4.3 Article

Chemical and sensory profiling of Shiraz wines co-fermented with commercial non-Saccharomyces inocula

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ajgw.12320

关键词

mixed culture inoculation; non-Saccharomyces yeasts; sensory evaluation; Shiraz; volatile compounds; yeast inoculum

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Aims: The choice of yeast strain(s) to conduct the fermentation can greatly affect wine chemical and sensory profile. Even though the use of non-Saccharomyces co-inocula to build complexity and diversify styles is increasingly in vogue, a limited number of such products are available to date, and more research is required to guide their use in the wine industry. This study evaluates the potential of commercial yeast inocula to modulate the quality of Shiraz wines at two maturity levels. Methods and Results: Vinification outcomes of eight yeast treatments were compared in earlier (24 degrees Brix) and later (29 degrees Brix) harvested Shiraz fruit. Yeast treatments included five non-Saccharomyces products with sequentially inoculated Saccharomyces cerevisiae, a commercial blend of non-Saccharomyces and S. cerevisiae strains, and a S. cerevisiae inoculum. Fermentation monitoring, and comprehensive analytical profiling in terms of basic chemistry, volatile composition, phenolic measurements and descriptive sensory analysis, allowed for the comparison of the resulting wines. Both harvest date and yeast inoculation treatments had a significant impact on a range of compositional and, in turn, sensory parameters of the wines. Conclusions: Certain non-Saccharomyces sequential inoculation treatments led to increased appeal of earlier harvest wines compared to the S. cerevisiae Control. These treatments, however, were related to an increased risk of arrested fermentation in higher ripeness conditions. Significance of the Study: This study contributes to a better understanding of yeast inoculum-derived modulation of Shiraz wine quality parameters at different maturity levels.

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

4.3
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