New acacia gums fractions: how their features affect the foamability of sparkling base wines?

Abstract

When sparkling wine is served, the first attribute perceived is foam1. Bentonite is usually added to wine in order to cause particle flocculation, but this procedure also leads to a drastic loss of foamability2. Acacia gums improve the foamability of some sparkling base wines treated with bentonite3. Acacia gums are already authorized as additives in wine production4. We studied how the addition of new fractions from Acacia gums affected the wines foamability. Our work deepens the relationship between wine foamability and gums fractions properties. Eight sparkling base wines were elaborated by the traditional white winemaking method. Three of them were elaborated in three different regions from Spain: Malaga using Moscatel grapes as well as Saragossa and Tarragona (TA), both using Macabeo grapes. The other five base wines were elaborated in the French region of Champagne using Chardonnay (4) and Pinot noir (1) grapes. They were treated with bentonite, stirred and filtered. Acacia senegal (Asen) and Acacia seyal (Asey) gums were fractionated by Ion Exchange Chromatography giving two high (F1sen and F1sey) and two low (F2sen and F2sey) molar mass fractions. Fractions and sparkling base wines were deeply characterized. Four Acacia gums fractions were separately added to wines (300 mg·L-1), resulting in “supplemented CO-wines”. Based on shaking test, wine was vigorously hand-shaken in closed tubes. The foam height at 5 and every 10 seconds during 90 seconds was measured (all in triplicate). The maximum foam height was improved in 11 out of the 16 supplementations (69%) with F1 fractions, which were the fractions with high protein amount and high molar mass. F1sey and mainly F1sen showed a positive effect improving the foamability in Spanish wines. F1 fractions also increased foamability of French wines, but in a more inefficient and irregular pattern. Moreover, the differentials of foam height (ΔFH) between “supplemented CO-wines” and CO-wines enhanced significantly in all the studied wines at several moments after supplementations with F1 fractions. F2 fractions gave enhancing effect only sporadically. Adding F1sen and F1sey, the foam height showed positive Pearson correlations with, respectively, (i) polysaccharides rich in arabinose and galactose percentage and (ii) the number average molar mass of polysaccharides. But after F1 supplementations, the mannoproteins percentage in base wines affected negatively their foamability. The Proteins %, the hydrophobic score, the volumetric properties, the molar masses, the high molar mass ranges and the content of several amino acids of gums fractions affected positively the foamability in different wines, whereas it was negatively affected by the sugars %.Concluding, sparkling base wine foamabilities strongly depend on the wine and the gum fraction addition, but also on their relationship.

DOI:

Publication date: September 15, 2021

Issue: Macrowine 2021

Type: Article

Authors

Rafael Apolinar-Valiente, Thomas Salmo, Pascale Williams,  Michaël Nigen, Christian Sanchez, Thierry Doco,  Richard Marchal.

UMR-1208/IATE, Montpellier SupAgro, France.LOCA, Université de Reims, France. UMR-1083/SPO, INRAE-Montpellier, France. UMR-1208/IATE, Université Montpellier, France. UMR-1208/IATE, Université Montpellier, France. UMR-1083/SPO, INRAE-Montpellier, France. LVBE, Université de Haute-Alsace, Colmar, France.

Contact the author

Keywords

sparkling base wine; foam; acacia gums; ion exchange chromatography; macromolecules; sec-malls; biochemical properties; structural features

Citation

Related articles…

Evaluation of intrinsic grape berry and cluster traits for postharvest withering kinetics prediction

To make some particular wine styles (e.g., Amarone), grapes are harvested and stored in dehydrating rooms before vinification, in a process called withering

Exploring the influence of terroir on the sensorial and aroma profiles of wines – An application to red wines from AOC Corbières

The aromatic profile of a wine is the result of volatile molecules present in grapes (varietal or primary aromas) and those produced during the winemaking process of fermentation (secondary aromas) and during wine aging (tertiary aromas).

Preliminary field studies of resistance of Georgian grapevine germplasm to powdery mildew (Erysiphe necator)

Erysiphe necator Schwein is a fungus that causes grapevine powdery mildew. It is one of the most problematic pathogens attacking Vitis vinifera L. The pathogen infects all green parts of the plant and reduces grape yield and quality. The suppression on mildew-susceptible cultivars requires intensive use of fungicides against pathogen, which has negative impact on the environment and human health.

Spontaneous fermentation dynamics of indigenous yeast populations and their effect on the sensory properties of Riesling

Varietal Riesling aroma relies strongly on the formation and liberation of bound aroma compounds. Floral monoterpenes, green C6-alcohols, fruity C13-norisoprenoids and spicy volatile phenols are predominantly bound to disaccharides, which are produced and stored in the grape berry during berry maturation.

BIOSORPTION OF UNDESIRABLE COMPONENTS FROM WINE BY YEAST-DERIVED PRODUCTS

4-Ethylphenol (EP) in wine is associated with organoleptic defects such as barn and horse sweat odors. The origin of EP is the bioconversion reaction of p-coumaric acid (CA), naturally present in grapes and grape musts by contaminating yeasts of the genus Brettanomyces bruxellensis.
Yeast cell walls (YCW) have shown adsorption capacities for different compounds. They could be applied to wines in order to adsorb either CA and/or EP and thus reduce the organoleptic defects caused by the contaminating yeasts.