Effect of Must Hyperoxygenation on Sensory Expression and Chemical Composition of the Resulting Wines

Abstract

This paper evaluates the effect of must hyperoxygenation on final wine. Lower concentrations of caftaric acid (0.29 mg·L−1), coutaric acid (1.37 mg·L−1) and Catechin (0.86 mg·L−1) were observed in hyperoxygenated must in contrast to control must (caftaric acid 32.78 mg·L−1, coutaric acid 5.01 mg·L−1 and Catechin 4.45 mg·L−1). In the final wine, hydroxybenzoic acids were found in higher concentrations in the control variant (gallic acid 2.58 mg·L−1, protocatechuic acid 1.02 mg·L−1, vanillic acid 2.05 mg·L−1, syringic acid 2.10 mg·L−1) than in the hyperoxygenated variant (2.01 mg·L−1, 0.86 mg·L−1, 0.98 mg·L−1 and 1.50 mg·L−1 respectively). Higher concentrations of total flavanols (2 mg·L−1 in hyperoxygenated must and 21 mg·L−1 in control must; 7.5 mg·L−1 in hyperoxygenated wine and 19.8 mg·L−1 in control wine) and polyphenols (97 mg·L−1 in hyperoxygenated must and 249 mg·L−1 in control must; 171 mg·L−1 in hyperoxygenated wine and 240 mg·L−1 in control wine) were found in both the must and the control wine. A total of 24 volatiles were determined using gas chromatography mass spectrometry. Statistical differences were achieved for isobutyl alcohol (26.33 mg·L−1 in control wine and 32.84 mg·L−1 in hyperoxygenated wine), or 1-propanol (7.28 mg·L−1 in control wine and 8.51 mg·L−1 in hyperoxygenated wine), while esters such as isoamyl acetate (1534.41 µg·L−1 in control wine and 698.67 µg·L−1 in hyperoxygenated wine), 1-hexyl acetate (136.32 µg·L−1 in control wine and 71.67 µg·L−1 in hyperoxygenated wine) and isobutyl acetate (73.88 µg·L−1 in control wine and 37.27 µg·L−1 in hyperoxygenated wine) had a statistically lower concentration.

Effect of New Methods for Inhibiting Malolactic Fermentation on the Analytical and Sensory Parameters of Wines

“…For the analyses, 1 mL samples were extracted with a syringe; 0.5 mL was allocated for system rinsing, while the remaining 0.5 mL was analysed three times. The obtained values were automatically assessed using the OpusWine 2.0. software (Bruker, Bremen, Germany) [51].…”