4.7 Review

Phenolic Compounds as Markers of Wine Quality and Authenticity

Journal

FOODS
Volume 9, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/foods9121785

Keywords

phenolic compounds; chemical markers; wine authenticity; wine quality; food traceability; chemometrics

Funding

  1. WineID Project of the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano [TN201A]
  2. c-PAC Project of the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano [TN200T]
  3. Open Access Publishing Fund of the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Targeted and untargeted determinations are being currently applied to different classes of natural phenolics to develop an integrated approach aimed at ensuring compliance to regulatory prescriptions related to specific quality parameters of wine production. The regulations are particularly severe for wine and include various aspects of the viticulture practices and winemaking techniques. Nevertheless, the use of phenolic profiles for quality control is still fragmented and incomplete, even if they are a promising tool for quality evaluation. Only a few methods have been already validated and widely applied, and an integrated approach is in fact still missing because of the complex dependence of the chemical profile of wine on many viticultural and enological factors, which have not been clarified yet. For example, there is a lack of studies about the phenolic composition in relation to the wine authenticity of white and especially rose wines. This review is a bibliographic account on the approaches based on phenolic species that have been developed for the evaluation of wine quality and frauds, from the grape varieties (of V. vinifera and non vinifera), to the geographical origin, the vintage year, the winemaking process, and wine aging. Future perspectives on the role of phenolic compounds in different wine quality aspects, which should be still exploited, are also outlined.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available