4.7 Article

Contribution of Grapes and Oak Wood Barrels to Pyrrole Contents in Chardonnay Wines: The Influence of Several Cooperage Parameters

期刊

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 69, 期 29, 页码 8179-8189

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.1c01633

关键词

wine; Chardonnay; pyrrole; oak; toasting

资金

  1. Seguin-Moreau and Biolaffort

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study investigated the influence of winemaking parameters on pyrrole concentrations in Chardonnay wines, finding significantly higher levels of pyrroles in wines made in new barrels compared to other containers, suggesting a significant contribution of oak wood during winemaking. The research also developed a method to assay pyrroles in oak wood extracts, and observed significant differences in pyrrole concentrations based on different cooperage parameters. These findings provide new insights for monitoring winemaking and aging of Chardonnay wines.
The influence of some enological parameters on pyrrole concentrations in Chardonnay wines was studied. First, a quantitative method to assay five pyrroles was optimized and applied to determine their content in wines produced in different containers. All pyrroles were observed in wines aged in a stainless-steel tank, which indicated that they have a varietal or fermentative origin. However, their concentrations were significantly higher in wines made in new barrels than in older barrels or in a stainless-steel tank, so oak wood may largely contribute during the winemaking process. A quantitative method to assay pyrroles in oak wood extract was also developed to study the influence of several cooperage parameters such as different types of traditional toasting, as well as the temperature and the time of toasting. Significant differences were observed on pyrrole concentrations in oak wood extracts according to these different cooperage parameters. These findings bring new perspectives to the monitoring of winemaking and the aging of Chardonnay wines.

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

4.7
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