Sensory profiles and consumer acceptance of different styles of Australian Moscato

Abstract

Background and Aims: In recent years, there has been significant growth in the popularity, and therefore sales, of Moscato in Australia. The aim of this study was to determine the sensory and quality variation amongst Australian Moscato wines, as well as consumer acceptance of different styles of Moscato. Methods and Results: The sensory profile of 24 Australian Moscato wines was determined by descriptive analysis using a trained panel, while quality ratings were determined by an expert panel of sparkling winemakers and wine show judges. Statistical analysis of sensory attribute ratings facilitated selection of a subset of Moscato wines, comprising three white and three pink wine styles that reflected the sensory variation observed amongst all wines, which were subsequently used in acceptance trials to determine consumer liking. Conclusions: Considerable diversity was observed amongst the composition and sensory profiles of the Moscato wines studied, with some exhibiting more prominent varietal characters, while others displayed complex, developed notes. Mean hedonic ratings for the subset of Moscato wines ranged from 4.7 to 5.6 (on a 9 cm scale). Segmentation of consumers according to their individual liking scores enabled identification of two consumer clusters with opposing preferences for distinct styles of Moscato. Significance of the Study: The variation in sensory profiles and quality of Australian Moscato wines has been profiled for the first time and consumer acceptance of different styles of Moscato determined. These results enable industry to make more informed decisions with regard to wine production and marketing, that is, to tailor different styles of Moscato for specific segments of the domestic sparkling wine market. Figure 4. Principal component (PC) analysis biplot of sensory attribute ratings, liking scores (for the two consumer clusters) and quality ratings for the subset of Moscato wines (M01, M03, M05, M15, M20 and M24). A, aroma attribute and P, palate attribute.8Sensory profiles of Australian Moscato

Discrimination of Juice Press Fractions for Sparkling Base Wines by a UV-Vis Spectral Phenolic Fingerprint and Chemometrics

“…This information may be of sensory significance to sparkling wine producers, as total phenolics and hydroxycinnamates (i.e., summed concentration of free hydroxycinnamate acids and their tartaric acid and ethyl esters) have been reported to exert an effect of bitter taste on white wines [8]. However, total phenolics in combination with higher pH have also been shown to elicit perceived viscosity (i.e., overall perception of palate weight) [8], responsible for affecting the quality of some sparkling wines [2].…”

“…Over the last decade, the Tasmanian wine industry has grown significantly, primarily due to an escalation in sparkling white wine production (Méthode Traditionelle), with Pinot noir and Chardonnay being the main Vitis vinifera varieties used [1]. Flavor is of primary importance for understanding consumer preference of sparkling white wines and, in general, intense aged/developed and complexity attributes are currently favored [2,3]. A number of viticultural and oenological decisions can affect a sparkling wine's flavor, such as grape variety selected, origin of grapes, and winemaking procedures adopted (e.g., juice extraction, oxygen management, fining, and length of lees aging) [4][5][6][7].…”

Investigating Australian Consumers’ Perceptions of and Preferences for Different Styles of Sparkling Wine Using the Fine Wine Instrument

“…Previous studies have demonstrated significant diversity in the sensory profiles of Australian sparkling white and Moscato wines [3,4]. For sparkling white wines, variation in sensory qualities can be attributed to the method of production; carbonated and Charmat wines are typically fruit-driven styles of sparkling wine, whereas transfer and Méthode Traditionelle wines exhibit complexity (e.g., yeasty, toasty, bready characters) due to a combination of bottle fermentation, aging with lees contact and/or yeast autolysis [5,6].…”

“…For sparkling white wines, variation in sensory qualities can be attributed to the method of production; carbonated and Charmat wines are typically fruit-driven styles of sparkling wine, whereas transfer and Méthode Traditionelle wines exhibit complexity (e.g., yeasty, toasty, bready characters) due to a combination of bottle fermentation, aging with lees contact and/or yeast autolysis [5,6]. Within the domestic (Australian) sparkling wine market, there are consumer segments with different preferences for these different styles of sparkling wine [3,4,7]. Wine sensory properties are amongst the most important factors influencing consumer preference [8][9][10].…”

Contribution of a BrazilianTorulaspora delbrueckiiisolate and a commercialSaccharomyces cerevisiaeto the aroma profile and sensory characteristics of Moscato Branco wines

“…The production and consumption of muscat sparkling wines in Brazil, Australia, Canada and USA has experienced a strong increase in the last few decades (Culbert et al ). Brazilian muscat sparkling wines are produced with Moscato Branco, a regional cultivar with a natural ability to produce aromatic wines characterised by fresh, floral and fruity aroma and equilibrated acidity (Rizzon et al ).…”