Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Sensory profile: a tool to characterize originality of wines produced without sulfites

Sensory profile: a tool to characterize originality of wines produced without sulfites

Abstract

AIM: A trend to reduce chemical inputs in wines exists, especially sulfur dioxide (SO2). This additive is widely used due to its antioxidant, antiseptic and antioxidasic properties. During without sulfites vinification, bioprotection by adding yeast on harvest could be a sulfites alternative. With extension of this wine market, sensory impact linked to sulfites absence and/or sulfites alternative should be evaluated. That’s what this approach proposes to do, focusing on sensory characteristics of wines produced with or without SO2 addition during the winemaking process.

METHODS: Wines were elaborated from Merlot grapes of two maturity levels according to three modalities: SO2, without SO2 and bioprotection on harvest (mix of Torulaspora delbrueckii and Metschnikowia pulcherrima). SO2 modality was sulfited throughout the winemaking and aging processes whether other modalities received any addition. After two years of aging, sensory studies were carried out with a specific panel for one month. First, descriptors were generated to differentiate the wines, then panelists were trained on these specific descriptors for five sessions and finally wines sensory profiles were elaborated.

RESULTS: The panel generated thirteen descriptors to differentiate the wines on which they have been trained: nine olfactive, three gustative and one trigeminal. After training, the nine presenting a consensus between judges were finally used. Wines without SO2 were characterized by freshness (mint and coolness) and cooked black cherries; bioprotection by fresh blackcurrant and with SO2 by smoke. Hierarchical clustering applied to this sensory approach lead to significantly differentiate wines produced with or without SO2.

CONCLUSIONS:

This approach allow to highlight sensory specificities of without sulfites wines. Therefore, with a dozen of descriptors, tasters could differentiate wines which have been sulfited or not but cannot differentiate among not sulfited ones those who have received bioprotection from those which have got any addition, regardless grapes maturity level.

DOI:

Publication date: September 24, 2021

Issue: Macrowine 2021

Type: Article

Authors

Edouard Pelonnier-Magimel , Sara WINDHOLTZ Isabelle, MASNEUF-POMAREDE,  Jean-Christophe BARBE  

Unité de Recherche Œnologie, EA 4577, USC 1366 INRAE F33882  France,
all : Unité de Recherche Œnologie, EA 4577, USC 1366 INRAE F33882 Villenave d’Ornon France

Contact the author

Keywords

wines without sulfites, bioprotection, sensory analysis, sensory profile, panel training

Citation

Related articles…

The concept of terroir: what place for microbiota?

Microbes play key roles on crop nutrient availability via biogeochemical cycles, rhizosphere interactions with roots as well as on plant growth and health. Recent advances in technologies, such as High Throughput Sequencing Techniques, allowed to gain deeper insight on the structure of bacterial and fungal communities associated with soil, rhizosphere and plant phyllosphere. Over the past 10 years, numerous scientific studies have been carried out on the microbial component of the vineyard. Whether the soil or grape compartments have been taken into account, many studies agree on the evidence of regional delineations of microbial communities, that may contribute to regional wine characteristics and typicity. Some authors proposed the term “microbial terroir” including “yeast terroir” for grapes to describe the connection between microbial biogeography and regional wine characteristics. Many factors are involved in terroir including climate, soil, cultivar and human practices as well as their interactions. Studies considering “microbial terroir” greatly contributed to improve our knowledge on factors that shape the vineyard microbial structure and diversity. However, the potential impact of “microbial terroir” on wine composition has yet not received strong scientific evidence and many questions remain to be addressed, related to the functional characterization of the microbial community and its impact on plant physiology and grape composition, the origins and interannual stability of vineyard microbiota, as well as their impact on wine sensorial attributes. The presentation will give an overview on the role of microbiota as a terroir component and will highlight future perspectives and challenges on this key subject for the wine industry.

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.

A predictive model of spatial Eca variability in the vineyard to support the monitoring of plant status

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.19.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

Climate and the evolving mix of grape varieties in Australia’s wine regions

The purpose of this study is to examine the changing mix of winegrape varieties in Australia so as to address the question: In the light of key climate indicators and predictions of further climate change, how appropriate are the grape varieties currently planted in Australia’s wine regions? To achieve this, regions are classified into zones according to each region’s climate variables, particularly average growing season temperature (GST), leaving aside within-region variations in climates. Five different climatic classifications are reported. Using projections of GSTs for the mid- and late 21st century, the extent to which each region is projected to move from its current zone classification to a warmer one is reported. Also shown is the changing proportion of each of 21 key varieties grown in a GST zone considered to be optimal for premium winegrape production. Together these indicators strengthen earlier suggestions that the mix of varieties may be currently less than ideal in many Australian wine regions, and would become even less so in coming decades if that mix was not altered in the anticipation of climate change. That is, grape varieties in many (especially the warmest) regions will have to keep changing, or wineries will have to seek fruit from higher latitudes or elevations if they wish to retain their current mix of varieties and wine styles.

Impact of yeast derivatives to increase the phenolic maturity and aroma intensity of wine

Using viticultural and enological techniques to increase aromatics in white wine is a prized yet challenging technique for commercial wine producers. Equally difficult are challenges encountered in hastening phenolic maturity and thereby increasing color intensity in red wines. The ability to alter organoleptic and visual properties of wines plays a decisive role in vintages in which grapes are not able to reach full maturity, which is seen increasingly more often as a result of climate change. A new, yeast-based product on the viticultural market may give the opportunity to increase sensory properties of finished wines. Manufacturer packaging claims these yeast derivatives intensify wine aromas of white grape varieties, as well as improve phenolic ripeness of red varieties, but the effects of this application have been little researched until now. The current study applied the yeast derivative, according to the manufacture’s instructions, to the leaves of both neutral and aromatic white wine varieties, as well as on structured red wine varieties. Chemical parameters and volatile aromatics were analyzed in grape musts and finished wines, and all wines were subjected to sensory analysis by a tasting panel. Collective results of all analyses showed that the application of the yeast derivative in the vineyard showed no effect across all varieties examined, and did not intensify white wine aromatics, nor improve phenolic ripeness and color intensity in red wine.