4.2 Article

Press Fractioning of Grape Juice: A First Step to Manage Potential Atypical Aging Development during Winemaking

期刊

出版社

AMER SOC ENOLOGY VITICULTURE
DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2019.19030

关键词

2-aminoacetophenone precursors; atypical aging; berry fractions; indole-3-acetic acid; industrial pressing; UTA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The development in young white wines of 2-aminoacetophenone, commonly known as atypical aging defect (UTA), leads to unpleasant notes such as mothball, wet mop, sweaty, acacia blossom, or soap. Tryptophan and indole-3-acetic acid, the most abundant auxin in plants, are considered to be the primary precursors of this compound. Indole-3-acetonitrile; indole-3-lactic acid; skatole; tryptophol and the inactivated form of the auxin N-(3-indolylacetyl)-L-alanine; N-(3-indolylacetyl)-DL-aspartic acid; and methyl-indole-3-acetate can act as potential precursors of 2-aminoacetophenone and contribute directly to UTA scents in wines. This paper investigates the distribution of 2-aminoacetophenone precursors or intermediate metabolites (n = 9) in grape berry tissues (pulp, skin, and seeds) in 12 samples of four different varieties: Cabernet Cantor, Chardonnay, Merlot, and Solaris. Chardonnay (three lots) was analyzed in more depth by evaluating precursor extraction during industrial pressing at different stages. For quantification, this study developed and validated a method using high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with high-resolution mass spectrometry. It used a pre-concentration and purification solid-phase extraction-online system and had a detection limit between 0.25 and 2 mu g/L, depending on the compound. Despite significant varietal differences, indole-3-acetic acid was more abundant in seeds and skin fractions. Only similar to 30% of the total berry amount was extracted with free-run pressing, but similar to 80% was extracted at 0.6 bar. This suggests a fundamental role of pressing in managing the development of UTA during winemaking.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据