Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Macrowine 9 Macrowine 2021 9 Chemical diversity of 'special' wine styles: fortified wines, passito style, botrytized and ice wines, orange wines, sparkling wines 9 Influence of processing parameters on aroma profile of conventional and ecological Cabernet-Sauvignon red wine during concentration by reverse osmosis

Influence of processing parameters on aroma profile of conventional and ecological Cabernet-Sauvignon red wine during concentration by reverse osmosis

Abstract

AIM: Wine aroma represents one of the most important quality parameter and it is influenced by various factors (viticulture and vinification techniques, climate or storage conditions etc.). Wines produced from conventionally and ecologically grown grapes of same variety have different chemical composition and aroma profile [1]. Aroma profile of wine can be also influenced by additional treatment of wine, such as concentration of wine by reverse osmosis (RO). Reverse osmosis represents a pressure-driven membrane separation technique that separates the initial wine on the retentate or concentrate that is retained on the membrane, and permeate that passes through it [2]. Wine permeate usually containes water, ethanol, acetic acid and several low molecular weight compounds that can pass through the membrane. This property enables the use of reverse osmosis membranes for wine concentration, partial dealcoholization, acetic acid or aroma correction [3,4].

METHODS: The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of four different pressures (2.5, 3.5, 4.5 and 5.5 MPa) and two temperature regimes (with and without cooling) on aroma profile of conventional and ecological Cabernet Sauvignon red wine during concentration by reverse osmosis. The reverse osmosis process was conducted on a plate-and-frame membrane filter Alfa Laval LabUnit M20, equipped with 6 composite RO98pHt membranes. The aroma compounds in initial wines and obtained retentates were analyzed on gas chromatograph with mass spectrometer. The solid-phase microextraction (SPME) method was used for sampling.

RESULTS: In the initial wines and their RO retentates, 45 aroma compounds were identified and divided into six groups: acids, alcohols, terpenes, carbonyl compounds, esters and volatile phenols. A certain loss of total aroma compounds was observed in conventional and ecological wine retentates, comparing to the corresponding initial wine. Higher working pressures (4.5 and 5.5 MPa) and the regime with cooling resulted in higher retention of total aroma compounds than the opposite processing parameters. Individual compounds retention depended also on their chemical properties and their interactions with the membrane surface. Reverse osmosis membranes proved to be highly permeable for acetic acid or undesirable 4-ethylphenol and 4-ethylguaiacol that made them applicable for their correction or removal. Initial wine composition influenced the retention of aroma compounds during reverse osmosis of red wines. Slightly higher retention of total acids, alcohols and terpenes was observed in conventional wine retentates than in the ecological one. The retention of carbonyl compounds, esters and volatile phenols was slightly higher during concentration of ecological wine than the conventional wine.

CONCLUSIONS:

The aroma profile of the wine retentate depends on initial wine aroma profile and applied processing parameters during reverse osmosis process (pressure, temperature, membrane type).

DOI:

Publication date: September 16, 2021

Issue: Macrowine 2021

Type: Article

Authors

Ivana Ivić, Mirela, KOPJAR, Dubravko, PICHLER, W. Ina, ĆORKOVIĆ, Anita, PICHLER, 

Faculty of Food Technology in Osijek, Croatia, Water Supply—Osijek, Croatia  

Contact the author

Keywords

conventional and ecological cabernet sauvignon, reverse osmosis, aroma compounds, processing parameters, retention

Citation

Related articles…

Extreme canopy management for vineyard adaptation to climate change: is it a good idea?

Climate change constitutes an enormous challenge for humankind and for all human activities, viticulture not being an exception. Long-term strategic changes are probably needed the most, but growers also need to deal with short-term changes: summers that are getting progressively warmer, earlier harvest dates and higher pH in musts and wines. In the last 10-15 years, a relevant corpus of research is being developed worldwide in order to evaluate to which extent extreme canopy management operations, aimed at reducing leaf area and, thus, limiting the source to sink ratio, could be useful to delay ripening. Although extreme canopy management can result in relevant delays in harvest dates, longer term studies, as well as detailed analysis of their implications on carbohydrate reserves, bud fertility and future yield are desirable before these practices can be recommended.

Grapevine yield estimation in a context of climate change: the GraY model

Grapevine yield is a key indicator to assess the impacts of climate change and the relevance of adaptation strategies in a vineyard landscape. At this scale, a yield model should use a number of parameters and input data in relation to the information available and be able to reproduce vineyard management decisions (e.g. soil and canopy management, irrigation). In this study, we used data from six experimental sites in Southern France (cv. Syrah) to calibrate a model of grapevine yield limited by water constraint (GraY). Each yield component (bud fertility, number of berries per bunch, berry weight) was calculated as a function of the soil water availability simulated by the WaLIS water balance model at critical phenological phases. The model was then evaluated in 10 grapegrowers’ plots, covering a diversity of biophysical and technical contexts (soil type, canopy size, irrigation, cover crop). We identified three critical periods for yield formation: after flowering on the previous year for the number of bunches and berries, around pre-veraison and post-veraison of the same year for mean berry weight. Yields were simulated with a model efficiency (EF) of 0.62 (NRMSE = 0.28). Bud fertility and number of berries per bunch were more accurately simulated (EF = 0.90 and 0.77, NRMSE = 0.06 and 0.10, respectively) than berry weight (EF = -0.31, NRMSE = 0.17). Model efficiency on the on-farm plots reached 0.71 (NRMSE = 0.37) simulating yields from 1 to 8 kg/plant. The GraY model is an original model estimating grapevine yield evolution on the basis of water availability under future climatic conditions.  It allows to evaluate the effects of various adaptation levers such as planting density, cover crop management, fruit/leaf ratio, shading and irrigation, in various production contexts.

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.

Exploring resilience and competitiveness of wine estates in Languedoc-Roussillon in the recent past: a multi-level perspective

The Languedoc-Roussillon wineries are facing a decline in wine yields particularly PGI yields due to many factors. Climate change is just ones, but is expected to increase in the future. There is also structurally a large heterogeneity of yield profiles among terroirs, varieties and strategies. This work investigates the link between yield, competitiveness and resilience to explore how resilient winegrowers have been in the recent past. To this end two approaches have been combined; (i) an accountancy database analysis at estate scale and (ii) municipality level competitiveness analysis. A new resilience indicator that characterizes the capacity of an estate to absorb yield variation is also defined. The FADN database between 2000 and 2018 of ex-Languedoc-Roussillon (France) and other data are used to analyse the current situation and the past evolution of competitiveness and resilience by type of estate (type of farm: PGI and/or PDO & type of commercialization: bulk and/or bottles). The net margin, which defines competitiveness, is not correlated to yield for all types but depends on the type of commercialization and the level of specialisation. The resilience indicator shows that the net margin of estates specialized in PGI is particularly sensitive to yield declines. We also show that price evolutions seem to compensate the effect of yield losses for the majority of types. Municipality scale analysis shows the links between local pedoclimate, yield, commercialization strategies and price. Overlapping a PDO with a PGI does not always increase a municipality’s PGI competitiveness. It is difficult to make links between causes and effects due to the complexity of the wine production system. Production diversification may be a solution. Resorting to the two level of analysis helps resolving the data gap that is necessary to explore the links between yield and economic performance of the wine estates in the long term.

Grapevine yield-gap: identification of environmental limitations by soil and climate zoning in Languedoc-Roussillon region (south of France)

Grapevine yield has been historically overlooked, assuming a strong trade-off between grape yield and wine quality. At present, menaced by climate change, many vineyards in Southern France are far from the quality label threshold, becoming grapevine yield-gaps a major subject of concern. Although yield-gaps are well studied in arable crops, we know very little about grapevine yield-gaps. In the present study, we analysed the environmental component of grapevine yield-gaps linked to climate and soil resources in the Languedoc Roussillon. We used SAFRAN data and IGP Pays d’Oc wine yields from 2010 to 2018. We selected climate and soil indicators proving to have a significant effect on average wine yield-gaps at the municipality scale. The most significant factors of grapevine yield were the Soil Available Water Capacity; followed by the Huglin Index and the Climatic Dryness Index. The Days of Frost; the Soil pH; and the Very Hot Days were also significant. Then, we clustered geographical zones presenting similar indicators, facilitating the identification of resources yield-gaps. We discussed the number of zones with the experts of IGP Pays d’Oc label, obtaining 7 zones with similar limitations for grapevine yield. Finally, we analysed the main resources causing yield-gaps and the grapevine varieties planted on each zone. Mapping grapevine resource yield-gaps are the first stage for understanding grapevine yield-gaps at the regional scale.