Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Characterizing chemical influences of smoke on wine via novel application of 13c-labelled smoke

Characterizing chemical influences of smoke on wine via novel application of 13c-labelled smoke

Abstract

Smoke impact is an ongoing and growing issue for vintners across the globe, with the west coast of the U.S. and Australia being two of the largest wine industries impacted. Wine has shown to be especially sensitive to smoke exposure, often acquiring off-flavor sensory characteristics, such as “burnt rubber”, “ashy”, or other medicinal off-flavors.1 While several studies have examined the chemical composition of smoke influences on wine, some studies disagree on what compounds are having the largest impact on smell and flavor.2 This study is designed as a bottom-up approach to inventory the chemical compounds derived from smoke from a grassland-like fire that are potentially influencing wine chemical composition. Barley (Hordeum vulgare) was chosen as a fuel source for its relatively fast growth and high lignin content, a biochemical pre-cursor compound responsible for many smoke sensory attributes. Barley was grown from seed in soil media for 4-6 weeks or until achieving GS 43-44 on the Zadoks’ scale of cereal growth in ambient greenhouse conditions in Corvallis, OR. At the GS 43-44 stages in the plant life cycle, barley growth accelerates, wherein the barley was placed in a sealed translucent container.3 Ambient 12CO2 was purged to

DOI:

Publication date: September 24, 2021

Issue: Macrowine 2021

Type: Article

Authors

D. Cole Cerrato, Lindsay Garcia, Michael Penner, Elizabeth Tomasino,

Ph.D. – Oregon State University

Contact the author

Keywords

smoke, 13c-label, 13co2, barley, pinot noir, chardonnay

Citation

Related articles…

Vineyard floor management intensity impacts soil health indicators and biodiversity across South Australian viticultural landscapes

Vineyard floors in warm, dry landscapes including those in South Australia, have traditionally been managed using intensive practices such as tillage and herbicides to control weeds and vegetation, thereby limiting competition with grapevines for water and nutrients in order to not compromise yields.

South Africa’s top 10 Sauvignon blanc wines. How do the chemical and sensory profiles compare?

FNB Top 10 Sauvignon Blanc competition, presented by the Sauvignon Blanc Interest Group of South Africa and sponsored by First National Bank, is the country’s foremost platform for producers of this cultivar to showcase and benchmark their wines. Wines entered in the competition originated from all over the winegrowing regions of the country and the winning wines showed good representation of quality South African Sauvignon blanc wines. The ten selected wines were subjected to various chemical analyses including volatile thiol and methoxypyrazine determination, while the sensory profile of each wine was determined using projective mapping.

Optimizing stomatal traits for future climates

Stomatal traits determine grapevine water use, carbon supply, and water stress, which directly impact yield and berry chemistry. Breeding for stomatal traits has the strong potential to improve grapevine performance under future, drier conditions, but the trait values that breeders should target are unknown. We used a functional-structural plant model developed for grapevine (HydroShoot) to determine how stomatal traits impact canopy gas exchange, water potential, and temperature under historical and future conditions in high-quality and hot-climate California wine regions (Napa and the Central Valley). Historical climate (1990-2010) was collected from weather stations and future climate (2079-99) was projected from 4 representative climate models for California, assuming medium- and high-emissions (RCP 4.5 and 8.5). Five trait parameterizations, representing mean and extreme values for the maximum stomatal conductance (gmax) and leaf water potential threshold for stomatal closure (Ψsc), were defined from meta-analyses. Compared to mean trait values, the water-spending extremes (highest gmax or most negative Ysc) had negligible benefits for carbon gain and canopy cooling, but exacerbated vine water use and stress, for both sites and climate scenarios. These traits increased cumulative transpiration by 8 – 17%, changed cumulative carbon gain by -4 – 3%, and reduced minimum water potentials by 10 – 18%. Conversely, the water-saving extremes (lowest gmax or least negative Ψsc) strongly reduced water use and stress, but potentially compromised the carbon supply for ripening. Under RCP 8.5 conditions, these traits reduced transpiration by 22 – 35% and carbon gain by 9 – 16% and increased minimum water potentials by 20 – 28%, compared to mean values. Overall, selecting for more water-saving stomatal traits could improve water-use efficiency and avoid the detrimental effects of highly negative canopy water potentials on yield and quality, but more work is needed to evaluate whether these benefits outweigh the consequences of minor declines in carbon gain for fruit production.

Deconstructing the soil component of terroir: from controversy to consensus

Wine terroir describes the collectively recognized relation between a geographical area and the distinctive organoleptic characteristics of the wines produced in it. The overriding objective in terroir studies is therefore to provide scientific proof relating the properties of terroir components to wine quality and typicity. In scientific circles, the role of climate (macro-, meso- and micro-) on grape and wine characteristics is well documented and accepted as the most critical. Moreover, there has been increasing interest in recent years about new elements with possible importance in shaping wine terroir like berry/leaf/soil microbiology or even aromatic plants in proximity to the vineyard conferring flavors to the grapes. However, the actual effect of these factors is also dependent on complex interactions with plant material (variety/clone, rootstock, vine age) and with human factors.
The contribution of soil, although a fundamental component of terroir and extremely popular among wine enthusiasts, remains a much-debated issue among researchers. The role of geology is probably the one mostly associated by consumers with the notion of terroir with different parent rocks considered to give birth to different wine styles. However, the relationship between wine properties and the underlying parent material raises a lot of controversy especially regarding the actual existence of rock-derived flavors in the wine (e.g. minerality). As far as the actual soil properties are concerned, the effect of soil physical properties is generally regarded as the most significant (e.g sandy soils being associated with lighter wines while those on clay with colored and tannic ones) mostly through control of water availability which ultimately modifies berry ripening conditions either directly by triggering biosynthetic pathways, or indirectly by altering vigor and yield components. The role of soil chemistry seems to be weakly associated to wine sensory characteristic, although N, K, S and Ca, but also soil pH, are often considered important in the overall soil effect.
Recently, in the light of evidence provided by precision agriculture studies reporting a high variability of vineyard soils, the spatial scale should also be taken into consideration in the evaluation of the soil effects on wines. While it is accepted that soil effects become more significant than climate on a local level, it is not clear whether these micro-variations of vineyard soils are determining in the terroir effect. Moreover, as terroir is not a set of only natural factors, the magnitude of the contribution of human-related factors (irrigation, fertilization, soil management) to the soil effect still remains ambiguous. Lastly, a major shortcoming of the majority of works about soil effects on wine characteristics is the absence of connection with actual vine physiological processes since all soil effects on grape and wine chemistry and sensorial properties are ultimately mediated through vine responses.
This article attempts to breakdown the main soil attributes involved in the terroir effect to suggest an improved understanding about soil’s true contribution to wine sensory characteristics. It is proposed that soil parameters per se are not as significant determining factors in the terroir effect but rather their mutual interactions as well as with other natural and human factors included in the terroir concept. Consequently, similarly to bioclimatic indices, composite soil indices (i.e. soil depth, water holding capacity, fertility, temperature etc), incorporating multiple soil parameters, might provide a more accurate and quantifiable means to assess the relative weight of the soil component in the terroir effect.