Literature DB >> 27896529

Acetaldehyde kinetics of enological yeast during alcoholic fermentation in grape must.

Erhu Li1, Ramón Mira de Orduña2.   

Abstract

Acetaldehyde strongly binds to the wine preservative SO2 and, on average, causes 50-70 mg l-1 of bound SO2 in red and white wines, respectively. Therefore, a reduction of bound and total SO2 concentrations necessitates knowledge of the factors that affect final acetaldehyde concentrations in wines. This study provides a comprehensive analysis of the acetaldehyde production and degradation kinetics of 26 yeast strains of oenological relevance during alcoholic fermentation in must under controlled anaerobic conditions. Saccharomyces cerevisiae and non-Saccharomyces strains displayed similar metabolic kinetics where acetaldehyde reached an initial peak value at the beginning of fermentations followed by partial reutilization. Quantitatively, the range of values obtained for non-Saccharomyces strains greatly exceeded the variability among the S. cerevisiae strains tested. Non-Saccharomyces strains of the species C. vini, H. anomala, H. uvarum, and M. pulcherrima led to low acetaldehyde residues (<10 mg l-1), while C. stellata, Z. bailii, and, especially, a S. pombe strain led to large residues (24-48 mg l-1). Acetaldehyde residues in S. cerevisiae cultures were intermediate and less dispersed (14-34 mg l-1). Addition of SO2 to Chardonnay must triggered significant increases in acetaldehyde formation and residual acetaldehyde. On average, 0.33 mg of residual acetaldehyde remained per mg of SO2 added to must, corresponding to an increase of 0.47 mg of bound SO2 per mg of SO2 added. This research demonstrates that certain non-Saccharomyces strains display acetaldehyde kinetics that would be suitable to reduce residual acetaldehyde, and hence, bound-SO2 levels in grape wines. The acetaldehyde formation potential may be included as strain selection argument in view of reducing preservative SO2 concentrations.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Acetaldehyde; Non-Saccharomyces; SO2; Saccharomyces cerevisiae; Wine

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27896529     DOI: 10.1007/s10295-016-1879-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol        ISSN: 1367-5435            Impact factor:   3.346


  20 in total

1.  Ethyl carbamate precursor citrulline formation from arginine degradation by malolactic wine lactic acid bacteria.

Authors:  R Mira de Orduña; S Liu; M L Patchett; G J Pilone
Journal:  FEMS Microbiol Lett       Date:  2000-02-01       Impact factor: 2.742

2.  Evaluation of the acetaldehyde production and degradation potential of 26 enological Saccharomyces and non-Saccharomyces yeast strains in a resting cell model system.

Authors:  Erhu Li; Ramón Mira de Orduña
Journal:  J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2010-12-17       Impact factor: 3.346

3.  Acetaldehyde metabolism by wine lactic acid bacteria.

Authors:  J P Osborne; R Mira de Orduña; G J Pilone; S Q Liu
Journal:  FEMS Microbiol Lett       Date:  2000-10-01       Impact factor: 2.742

Review 4.  Clinical effects of sulphite additives.

Authors:  H Vally; N L A Misso; V Madan
Journal:  Clin Exp Allergy       Date:  2009-09-22       Impact factor: 5.018

5.  New methodology for removing carbonyl compounds from sweet wines.

Authors:  Mélanie Blasi; Jean-Christophe Barbe; Bernard Maillard; Denis Dubourdieu; Hervé Deleuze
Journal:  J Agric Food Chem       Date:  2007-11-22       Impact factor: 5.279

6.  Gluconic acid consumption in wines by Schizosaccharomyces pombe and its effect on the concentrations of major volatile compounds and polyols.

Authors:  Rafael A Peinado; Juan J Moreno; Oscar Maestre; Jose M Ortega; Manuel Medina; Juan C Mauricio
Journal:  J Agric Food Chem       Date:  2004-02-11       Impact factor: 5.279

7.  Formation of pyranoanthocyanins by Schizosaccharomyces pombe during the fermentation of red must.

Authors:  A Morata; S Benito; I Loira; F Palomero; M C González; J A Suárez-Lepe
Journal:  Int J Food Microbiol       Date:  2012-08-18       Impact factor: 5.277

Review 8.  Controlled mixed culture fermentation: a new perspective on the use of non-Saccharomyces yeasts in winemaking.

Authors:  Maurizio Ciani; Francesca Comitini; Ilaria Mannazzu; Paola Domizio
Journal:  FEMS Yeast Res       Date:  2009-09-07       Impact factor: 2.796

9.  Impact of mixed Torulaspora delbrueckii-Saccharomyces cerevisiae culture on high-sugar fermentation.

Authors:  Marina Bely; Philippe Stoeckle; Isabelle Masneuf-Pomarède; Denis Dubourdieu
Journal:  Int J Food Microbiol       Date:  2008-01-04       Impact factor: 5.277

10.  Selected Schizosaccharomyces pombe Strains Have Characteristics That Are Beneficial for Winemaking.

Authors:  Ángel Benito; Daniel Jeffares; Felipe Palomero; Fernando Calderón; Feng-Yan Bai; Jürg Bähler; Santiago Benito
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-23       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  3 in total

1.  The Use of Yeast Mixed Cultures for Deacidification and Improvement of the Composition of Cold Climate Grape Wines.

Authors:  Monika Cioch-Skoneczny; Michał Grabowski; Paweł Satora; Szymon Skoneczny; Krystian Klimczak
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 4.411

Review 2.  Microbial Resources as a Tool for Enhancing Sustainability in Winemaking.

Authors:  Tiziana Nardi
Journal:  Microorganisms       Date:  2020-04-02

3.  Autophagy is required for sulfur dioxide tolerance in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  Eva Valero; Jordi Tronchoni; Pilar Morales; Ramon Gonzalez
Journal:  Microb Biotechnol       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 5.813

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.