Volatile profile and aroma potential of tropical Syrah wines elaborated in different maturation and maceration times using comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography and olfactometry

A comparative aroma and volatile profile investigation of 2016 and 2017 vintage Bull’s Blood wine samples

“…Methyl decenoate, Furfuryl-alcohol and ethyl-sorbate were only found in 3 separate samples. 1-Octen-3-ol was specific to 2017 vintage, and Only 14 of the components (Ethyl acetate, Isobutyl alcohol, Isoamyl acetate, Isoamyl alcohol, Ethyl caproate, Ethyl lactate, 1-Hexanol, Ethyl octanoate, Ethyl decanoate, Diethyl succinate, Phenethyl alcohol, Octanoic acid) could be found in every single Bull's Blood wine 6,7,8 .…”

Role of gas chromatography and olfactometry to understand the wine aroma: Achievements denoted by multidimensional analysis

“…In order to obtain suitable reliability, when a low number of assessors are involved, the number of repetitions per assessor is usually greater and vice versa as presented in Figure 1 [30]. For example, in OSME GC‐O analysis of Muscadine wines was performed by two assessors with at least five repetitions of each sample [17], whereas five judges evaluated Cabernet Sauvignon wines doing three repetitions [23] and four panelists performed four repetitions per sample of Pinot Noir [97], Syrah [27], and Merlot [26] wines. For all GC‐O methods, data collected by each panelist and considering the repetitions performed for each sample are averaged, yielding a consensus odorgram as represented in Figure 2.…”

“…An analytical approach encompassing multiple dimensions, such as multidimensional GC (MDGC), including heart‐cutting GC (GC‐GC) or comprehensive two‐dimensional GC (GCxGC), may help separating coeluting compounds and detect some trace compounds important to wine aroma [22,23]. GC techniques combined with olfactometry have been used to identify odor‐active compounds that are essential to differentiate wines according to the terroir [24], to understand the role of fungal infection of grapes for wine quality [25], to find best canopy management practices [26] and to define the ideal balance between maturation degree and maceration time of grapes to obtain the best quality [27], among others.…”

Comprehensive 2D Gas Chromatography with TOF-MS Detection Confirms the Matchless Discriminatory Power of Monoterpenes and Provides In-Depth Volatile Profile Information for Highly Efficient White Wine Varietal Differentiation

“…The three groups mentioned are not so clearly divided: most of the precursors of volatile aroma compounds originate from grapes and are in one way or another affected by fermentation and/or aging [4]. The final wine aroma profile is a result of complex interactive effects between many sources of variability, such as variety [5], geographical position characterized by specific agroecological conditions [6,7], viticultural practices [8], harvest date [9], harvest year [10,11], grape processing, and fermentation parameters [12,13], etc.…”

“…Regardless of the existing great potential, only a few studies have utilized GC×GC to investigate wine volatile aroma profiles, while studies which used GC×GC for varietal characterization and differentiation were extremely rare. Several authors reported more or less detailed GC×GC volatile aroma profiles of particular monovarietal wines, such as Cabernet Sauvignon [24], Sauvignon Blanc [25], Shiraz [9,26] or Syrah [12], Pinotage [21], Chardonnay [27], and Verdicchio [28], but none of them directly compared them to or differentiated them from other monovarietal wines of similar typology. In this way, despite detailed profiles determined in some cases, it still remained unknown which compounds and in which amounts are typical for a given variety and whether they could differentiate it from other monovarietal wines.…”