Sulphite binding in ciders

Abstract

SummaryThe extent of sulphite binding was measured in commercial ciders, and experimentally observed binding curves were compared with theoretically derived curves based on assessment of the levels of individual sulphite binding compounds determined in the ciders. Subsequently, experimental ciders were fermented under various controlled conditions using nine different strains of cider yeasts. The results indicated considerable differences both in the levels of sulphite binding compounds produced, and in the ability of different yeast strains to produce SO 2 in the cider. Juice concentration and the presence of cloud in juice had little or no effect on sulphite binding. Other factors which affected sulphite binding included the type and condition of juice (especially the effect of pectinase treatment) and, in some instances, the use of added yeast nutrients. Significant sulphite binding was also attributable to unaccountable components, probably derived from poor quality fruit, which were present in the apple juice prior to fermentation.

Multifactorial analysis of acetaldehyde kinetics during alcoholic fermentation by Saccharomyces cerevisiae

“…However, the lack of overall difference among treatments with and without yeast nutrient added found in this study, makes it unlikely that the availability of YAN may have been solely responsible for the varietal effect observed. Jarvis and Lea (2000) found a correlation between low thiamine and pantothenate levels and higher final acetaldehyde concentrations. Low zinc concentrations have also been implicated in increased final acetaldehyde levels (Bird, Gordon, Eide, & Winge, 2006).…”

Simple methods for rapid determination of sulfite in food products

“…But for the modified PRA-formaldehyde method, the recovery of sulfite in the beer sample was very low. This was most probably caused by the binding of sulfite to the components in the beer, especially aldehyde compounds originated from the fermentation process, which might compete with the PRA-formaldehyde for the sulphite (Jarvis & Lea, 2000;Lea, Ford, & Fowler, 2000). To further examine the robustness of the DTNB method, two commercial sausages (another type of foods often suffered from the sulfite binding problems) were analyzed and quantitative recovery results (97 ± 1%) were obtained for both samples.…”

Production of SO2 Binding Compounds and SO2 by Saccharomyces during Alcoholic Fermentation and the Impact on Malolactic Fermentation

“…DISCUSSION During alcoholic fermentation in synthetic grape juice and Pinot gris grape juice, strains of S. cerevisiae produced different amounts of total SO 2 with the differences being accounted for almost entirely by bound SO 2 as very little free SO 2 was measured during the alcoholic fermentation. Yeasts are known to produce a wide range of SO 2 concentrations during alcoholic fermentation (Rankine & Pocock, 1969) depending primarily on yeast strain, fermentation temperature and juice composition (Weeks, 1969;Eschenbruch, 1974;Henick-Kling & Park, 1994;Jarvis & Lea, 2000;Osborne & Edwards, 2006). In this study, the juice composition (either synthetic grape juice or Pinot gris juice) and the fermentation temperature were kept constant and so the differences in SO 2 production were likely due to variability between the yeast strains in their ability to produce SO 2 .…”