Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Mouthfeel effects due to oligosaccharides within a wine matrix

Mouthfeel effects due to oligosaccharides within a wine matrix

Abstract

The mouthfeel of wine is one of the most important aspects of the organoleptic experience of tasting wine. In wine a great deal is known about certain compositional components and how they impact mouthfeel perception, such as phenolics. But there are other components where little is understood, such as oligosaccharides. Saccharides in general are found in very low concentrations with wine, especially compared to conventional foods. There is very little information about how oligosaccharides influence the mouthfeel perception of wine. Given the large variance in types and concentrations of oligosaccharides present within the wine system this study aimed to understand their effects with as little variables as possible. This study utilized two different types of oligosaccharides at two different concentration levels to identify and quantify differences in mouthfeel perception within a model wine system. The two oligosaccharides in question, Fructooligosaccharide (FOS) and Glactooligosaccharide (GOS), were added to a basic wine model (14% ethanol, 4 g/L tartaric acid, pH 3.5) at a rate of 450ppm and 900ppm. Concentrations that have been measured in wine, resulting in four treatment groups, FOS450, FOS900, GOS450, GOS900, and one control group consisting of untreated model wine. All four treatment groups underwent triangle testing against the untreated control, and one additional triangle test between the low and high concentrations of the respective oligosaccharide. After triangle tests, all four treatments, and the untreated control underwent descriptive analysis via 100mm visual analog scales. Panelists for the descriptive analysis panel underwent training on sweetness, bitterness, viscosity, acidity, and astringency prior to the beginning of the panel. The results of the triangle tests showed a significant different between the FOS450 and FOS900 samples. However, interestingly neither the FOS450 nor FOS900 samples were found to be significantly different from the untreated control sample. Additionally, neither of the GOS samples were found to be significant from either each other or the control sample. Descriptive analysis found no significant difference in any of the five attributes tested. This indicates that the difference between the FOS450 and FOS900 samples may be above a detection threshold but may not be above a perception threshold. This would mean that a difference can be noticed, but not quantified. Future work will investigate differing levels of oligosaccharides and implement more training to better differentiate during descriptive analysis.

DOI:

Publication date: September 24, 2021

Issue: Macrowine 2021

Type: Article

Authors

Samuel Hoffman, Elizabeth Tomasino, Quynh Phan,

Graduate Research Assistant and MS Candidate, Oregon State University, Associate Professor, Oregon State University Graduate Research Assistant and PhD Candidate, Oregon State University

Contact the author

Keywords

mouthfeel, wine, oligosaccharides, descriptive analysis

Citation

Related articles…

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.

Evolution of the amino acids content through grape ripening: Effect of foliar application of methyl jasmonate with or without urea

The parameters that determine the grape quality, and therefore the optimal harvest time, suffer variations during berry ripening, related to climate change, with the widely known problem of the gap between technological and phenolic maturities. However, there are few studies about its incidence on grape nitrogen composition. For this reason, the use of an elicitor, methyl jasmonate (MeJ), alone or with urea, is proposed as a tool to reduce climatic decoupling, allowing to establish the harvest time in order to achieve the optimum grape quality. The aim was to study the effect of MeJ and MeJ+Urea foliar applications on the evolution of Tempranillo amino acids content throughout the grape maturation. Three treatments were foliarly applied, at veraison and 7 days later: control (water), MeJ (10 mM) and MeJ+Urea (10 mM+6 kg N/ha). Grape samples were taken at five stages of maturation: day before the first and second applications, 15 days after the second application (pre-harvest), harvest day, and 15 days after harvest (post-harvest). The amino acids analysis of the samples was carried out by HPLC. Results showed that the evolution of amino acids was similar regardless of the treatment; however, foliar applications influenced the nitrogen compounds content, i.e., there was no qualitative effect but quantitative one. Most of the amino acids reached their maximum concentration in pre-harvest, being higher in grapes from the treatments than in the control. In general, no differences in grape amino acids content were observed between MeJ and MeJ+Urea treatments. Foliar applications with MeJ and MeJ+Urea enhanced the grape amino acids content, without affecting their profile, helping to optimize their quality and allowing to establish a more complete grape ripening standard. Therefore, MeJ and MeJ+Urea foliar applications can be a simple agronomic practice, which has shown promising results in order to enhance the grape quality.

Sustaining wine identity through intra-varietal diversification

With contemporary climate change, cultivated Vitis vinifera L. is at risk as climate is a critical component in defining ecologically fitted plant materiel. While winegrowers can draw on the rich diversity among grapevine varieties to limit expected impacts (Morales-Castilla et al., 2020), replacing a signature variety that has created a sense of local distinctiveness may lead to several challenges. In order to sustain wine identity in uncertain climate outcomes, the study of intra-varietal diversity is important to reflect the adaptive and evolutionary potential of current cultivated varieties. The aim of this ongoing study is to understand to what extent can intra-varietal diversity be a climate change adaptation solution. With a focus on early (Sauvignon blanc, Riesling, Grolleau, Pinot noir) to moderate late (Chenin, Petit Verdot, Cabernet franc) ripening varieties, data was collected for flowering and veraison for the various studied accessions (from conservatory plots) and clones. For these phenological growing stages, heat requirements were established using nearby weather stations (adapted from the GFV model, Parker et al., 2013) and model performances were verified. Climate change projections were then integrated to predict the future behaviour of the intra-varietal diversity. Study findings highlight the strong phenotypic diversity of studied varieties and the importance of diversification to enhance climate change resilience. While model performances may require improvements, this study is the first step towards quantifying heat requirements of different clones and how they can provide adaptation solutions for winegrowers to sustain local wine identity in a global changing climate. As genetic diversity is an ongoing process through point mutations and epigenetic adaptations, perspective work is to explore clonal data from a wide variety of geographic locations.

Local adaptation tools to ensure the viticultural sustainability in a changing climate

[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"...

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.