Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Volatile and phenolic profiles of wines closed with different stoppers and stored for 30 months

Volatile and phenolic profiles of wines closed with different stoppers and stored for 30 months

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the volatile and phenolic profiles of three red and one rosé wines stored in bottles for 30 months. Four wines were provided by a winery located in South Tyrol (Kellerei Bozen, Bolzano, Italy), which included Merlot, Lagrein red, Lagrein rosé and St. Magdalener and were closed with different types of stoppers: a blend of natural cork microgranules and polymers without glue addition (Supercap Nature, Mombaroccio, Italy), a one-piece natural cork, agglomerated natural cork and a technical cork 1+1. Volatile compounds were extracted by head-space solid phase microextraction (HS-SPME) and then analysed by GC-MS, while the phenolic compounds were determined by HPLC-DAD-FLD. The type of stopper did not show significant differences on the chemical profiles of the wines. Instead, the interaction between the wines and the type of stoppers as well as the type of wines had a significant influence on the volatile and phenolic profiles. Regarding the volatile profile, significant differences were observed for ethyl butanoate and 2-hydroxyethylpropanoate which were present just in St. Magdalener and absent in Lagrein rosé wines, respectively. Also, 2-methylethyl butanoate and 3-methylethyl butanoate were not detected in both Lagrein red and rosé, whereas isopentyl acetate was found in Merlot wines at low concentration. On the other hand, 1-hexanol, ethyl hexanoate, ethyl octanoate and ethyl decanoate were found at high concentration in Lagrein rosé wine compared to the three red wines. Regarding the phenolic profile, results showed a low concentration of p-coumaric acid, protocatechuic acid, caftaric acid, (+)-catechin, (-)-epicatechin, S-glutathionyl caftaric acid (GRP) and syringic acid in Lagrein rosé wine with respect to the red wines. However, the concentration of gallic acid was higher in Merlot wine and differed significantly from the three others with the lowest value in the Lagrein rosé. The chemical profiles of the four wines were significantly influenced by the type of wine due to their grape variety and vinification processes. Conversely, the type of stopper did not show any significant differences in terms of volatile nor phenolic profile, due to the high technical quality of the closures under study.

DOI:

Publication date: September 14, 2021

Issue: Macrowine 2021

Type: Article

Authors

Prudence Fleur Tchouakeu Betnga

Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy ,Edoardo LONGO, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy Vakare MERKYTE, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy Amanda DUPAS DE MATOS, Feast Lab, Massey University, New Zealand Fabrizio ROSSETTI, Mérieux NutriSciences, Italy   Emanuele BOSELLI, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy

Contact the author

Keywords

cork stoppers; technical stoppers; volatile profile; phenolic profile; wines; bottle

Citation

Related articles…

VOLATILE AND GLYCOSYLATED MARKERS OF SMOKE IMPACT: EVOLUTION IN BOTTLED WINE

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. The impact on wine aroma is mainly attributed to volatile phenols, while in-mouth hydrolysis of glycosylated forms may be responsible for long-lasting “ashy” aftertastes (1).

An infrared laser sensor to characterize the gaseous headspace of champagne glasses under static and swirling conditions

Right after the pouring of champagne in a glass, thousands of rising and bursting bubbles convey gas-phase CO2 and volatile organic compounds in the headspace above the champagne surface, thus progressively modifying the gaseous chemical space perceived by the consumer [1]

Aroma chemical markers of Durello wines from different vintages and origins: a case study

Wines expressing sensory characters that are representative of their varietal and geographical origins are highly sought after in today’s market. It is therefore of considerable technological interest to investigate the aromatic aspects of specific wines and to identify the odorous substances involved. This study investigated aroma chemical and sensory diversity of Durello DOC white

Comparison of tannin analysis by protein precipitation and normal-phase HPLC

Tannins are a heterogenous class of polymeric phenolics found in grapes, oak barrels and wine. In red wine tannins are primarily responsible for astringency, though they also have an important role in reacting with and stabilizing pigments. There are numerous sub-classes of tannins found in wine but they all share structural heterogeneity within each sub-class, with varied polymer composition, configuration and length.

Numerous methodologies exist for the quantification of tannins, however, protein precipitation using bovine serum albumin has proved itself useful due to its strong correlation to the sensory perception of astringency and the basic instruments required for the method. Though the method can yield valuable insights into tannin composition, it cannot be automated easily and necessitates well-trained personnel.

Development and validation of a standardized oxidation assay for the accurate measurement of the ability of different wines to form “de novo” oxidation-related aldehydes

From the standpoint of wine aroma oxidation there are two effects observed: aroma degradation of oxygen sensitive compounds (polyfunctional mercaptans) and the appearance of new substances with high aromatic power (acetaldehyde, methional, phenylacetaldehyde, sotolon, alkenals, isobutanal and 2, 3-metylbutanals) (1-5). According to our experience, Strecker aldehydes are compounds with highest sensory relevance in the oxidative degradation of many wines (5-7).