Abstract

Volatile and non-volatile chemical profiles, free and total SO2 and dissolved oxygen content were studied in three red (Merlot, Lagrein red, St. Magdalener) and one rosé (Lagrein rosé) wine after 30 months of storage in bottles. Each wine was sealed with closures made of a ‘blend’ (B) of natural cork microgranules and polymers without glue and was compared with wines closed with other types of corks (C; a technical cork 1 + 1, or an agglomerated natural cork or a natural one-piece cork). Glutathionyl caftaric acid (GRP) was inversely correlated with total SO2 content and was higher in all three red wines closed with B compared to C, whereas epicatechin was higher in three wines closed with C compared to B. Three volatile compounds formed by fermentation (ethyl butanoate, isoamyl lactate, and octanol) were inversely correlated with both free and total SO2. In terms of their volatile profiles, ethyl octanoate and 2,3-butanediol were significantly higher in the Lagrein red wines closed with C closures, whereas no significant difference was observed in Merlot, Lagrein rosé and St. Magdalener wines. Small differences in some phenolic compounds due to the type of closure were found: GRP, syringic acid, (+)-catechin, and (−)-epicatechin differentiated the Merlot wines closed with B from the C closures. Protocatechuic acid and GRP levels differentiated the Lagrein red wines according to their closure type, whereas only (−)-epicatechin differentiated the Lagrein rosé wines. GRP, caffeic acid, (−)-epicatechin, and anthocyanin content differentiated the St. Magdalener wines according to their closure type. Even though St. Magdalener and Lagrein rosé closed with C could be distinguished from those closed with B by using the (sensory) triangle test (α = 0.05), these differences appeared to be relative as it did not include all the wines in a systematic manner.

Highlights

  • The profiles of volatile and non-volatile compounds, free and total SO2 content, and dissolved oxygen content of the same wines were analyzed after 30 months of storage in bottles, with the goal of evaluating how quality was affected by the different types of closures over a much longer period of time than previously studied

  • Volatile compounds were sampled by head-space solid phase microextraction (HSSPME), according to the operating parameters described by Rossetti et al [33]

  • South Tyrolean wines stored for thirty months in bottles and sealed with different types of closures were studied in terms of changes in volatile and phenolic compounds and their content of free and total sulfites and dissolved oxygen

Read more

Summary

Introduction

González-Adrados et al [6] conducted a study using two different closure materials (natural cork and 1 + 1 technical cork) with treated and non-treated surfaces to evaluate the interactions between the closure and the wine. Their results showed that most of the overall migration of non-volatile compounds from the closure to the wine was due to the natural components of the cork. The profiles of volatile and non-volatile compounds, free and total SO2 content, and dissolved oxygen content of the same wines were analyzed after 30 months of storage in bottles, with the goal of evaluating how quality was affected by the different types of closures over a much longer period of time than previously studied. The results obtained broadened the knowledge of closure–wine interactions after a long period of storage in the bottle

Wines and Closures
Analysis of Volatile Compounds
HPLC Analysis
Determination of Dissolved O2 and SO2
Sensory Discrimination Test
Multivariate Data Analysis
Profile of Volatile Compounds
Non-Volatile Compounds
Sulfur Dioxide and Dissolved Oxygen Content
Sensory Evaluation
Discussion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call