terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 FLAVANOL COMPOSITION OF VARIETAL AND BLEND WINES MADE BEFORE AND AFTER FERMENTATION FROM SYRAH, MARSELAN AND TANNAT

FLAVANOL COMPOSITION OF VARIETAL AND BLEND WINES MADE BEFORE AND AFTER FERMENTATION FROM SYRAH, MARSELAN AND TANNAT

Abstract

Background: The Flavan-3-ol extraction from grape skin and seed during red-winemaking and their retention into wines depend on many factors, some of which are modified in the winemaking of blend wines. Recent research shows that Marselan, have grapes with high proportion of skins with high concentrations of flavanols, but produces red-wines with low proportion of skin derived flavanols, differently to the observed in Syrah or Tannat. But the factors explaining these differences are not yet understood. Thus, the aim of this work was to evaluate if factors cited to affect tannin extraction and solubility, like solid to liquid ratio, anthocyanin concentration, seed to skin proportion, are behind the differences found in the flavanol composition of Syrah, Marselan and Tannat wines. Material and Methods: Over two vintages, 2019 and 2020, wines were made by the blending of grape-must before-fermentation (BFB) or of wines, after-fermentation (AFB), in proportion of 1/2-1/2 of Tannat-Marselan, Tannat-Syrah, Syrah-Marselan, and 1/3-1/3-1/3 of Tannat-Syrah-Marselan. The varietal wines (VW) were elaborated as well. All treatments were vinified by triplicate at experimental scale. Grape samples were taken before each winemaking. Macerations along 8 days were made in all cases. Spectrophotometric analysis were performed together with HPLC-ESI-Q-ToF determinations of flavan-3-ols. The wine to skin prodelphinidins quotient was used to estimate skin contribution to the wine flavanols. Results: In all cases, the flavanol structural composition of the grapes and of the varietal wines corresponded to the one expected for cultivar it belongs to. Thus, the results confirmed that under traditional red-winemaking, the flavanol composition of Syrah and Tannat wines mainly depends on the Skins while in Marselan mainly on seeds. The blend wines had a flavanol content and structural composition that closely matched the one that could be expected considering the composition of the varietal wines and the proportion of each cultivar in the blend. Therefore, there was also no significant effect of the time of blend (BFB vs AFB) on the flavanol concentration or composition of the wines. Conclusion: None of the factors that were modified in the winemaking of blend wines were behind the differences observed in the flavanol composition of the varietal wines of Syrah, Marselan and Tannat. Ongoing studies in Marselan may help to better understand the flavanol composition of wines.

1. Bordiga, M., Coïsson, J.D., Locatelli, M., Arlorio, M. and Travaglia, F., (2013) Pyrogallol: An Alternative Trapping Agent in Proanthocyanidins Analysis. Food Anal Methods 6, 148–156.

DOI:

Publication date: February 9, 2024

Issue: OENO Macrowine 2023

Type: Poster

Authors

Sergio Gómez-Alonso², José Pérez-Navarro², Belén Morales¹, Diego Piccardo¹, Gustavo González-Neves¹

1. Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad de la República, Avda. Garzón 780. C.P., 12900 Montevideo, Uruguay 
2. Instituto Regional de Investigación Científica Aplicada (IRICA), Universida de Castilla-La Mancha, Avda. Camilo José Cela S/N, 13071 Ciudad Real, Spain. 

Contact the author*

Keywords

Polyphenols, Flavanols, Tannins, Wines

Tags

IVES Conference Series | oeno macrowine 2023 | oeno-macrowine

Citation

Related articles…

FOLIAR APPLICATION OF METHYL JASMONATE AND METHYL JASMONATE PLUSUREA: INFLUENCE ON PHENOLIC, AROMATIC AND NITROGEN COMPOSITION OFTEMPRANILLO WINES

Phenolic, volatile and nitrogen compounds are key to wine quality. On one hand, phenolic compounds are related to wine color, mouthfeel properties, ageing potential. and are associated with beneficial health properties. On the other hand, wine aroma is influenced by hundreds of volatile compounds. Fermentative aromas represent, quantitatively, the wine aroma, and among these volatile compounds, esters, higher alcohols and acids are mainly responsible for the fermentation bouquet.

IMPACT OF HARVEST DATE ON THE FINE MOLECULAR COMPOSITION OF MUST AND BORDEAUX RED WINE (VAR. MERLOT, CABERNET SAUVIGNON). FOCUS ON ACIDITY AND SENSORY IMPACT AFTER FIVE YEARS OF AGING

Climate change has brought several impacts that are becoming increasingly intense during the last few years and put at risk the quality of the berries or even the plant’s sustainability. Such extreme climatic events impact the composition of the wine while modulating its quality and the consumer preferences (Tempère et al., 2019). The three most important changes that take place in the must are: 1) decrease acidity, 2) increase of the concentration of sugar, hence increase of alcohol in the wine, and 3) modification
of the sensory balance and the development for example of cooked fruit aromas.

VOLATILE AND GLYCOSYLATED MARKERS OF SMOKE IMPACT: LEVELS AND PATTERNS OBSERVED IN 2020 WINES FROM THE UNITED STATES WEST COAST

Smoke impact in wines is caused by a wide range of volatile phenols found in wildfire smoke. These compounds are absorbed and accumulate in berries, where they may also become glycosylated. Both volatile and glycosylated forms eventually end up in wine where they can cause off-flavors, described as “smoky”, “bacon”, “campfire” and “ashtray”, often long-lasting and lingering on the palate. In cases of large wildfire events, economic losses for all wine industry actors can be devastating.

EFFECT OF MANNOPROTEIN-RICH EXTRACTS FROM WINE LEES ON PHENOLICCOMPOSITION AND COLOUR OF RED WINE

In 2022, wine production was estimated at around 260 million hl. This high production rate implies to generate a large amount of by-products, which include grape pomace, grape stalks and wine lees. It is estimated that processing 100 tons of grapes leads to ~ 22 tons of by-products from which ~ 6 tons are lees [1]. Wine lees are a sludge-looking material mostly made of dead and living yeast cells, yeast debris and other particles that precipitate at the bottom of wine tanks after alcoholic fermentation. Unlike grape pomace or grape stalks, few strategies have been proposed for the recovery and valorisation of wine less [2].

ACIDIC AND DEMALIC SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE STRAINS FOR MANAGING PROBLEMS OF ACIDITY DURING THE ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATION

In a recent study several genes controlling the acidification properties of the wine yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae have been identified by a QTL approach [1]. Many of these genes showed allelic variations that affect the metabolism of malic acid and the pH homeostasis during the alcoholic fermentation. Such alleles have been used for driving genetic selection of new S. cerevisiae starters that may conversely acidify or deacidify the wine by producing or consuming large amount of malic acid [2]. This particular feature drastically modulates the final pH of wine with difference of 0.5 units between the two groups.