| Literature DB >> 28680428 |
Stefano Negri1, Arianna Lovato1, Filippo Boscaini1, Elisa Salvetti1, Sandra Torriani1, Mauro Commisso1, Roberta Danzi2, Maurizio Ugliano1, Annalisa Polverari1, Giovanni B Tornielli1, Flavia Guzzo1.
Abstract
The natural or induced development of noble rot caused by the fungus Botrytis cinerea during the late stages of grapevine (Entities:
Keywords: Garganega grapes; VOCs; metabolomics; noble rot induction; postharvest withering
Year: 2017 PMID: 28680428 PMCID: PMC5478704 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2017.01002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
Figure 1The two types of withering process applied to Garganega berries. Harvested berries were withered under natural conditions for 29 days and then half of the berries were enclosed in plastic crates (right-hand image) to increase the relative humidity (RH%) and favor Botrytis cinerea development in the form of noble rot. The whole withering process lasted 61 days. T0 = berries at the beginning of withering; T1 = withering berries collected before varying the humidity; T2-n = naturally withered berries; T2-i = berries withered under higher humidity conditions to induce noble rot.
Figure 2Garganega berry characteristics. (A) Percentage weight loss and (B) soluble solids (°Bx) during normal withering (T2-n) and induced noble rot (T2-i). (C) Appearance of sampled berries withered under natural conditions or (D) under higher humidity to induce noble rot. (E) Average berry weight in the T2-n and T2-i samples at the end of the withering process. (F) Enumeration of Botrytis cinerea colony forming units (CFUs) in samples T0, T1, T2-n, and T2-i. Vertical bars represented standard deviations (SD) of means (n = 3). Asterisks refer to t-student p-values obtained from T2-n and T2-i comparison (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01).
Figure 3Base peak chromatograms (BPC) recorded in negative (left) and positive (right) ionization mode based on the RP-HPLC-ESI-MS analysis of T0, T1, T2-n, and T2-i berry samples. Peak numbers refer to the metabolites listed in Table 1. Chromatogram areas are highlighted to show the reduction (in blue) or the accumulation (in red) of metabolites in T2-i grapes relative to naturally withered grapes (T0, T1, T2-n). The lower bars refer to the percentage of acetonitrile (ACN) in the mobile phase.
Main metabolites detected by RP-HPLC-ESI-MS analysis in negative ([M-H]−) and positive ([M+H]+) ionization modes.
| 1 | 6.7 | Uridine 5′-diP-N-acetylglucosamine | 605.9 | 384.8 (nf), 402.7, 281.8, 272.7 | − | − | MassBank |
| 2 | 7.9 | 2-S-Glutathionylcaftaric acid | 616.0 | 439.9 (271.7, 166.8, 142.8), 253.8 | − | − | Boselli et al., |
| 3 | 10.0 | Caffeoyl tartaric acid | 310.9 | 148.7 (86.9, 130.7, 102.8), 178.7 | − | − | Library |
| 4 | 14.3 | Catechin derivative | 435.0 | 136.8 (108.7), 288.8, 270.8, 244.8 | 437.1 | 285.1 (163.0, 249,1, 205.0), 267.1 | Putative identification |
| 5 | 16.5 | Caffeic acid tryptophan | 366.1 | 185.8 (141.8), 203.8, 245.7, 217.8 | 385.1 | − | Putative identification |
| 6 | 18.8 | Resveratrol hexose isomer I | 389.1 | 226.8 (184.7, 158.8), 227.7, 164.8 | − | − | Sandhu and Gu, |
| 7 | 19.6 | Quercetin-3-O-glucoside | 463.0 | 300.7 (150.8, 299.8, 178.7), 301.7 | 465.0 | 303.0 (257.0, 229.0, 153.0, 165.0) | Library |
| 8 | 19.8 | Quercetin-glucuronide | 477.0 | 300.8 (178.6, 150.6, 151.7), 301.7 | 479.0 | 303.0 (229.0, 214.7), 317.0, 304.1 | Hvattum, |
| 9 | 22.3 | Resveratrol hexose isomer II | 389.0 | 226.8 (nf), 227.7, 228.7, 184.5 | − | − | Sandhu and Gu, |
| 10 | 25.4 | Resveratrol tetramer | 905.3 | 811.0 (717.0), 812.0, 718.0, 356.9 | − | − | Püssa et al., |
| 11 | 26.8 | 13-KODE | 293.0 | 202.8 (174.8), 220.8, 148.8 | − | − | MassBank |
| 12 | 3.5 | L-(Iso)leucine | − | − | 132.0 | 86.3 (nf), 87.3, 84.1 | MassBank |
| 13 | 4.6 | L-Phenylalanine | − | − | 166.0 | 120.2 (79.2, 103.1), 149.1, 121.1 | MassBank |
| 14 | 9.7 | L-Tryptophan | − | − | 205.0 | 188.0 (146.1, 144.0) | Massbank |
| 15 | 12.4 | (+)-Catechin | − | − | 291.1 | 139.1 (111.0), 123.1, 165.1, 147.1 | Library |
| 16 | 15.2 | (−)-Epicatechin | − | − | 291.1 | 139.1 (111.0), 123.1, 165.1, 147.1 | Library |
| 17 | 22.9 | Unidentified | − | − | 404.2 | 242.1 (224.1, 223.0, 96.1, 222.0) | − |
| 18 | 24.0 | Unidentified | − | − | 404.2 | 242.1 (nf) | − |
| 19 | 26.0 | Unidentified | − | − | 226.1 | 178.0 (150.1), 207.9, 181.3, 116.2 | − |
Peak numbers refer to the chromatogram profiles in Figure .
p < 0.05,
p < 0.01.
Figure 4Score plots (A) and correlation loading plots (B) for the O2PLS-DA model of the negative data matrices after data normalization for sample weight loss. The metabolites which strongly characterize each sample are highlighted with colored circles and are listed in Supplementary File 2 (Datasheet 1). The light blue circle comprises all metabolites that characterize the natural withering process and negatively correlate with berries infected with noble rot (T2-i). Correlation loading plots for the OPLS-DA models of negative (C) and positive (D) data matrices show the distribution of metabolites between T2-n and T2-i berries. All metabolites with pq(corr) values > 0.7 or < −0.7 are considered highly characteristic of T2-n (highlighted in yellow) or T2-i (highlighted in brown) berries and are listed in the Supplementary File 2 (Datasheet 2).
Figure 5Analysis of wines produced from Garganega berries. (A) Fermentation kinetics of the musts obtained from T0, T2-n, and T2-i berries during the 14 days of micro-vinification. Vertical bars represented standard deviations (SD) of means (n = 3). Asterisks refer to t-student p-values obtained from comparison of T2-i with T-n and T0 samples (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01) (B) O2PLS-DA score plot and (C) loading plot of T0, T2-n, and T2-i wines. In (C) correlation loading of the aroma differentiation characterizing each sample is represented by a color code, with VOCs grouped according to their aromatic class. (D) OPLS-DA loading correlation plot of withered control (T2-n) and botrytized (T2-i) wines.
Aroma compounds highlighted in Figure 5C characterizing T0, T2-n, and T2-i musts.
| Ethyl 2-hydroxy-4-methylpentanoate | Esters | 29.6 ± 5.4 | 13.4 ± 2.6 | 16.3 ± 0.7 | |||
| Ethyl lactate | Esters | Wood, cognac | Other | 932.4 ± 37.6 | 761.7 ± 74.5 | 701.5 ± 39.2 | |
| Methyl salicylate | Esters | Mint, spices | Spices | 3.2 ± 1.0 | <1 | <1 | |
| 4-Vinylguaicaol | Benzenoids | Cloves, curry | Spices | 55.3 ± 4.4 | 23.3 ± 10.5 | 2.1 ± 0.6 | |
| Phenylacetaldehyde | Benzenoids | Orange flowers, honey | Floral | 28.5 ± 4.9 | 15.7 ± 8.3 | 16.4 ± 1.8 | |
| 4-Carbethoxy butyrolactone | Lactones | 56.9 ± 3.3 | 49.2 ± 8.4 | 43.3 ± 1.5 | |||
| Isoamyl acetate | Esters | Banana | Fruity | 312.3 ± 76.5 | 765.6 ± 169.3 | 269.5 ± 11.5 | |
| β-Phenylethyl acetate | Esters | Rose, honey | Floral | 31.23 ± 8.6 | 114.1 ± 31.8 | 47.2 ± 6.8 | |
| Ethyl butanoate | Esters | Kiwifruit, pineapple | Fruity | 29.9 ± 1.4 | 79.9 ± 30.2 | 39.5 ± 11.9 | |
| Ethyl hexanoate | Esters | Apple | Fruity | 98.4 ± 14.9 | 293.6 ± 79.9 | 170.1 ± 16.8 | |
| *Ethyl 4-hydroxybutanoate | Esters | Fruity, honey | Fruity | 2.6 ± 0.5 | 39.6 ± 1.3 | 15.3 ± 2.3 | |
| Methyl vanillate | Esters | Green tea | Spices | 2.8 ± 0.3 | 4.8 ± 0.7 | 1.8 ± 0.2 | |
| trans-3-Hexen-1-ol | Alcohols | Apple, herbal | Fruity | 11.3 ± 2.4 | 29.9 ± 5.1 | 6.1 ± 1.4 | |
| Benzyl alcohol | Alcohols | Fruity, balsamic | Fruity | 64.8 ± 24.7 | 735.4 ± 37.6 | 124.8 ± 24.5 | |
| Furfuryl alcohol | Alcohols | 2.5 ± 0.4 | 8.2 ± 0.3 | 5.5 ± 1.0 | |||
| Homovanillyl alcohol | Alcohols | 64.6 ± 22.4 | 418.9 ± 39.8 | 1.6 ± 0.4 | |||
| Guaiacol | Benzenoids | Smoked | Spices | <1 | 1.6 ± 0.2 | <1 | |
| γ-butyrolactone | Lactones | Peach | Fruity | 282.6 ± 20.6 | 979.1 ± 99.9 | 561.2 ± 69.9 | |
| Decanoic acid | Carboxylic acids | Cheese | Cheesy | 214.7 ± 1.6 | 563.9 ± 104.8 | 253.9 ± 35.4 | |
| Homovanillic acid | Carboxylic acids | 1.2 ± 0.4 | 8.6 ± 1.6 | <1 | |||
| Ethyl phenylacetate | Esters | Rose, honey, tobacco | Floral | 5.0 ± 0.5 | 3.1 ± 0.7 | 7.4 ± 0.8 | |
| Ethyl 2-hydroxyvalerate | Esters | Banana | fruity | 3.0 ± 0.8 | 1.7 ± 0.7 | 4.2 ± 0.5 | |
| Diethyl succinate | Esters | Fruity | Fruity | 56.4 ± 5.5 | 58.6 ± 9.5 | 135.3 ± 13.3 | |
| Isoamyl lactate | Esters | 5.5 ± 1.6 | 13.3 ± 2.4 | 20.8 ± 5.5 | |||
| Ethyl isoamylsuccinate | Esters | 1.5 ± 0.5 | <1 | 4.8 ± 0.4 | |||
| Diethyl maleate | Esters | 29.4 ± 1.2 | 33.7 ± 3.7 | 66.5 ± 14.7 | |||
| Ethyl vanillate | Esters | Vanilla | Spices | 3.9 ± 0.8 | 1.9 ± 0.6 | 10.1 ± 1.2 | |
| 2-Hexen-1-ol | Alcohols | <1 | <1 | 2.5 ± 0.9 | |||
| 1-Octen-3-ol | Alcohols | Mushrooms | Other | <1 | <1 | 17.0 ± 1.7 | |
| trans-Linalool oxide C | Terpenes | Floral | Floral | <1 | <1 | 2.7 ± 0.2 | |
| Ho-diendiol 1 | Terpenes | Muscat, white moss | Floral | 15.2 ± 6.2 | 23.3 ± 2.8 | 37.5 ± 1.4 | |
| 4-Terpineol | Terpenes | Lilac, earthy, underwood | Floral | <1 | 29.1 ± 13.6 | 432.5 ± 122.2 | |
| p-Cresol | Benzenoids | Stable | Off-flavor | <1 | 1.7 ± 0.1 | 9.9 ± 2.1 | |
| Vanillin | Benzenoids | Vanilla | Spices | 2.2 ± 0.1 | 8.4 ± 3.4 | 70.5 ± 22.6 | |
| Phenol | Benzenoids | Smoked | Spices | 1.9 ± 0.1 | 8.30 ± 1.1 | 15.7 ± 1.1 | |
| Benzaldehyde | Benzenoids | Almond | Spices | 2.7 ± 0.5 | 22.4 ± 13.5 | 580.4 ± 87.1 | |
| γ-nonalactone | Lactones | Coconut | Fruity | 5.4 ± 0.6 | 7.5 ± 0.9 | 17.2 ± 1.6 | |
| Sherry lactone 1 | Lactones | Spice | Spices | 114.1 ± 20.4 | 219.7 ± 12.7 | 933.2 ± 96.2 | |
| Sherry lactone 2 | Lactones | Spice | Spices | 701.9 ± 89.6 | 407.0 ± 19.2 | *1.0 ± *0.3 | |
| N-(3-Methylbutyl)-acetamide | Amides | Pungent (winegar) | Off-flavor | 79.3 ± 4.5 | 158.7 ± 137.1 | *19.9 ± *6.3 | |
The corresponding pq(corr) values are reported in Supplementary File .