Untangling the impact of red wine maceration times on wine ageing. A multidisciplinary approach focusing on extended maceration in Shiraz wines

Garrido-Bañuelos, Gonzalo; Buica, Astrid; Kuhlman, Brock; Schückel, Julia; Zietsman, Anscha J.J.; Willats, William G. T.; Moore, John P.; Toit, W. J. Du

doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2021.110697

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These beers were characterized with more tropical and fruity aromas (i.e., passion fruit or mango). Conversely, beers containing AM hops were characterized by the absence of these tropical fruits, rather showing notes of “coffee,” “cocoa/chocolate” or “spicy.” These results are in agreement with the recent findings from Garrido‐Bañuelos, Buica, et al (2021) (Garrido‐Bañuelos, de Barros Alves, & Mihnea, 2021), where the sensory space of specific hops was investigated through text data. Nonetheless, a recent study has shown how the taster's beer styles preference can influence the perceptual maps and aromatic description of hop varieties (Hopfer et al, 2021).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Other studies have used sorting in combination with typicality, to understand the sensory perception of “old vine” wines (Mafata et al, 2020) or rating strategies, by quality scores (Brand et al, 2018). The addition of intensity rating has already been explored in other similarity‐based methods, such as PM (Garrido‐Bañuelos, Buica, et al, 2021; Wilson et al, 2019). These studies, conducted in wine, evaluated the intensity as low, medium, and high, which was later converted into numerical values for data analysis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sensory discrimination of single hop beers by using sorting combined with profiling and intensity rating

Garrido-Bañuelos

Buica

2023

Journal of Sensory Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensory methodologies are continuously being optimized based on industry needs. Sorting is a widely used sensory method; however, it provides limited information about the uniqueness of individual products. The present work was performed on nine single‐hop beers using a combination of sorting with profiling and intensity rating (SPIR) rating to highlight the intra‐group variability and individual characteristics. Results have shown that SPIR can effectively highlight the intra‐group differences. It has also shown that a higher frequency of citation did not always correspond to a higher attribute intensity. For the considered application, the results highlighted the role of hop varieties on the sensory profile of beers. Overall sensory similarities were found between Mosaic (MO), Citra (CI), and Celeia (CE) hops. However, the use of SPIR highlighted differences between CE and the other hops. Amarillo (AM) hops showed the most distinctive profile in all cases. Practical applications The use of sorting in combination with profiling and intensity rating (SPIR) rating can be a valuable tool in new product development. It is not only important to understand the overall sensory similarities and differences between groups of samples, but also unique aspects compared to similar products. The present work has shown that adding intensity to sorting and profiling can highlight the inner characteristics of individual products in a group of samples with an overall similar sensory profile.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensory discrimination of single hop beers by using sorting combined with profiling and intensity rating

Garrido-Bañuelos

Buica

2023

Journal of Sensory Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results clearly showed that the components of Laoxianghuang were clustered into three groups according to the fermentation years: 3–5 years, 8–10 years, and 15–20 years. This phenomenon is similar to the fermentation of grape wine ( 37 ), the aging of tea ( 38 ), and the storage of tangerine peel ( 39 ), where samples of the same fermentation or storage age shared some similarity and had the potential for clustering homogeneity. As with unfermented raw fruits ( 30 ) and other citrus ( 40 ), the VIP scores of PLS-DA were >1 for terpenes such as γ-terpinene, cymene, limonene, and terpinolene, which may be the signature characteristic compounds of such fruits.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

SPME-GC–MS combined with chemometrics to assess the impact of fermentation time on the components, flavor, and function of Laoxianghuang

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laoxianghuang, fermented from Citrus medica L. var. Sarcodactylis Swingle of the Rutaceae family, is a medicinal food. The volatiles of Laoxianghuang fermented in different years were obtained by solid-phase microextraction combined with gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (SPME-GC–MS). Meanwhile, the evolution of its component-flavor function during the fermentation process was explored in depth by combining chemometrics and performance analyses. To extract the volatile compounds from Laoxianghuang, the fiber coating, extraction time, and desorption temperature were optimized in terms of the number and area of peaks. A polydimethylsiloxane/divinylbenzene (PDMS/DVB) with a thickness of 65 μm fiber, extraction time of 30 min, and desorption temperature of 200 °C were shown to be the optimal conditions. There were 42, 44, 52, 53, 53, and 52 volatiles identified in the 3rd, 5th, 8th, 10th, 15th, and 20th years of fermentation of Laoxianghuang, respectively. The relative contents were 97.87%, 98.50%, 98.77%, 98.85%, 99.08%, and 98.36%, respectively. Terpenes (mainly limonene, γ-terpinene and cymene) displayed the highest relative content and were positively correlated with the year of fermentation, followed by alcohols (mainly α-terpineol, β-terpinenol, and γ-terpineol), ketones (mainly cyclohexanone, D(+)-carvone and β-ionone), aldehydes (2-furaldehyde, 5-methylfurfural, and 1-nonanal), phenols (thymol, chlorothymol, and eugenol), esters (bornyl formate, citronellyl acetate, and neryl acetate), and ethers (n-octyl ether and anethole). Principal component analysis (PCA) and hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) showed a closer relationship between the composition of Laoxianghuang with similar fermentation years of the same gradient (3rd-5th, 8th-10th, and 15th-20th). Partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) VIP scores and PCA-biplot showed that α-terpineol, γ-terpinene, cymene, and limonene were the differential candidate biomarkers. Flavor analysis revealed that Laoxianghuang exhibited wood odor from the 3rd to the 10th year of fermentation, while herb odor appeared in the 15th and the 20th year. This study analyzed the changing pattern of the flavor and function of Laoxianghuang through the evolution of the composition, which provided a theoretical basis for further research on subsequent fermentation.

show abstract

“…Also, the winemaking strategy impact on the mouthfeel has been extensively evaluated, as the influence of the pre‐fermentative condition in terms of total soluble solids content (Casassa et al., 2013; Frost et al., 2021), maceration length, and different skin contact techniques (Casassa et al., 2013; Garrido‐Bañuelos et al., 2021; González‐Lázaro et al., 2019; Sokolowsky et al., 2015), as well as the use of native and commercial yeasts (Fanzone et al., 2020; Pickering & Nikfardjam, 2008). Furthermore, the post‐fermentative influence of the tannin and mannoprotein addition (Li et al., 2017; Picariello et al., 2020; Rinaldi & Moio, 2018; Rinaldi et al., 2019; Rinaldi et al., 2021b), the oxygen‐controlled exposure during aging (Gambuti et al., 2020a; Rinaldi et al., 2021c), and the combined impact of wine‐packaging configurations and storage temperature (Hopfer & Heymann, 2013; Hopfer et al., 2012) were considered.…”

Section: Main Aims In the Study Of Mouthfeel Subqualitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among the similarity‐based methods, sorting and projective mapping (PM) have been applied to identify similarities (and dissimilarities) using sensory and mouthfeel descriptors for phenolic fractions and wine samples (Araujo et al., 2021; Barbe et al., 2021; Ferrero‐del‐Teso et al., 2020, 2022; Garrido‐Bañuelos et al., 2021; Mafata et al., 2020; Piombino et al., 2020; Sáenz‐Navajas et al., 2017; Sáenz‐Navajas et al., 2020). The PM method takes advantage of a rectangular white paper sheet where samples are placed close/far to each other, based on their affinities/differences (Risvik et al., 1994).…”

Section: Sensory Evaluation Of Wine Mouthfeel Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mouthfeel subqualities in wines: A current insight on sensory descriptors and physical–chemical markers

Paissoni

Motta

Giacosa

et al. 2023

Comp Rev Food Sci Food Safe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Astringency and more generally mouthfeel perception are relevant to the overall quality of the wine. However, their origin and description are still uncertain and are constantly updating. Additionally, the terminology related to mouthfeel properties is expansive and extremely diversified, characterized by common traditional terms as well as novel recently adopted descriptors. In this context, this review evaluated the mention frequency of astringent subqualities and other mouthfeel attributes in the scientific literature of the last decades (2000( -August 17, 2022. One hundred and twenty-five scientific publications have been selected and classified based on wine typology, aim, and instrumental-sensorial methods adopted. Dry resulted as the most frequent astringent subquality (10% for red wines, 8.6% for white wines), while body-and related terms-is a common mouthfeel sensation for different wine types, although its concept is still vague. Alongside, promising analytical and instrumental techniques investigating and simulating the in-mouth properties are discussed in detail, such as rheology for the viscosity and tribology for the lubrication loss, as well as the different approaches for the quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the interaction between salivary proteins and astringency markers. A focus on the phenolic compounds involved in the tactile perception was conducted, with tannins being the compounds conventionally found responsible for astringency. Nevertheless, other non-tannic polyphenolic classes (i.e., flavonols, phenolic acids, anthocyanins, anthocyanin-derivative pigments) as well as chemical-physical factors and the wine matrix (i.e., polysaccharides, mannoproteins, ethanol, glycerol, and pH) can also contribute to the wine in-mouth sensory profile. An overview of mouthfeel perception, factors involved, and its vocabulary is useful for enologists and consumers.Maria Alessandra Paissoni and Giulia Motta contributed equally to the study.

show abstract

Untangling the impact of red wine maceration times on wine ageing. A multidisciplinary approach focusing on extended maceration in Shiraz wines

Cited by 9 publications

References 54 publications

Sensory discrimination of single hop beers by using sorting combined with profiling and intensity rating

Sensory discrimination of single hop beers by using sorting combined with profiling and intensity rating

SPME-GC–MS combined with chemometrics to assess the impact of fermentation time on the components, flavor, and function of Laoxianghuang

Mouthfeel subqualities in wines: A current insight on sensory descriptors and physical–chemical markers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About