Influence of polysaccharides on wine protein aggregation

Jaeckels, Nadine; Meier, Miriam; Dietrich, Helmut; Will, Frank; Decker, Heinz; Fronk, Petra

doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.12.088

Cited by 47 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other wine proteins such as invertases and glucosidases seemed to have minor importance. For the invertase, we were able to confirm this in a previous study [24]. Up to now, bentonite fining in must or wine is the common way to remove wine proteins during the vinification process.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of drought stress on concentration and composition of wine proteins in Riesling

Meier

Jaeckels

Stoll

et al. 2016

Eur Food Res Technol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

of chitinases and thaumatin-like proteins between 20 and 30 kDa. Concerning the protein composition, minor differences became obvious only between vintages but not between the stressed and watered samples. In-solution digest of proteins from Riesling grapes 2008 followed by LC-MS n and database research identified 15 proteins originating from grapes and 10 from the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. In conclusion, our study demonstrates the importance to develop new strategies to prevent increased haze formation in wine under the predicted conditions of climate change. Prevention of drought stress by drip irrigation can be considered as one strategy to decrease protein amounts in wines.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…There, 25 mL samples were sealed in test tubes with screw caps. The tubes were heated at 80 °C in a water bath for 3 h [24]. After cooling down to 20 °C, the turbidity of the samples was measured nephelometrically (Nephla LPG, Hach-Lange, Düsseldorf, Germany) before and after the heat test.…”

Section: Bentonite Fining and Protein Haze Stability Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of drought stress on concentration and composition of wine proteins in Riesling

Meier

Jaeckels

Stoll

et al. 2016

Eur Food Res Technol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The conditions recommended for heating and cooling vary widely and include heating at 80°C for 2 h then cooling at 4°C for 16 h (Pocock and Waters ), or cooling at 0°C for 2 h (Marangon et al , Chagas et al , Salazar et al ), or cooling to 4°C for 2 h (de Bruijn et al ). Other methods include heating to 80°C for 3 h followed by cooling at 20°C for 0.5 h (Jaeckels et al , Meier et al ); heating at 80°C for 6 h then cooling at 4°C for 16 h (Pocock and Rankine , Batista et al , Vincenzi et al , Benucci et al ); 80°C for 30 min with no cooling time specified (Gabrielli et al ); 90°C for 1 h then cooling at 4°C for 18 h (Giese et al ), or heating samples to 30–80°C for 6 h and cooling at 4°C for 16 h with the change in turbidity monitored at different temperature values (Lambri et al ). Laboratory methods used widely by the Australian wine industry are specific for the heating conditions (80°C for 6 h), but not for the cooling conditions (Iland ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting protein haze formation in white wines

McRae

Barricklow

Pocock

et al. 2018

Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aims Wine protein haze formation is commonly predicted by a heat test; however, the conditions used in the test can vary widely between laboratories. Here, we investigate the influence of heating and cooling conditions on heat test results. Methods and Results White wines were heated at 80°C for a time that varied from 0.5 to 6.0 h and then cooled for 0.5–18 h at either 0, 4 or 20°C. The turbidity was measured before heating and after cooling. Longer heating times, longer cooling times and a lower cooling temperature all increased the amount of haze produced in the heat test. Bentonite fining trials with eight white wines indicated that after 2 h heating, cooling either at 4°C for 18 h, 0°C for 3 h or 20°C for 3 h had no impact on the predicted dose. Heating for 6 h with 18 h cooling at 4°C (24 h test) generally increased the predicted bentonite dose by up to 0.3 g/L compared with heating for 2 h. Wines fined at the bentonite dose recommended by a 5 h test or a 24 h test were generally clear after storage at 17 or 28°C for 12 months while the unfined Control wines generally became hazy. Conclusions Wines heated for 2 h at 80°C and subsequently cooled for 3 h at 20°C (5 h heat test) enabled the repeatable production of haze and bentonite fining dose. Significance of the Study Heat tests used in the wine industry need to include consistent heating and cooling conditions for reliable results and can be achieved in less time than previously recommended.

show abstract

“…The removal of phenolic substances from wines has also been shown to decrease haze formation (Pocock et al ). Polysaccharides may potentially reduce protein aggregation in wines by forming a protective layer around unfolded proteins (Waters et al ), although the contribution of polysaccharides to haze formation in reconstituted wines is variable (Dupin et al , Carvalho et al , Gazzola et al , Jaeckels et al ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of white wine composition on protein haze potential

McRae

Schulkin

Dambergs

et al. 2018

Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aims Haze formation in white wine is caused by protein aggregation and can be influenced by many other wine components. This study investigated the impact of wine matrix composition on haze formation in 60 white wines to assess the feasibility of predicting haze by measuring selected wine components. Methods and Results Sixteen wine matrix components previously shown to influence wine haze in model and reconstitution studies were analysed in a range of white wines and compared to the amount of haze formed in a heat test. Protein concentration and electrical conductivity were the only components that significantly (P < 0.05) correlated with haze formation (positive and negative correlations, respectively). Partial least squares and multiple linear regression analyses, however, indicated that this correlation (R2 = 0.54, standard error in cross validation = 9.00, residual predictive deviation (RPD) = 1.44) was not sufficient to use as a model for predicting haze formation. Conclusions Protein concentration and electrical conductivity are the key influencing factors of haze formation in white wines, although multiple other components are likely to also contribute to the amount of haze produced. Significance of the Study Predicting haze potential in wine is achieved more effectively by inducing a haze than by measuring individual wine components.

show abstract

Influence of polysaccharides on wine protein aggregation

Cited by 47 publications

References 40 publications

Impact of drought stress on concentration and composition of wine proteins in Riesling

Impact of drought stress on concentration and composition of wine proteins in Riesling

Predicting protein haze formation in white wines

Effect of white wine composition on protein haze potential

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About