The use of Hanseniaspora vineae on the production of base sparkling wine

Abstract

Non-Saccharomyces yeasts have been associated, for many years, with challenging alcoholic fermentation processes. However, during the last decade the use of non-Saccharomyces yeasts in wine production has become increasingly widespread due to the advantages they can offer in mixed inoculations with Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Sc). In this respect, Hanseniaspora vineae (Hv), in synergy with Saccharomyces spp, represents an interesting opportunity to impart a positive contribution to the aroma complexity of wines. In fact, it is a well-known producer of pleasant esters, such as 2-phenylethyl acetate. This study compares the performances of Hv (strain Hv-205) in sequential inoculation modality to Sc in three Chardonnay musts for base sparkling wine production. No significant differences were observed in basic chemical parameters between wines except for titratable acidity, with a significantly decrease (up to 1.5 g/L) in Hv processes due to malic acid degradation. The analysis of the aroma compounds revealed remarkable differences in concentration of volatile metabolites, among others up to 37-fold increase of 2-phenylethyl acetate. In contrast, lower concentration of its alcohol were detected, suggesting higher acetylation activity by Hv. Branched-chain fatty acids were found in lower concentration in wines fermented with Hv. Additionally, despite the higher concentration of tryptophol and indolacetic acid in the Hv-fermented wines, no significant differences were displayed in 2-aminoacetophenone content at the end of the alcoholic fermentation. Furthermore, it has not been found a clear trend on the potential development of this marker as a typical aging defect. Results suggest a different nutrient demand between the two yeast species with a strong matrix effect on the performances of Hv. Further research is required to elucidate this aspect. From a flavour enhancement perspective, all together these results highlight the potential of Hv strain as an interesting alternative for sparkling base production with a notable floral aroma.   

DOI:

Publication date: September 16, 2021

Issue: Macrowine 2021

Type: Article

Authors

Tomas Roman 

Fondazione Edmund Mach—Technology Transfer Center, via Edmund Mach 1, 38010 San Michele all‘Adige, Italy.,Nicola CAPPELLO, Fondazione Edmund Mach—Technology Transfer Center, via Edmund Mach 1, 38010 San Michele all‘Adige, Italy. Adelaide GALLO Fondazione Edmund Mach—Technology Transfer Center, via Edmund Mach, 38010 San Michele all‘Adige, Italy. Mauro PAOLINI, Fondazione Edmund Mach—Technology Transfer Center, via Edmund Mach, 38010 San Michele all‘Adige, Italy. Tiziana NARDIN, Fondazione Edmund Mach—Technology Transfer Center, via Edmund Mach, 38010 San Michele all‘Adige, Italy. Sergio MOSER, Fondazione Edmund Mach—Technology Transfer Center, via Edmund Mach 1, 38010 San Michele all‘Adige, Italy. Francisco CARRAU, Universidad de la Republica, Area Enologia y Biotecnología de Fermentaciones, Facultad de Química, Montevideo, Uruguay Rémi SCHNEIDER, Oenoborands SAS Parc Agropolis II-Bât 5 2196 Bd de la Lironde-CS 34603, CEDEX 05, 34397 Montpellier, France Roberto LARCHER, Fondazione Edmund Mach—Technology Transfer Center, via Edmund Mach 1, 38010 San Michele all‘Adige, Italy.

Contact the author

Keywords

hanseniaspora vineae; sparkling wine; aroma; yeast nutrition; 2-aminoacetophenone

Citation

Related articles…

Protected Designation of Origin (D.P.O.) Valdepeñas: classification and map of soils

The objective of the work described here is the elaboration of a map of the different types of vineyard soils that to guide the famers in the choice of the most productive vine rootstocks and varieties. 90 vineyard soils profiles were analysed in the entire territory of the Origen Denominations of Valdepeñas. The sampling was carried out in 2018 (June to October) by making a sampling grid, followed by photointerpretation and control in the field. The studied soils can be grouped into 9 different soil types (according to FAO 2006 classification): Leptosols, Regosols, Fluvisols, Gleysols, Cambisols, Calcisols, Luvisols and Anthrosols. A map showing the soil distribution with different type of soils has been made with the ArcGIS program. Regarding to the choice of rootstock, Calcisoles are soils with a high active limestone content, so the rootstocks used in these soils must be resistant to this parameter; Luvisols are deep soils with high clay content, so they will support vigorous rootstocks. Because the cartographic units are composed of two or more subgroups, with are associated in variable proportions, 9 different soil associations have been established; Unit 1: Leptosols, Cambisols and Luvisols (80%, 15% and 5% respectively); Unit 2: Cambisols with Regosols and Luvisols (40%, 30% and 30% respectively); Unit 3: Cambisols and Gleysols with Regosols (40%, 40% and 20% respectively); Unit 4: Regosols with Cambisols, Leptosols and Calcisols (40%, 30%, 15% and 15% respectively); Unit 5: Cambisols, Leptosols, Calcisols and Regosols (25% each of them); Unit 6: Luvisols with Cambisol and Calcisols (80%, 10% and 10% respectively); Unit 7: Luvisols and Calcisols with Cambisols (40%, 40% and 20% respectively); Unit 8: Calcisols with, Cambisols and Luvisols (80%, 10% and 10% respectively); Unit 9: Anthrosols. These study allow to elaborate the first map of vineyard soils of this Protected Designation of Origin in Castilla-La Mancha.

The modification of cultural practices in grapevine cv. Syrah, does it modify the characteristics of the musts?

The work shows the results of a year of experimentation (2020) in a Syrah variety vineyard in La Roda (Castilla-La Mancha, Spain). The trial approach was on a randomized block design with two factors: Irrigation (I) and Pruning (P).
Irrigation schedules were adjusted to apply amounts close to 1,500 m3/ha. With this provision, 2 different irrigation treatments were proposed: I1) Start of irrigation from pea-sized grape to post-harvest (providing at least 20 % of the total amount of irrigation water to be provided post-harvest); I2) Start of irrigation from pea-sized grape to harvest (usual irrigation practice in the study area). Pruning was proposed with two treatments, one at the end of January (P1), which is pruning on a conventional date; and P2) pruning carried out at the beginning of budding. In total, 4 repetitions were designed with 4 elementary plots, each one of them representing one of the proposed treatments (I1P1; I1P2; I2P1; I2P2). In total, 16 plots were worked on and each elementary plot consisted of 30 strains, distributed in 3 lines.
The productive response was evaluated with the yield results of the harvest harvested at 23 ºBrix. The qualitative response was measured in the musts through the indices of technological (acidity, pH and potassium) and phenolic maturity and aromatic compounds in free and glycosylated fractions. The treatments tested had, in general, an effect on the different variables analyzed.

Variety and climatic effects on quality scores in the Western US winegrowing regions

Wine quality is strongly linked to climate. Quality scores are often driven by climate variation across different winegrowing regions and years, but also influenced by other aspects of terroir, including variety. While recent work has looked at the relationship between quality scores and climate across many European regions, less work has examined New World winegrowing regions. Here we used scores from three major rating systems (Wine Advocate, Wine Enthusiast and Wine Spectator) combined with daily climate and phenology data to understand what drives variation across wine quality scores in major regions of the Western US, including regions in California, Oregon and Washington. We examined effects of variety, region, and in what phenological period climate was most predictive of quality. As in other studies, we found climate, based mainly on growing degree day (GDD) models, was generally associated with quality—with higher GDD associated with higher scores—but variety and region also had strong effects. Effects of region were generally stronger than variety. Certain varieties received the highest scores in only some areas, while other varieties (e.g., Merlot) generally scored lower across regions. Across phenological stages, GDD during budbreak was often most strongly associated with quality. Our results support other studies that warmer periods generally drive high quality wines, but highlight how much region and variety drive variation in scores outside of climate.

Leaf vine content in nutrients and trace elements in La Mancha (Spain) soils: influence of the rootstock

The use of rootstock of American origin has been the classic method of fighting against Phylloxera for more than 100 years. For this reason, it is interesting to establish if different rootstock modifies nutrient composition as well as trace elements content that could be important for determining the traceability of the vine products. A survey of four classic rootstocks (110-Richter, SO4, FERCAL and 1103-Paulsen) and four new ones (M1, M2, M3 and M4) provided by Agromillora Iberia. S.L.U., all of them grafted with the Tempranillo variety, has been carried out during 2019. The eight rootstocks were planted in pots of 500 cc, on three soils with very different characteristics from Castilla-La Mancha (Spain). In the month of July, the leaves were collected and dried in a forced air oven for seven days at 40ºC. Then, the samples were prepared for the analysis determination, carried out by X-Ray fluorescence spectrometry. The results obtained showed that in the case of content in mineral elements in leaf, separated by soil type, we can report the importance of few elements such as Si, Fe, Pb and, especially, Sr. The rootstock does not influence the composition of the vine leaf for the studied elements that are the most important in determining the geochemical footprint of the soil. The influence of the soil can be discriminated according to some elements such as Fe, Pb, Si and, especially, Sr.

Soil, vine, climate change – what is observed – what is expected

To evaluate the current and future impact of climate change on Viticulture requires an integrated view on a complex interacting system within the soil-plant-atmospheric continuum under continuous change. Aside of the globally observed increase in temperature in basically all viticulture regions for at least four decades, we observe several clear trends at the regional level in the ratio of precipitation to potential evapotranspiration. Additionally the recently published 6th assessment report of the IPCC (The physical science basis) shows case-dependent further expected shifts in climate patterns which will have substantial impacts on the way we will conduct viticulture in the decades to come.
Looking beyond climate developments, we observe rising temperatures in the upper soil layers which will have an impact on the distribution of microbial populations, the decay rate of organic matter or the storage capacity for carbon, thus affecting the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and the viscosity of water in the soil-plant pathway, altering the transport of water. If the upper soil layers dry out faster due to less rainfall and/or increased evapotranspiration driven by higher temperatures, the spectral reflection properties of bare soil change and the transport of latent heat into the fruiting zone is increased putting a higher temperature load on the fruit. Interactions between micro-organisms in the rhizosphere and the grapevine root system are poorly understood but respond to environmental factors (such as increased soil temperatures) and the plant material (rootstock for instance), respectively the cultivation system (for example bio-organic versus conventional). This adds to an extremely complex system to manage in terms of increased resilience, adaptation to and even mitigation of climate change. Nevertheless, taken as a whole, effects on the individual expressions of wines with a given origin, seem highly likely to become more apparent.