| Literature DB >> 32182679 |
Jelena Jeremic1,2, Isara Vongluanngam2,3, Arianna Ricci1, Giuseppina Paola Parpinello1, Andrea Versari1.
Abstract
One property of oenological tannins, oxygen reactivity, is commonly exploited in winemaking. The reactivity is mediated by the presence of catalysts (i.e., transition metals and sulfur dioxide) and protects wine against oxidation. This work compares the oxygen consumption rate (OCR) of four commercial oenological tannins (two procyanidins from grape skin and seed, an ellagitannin from oak wood and a gallotannin from gallnut) in a model wine solution and Chianti red wine. All samples were subjected to consecutive cycles of air saturation at 20 °C to increase the total level of oxygen provided. After each cycle, the oxygen level was measured by means of a non-invasive luminescent sensor glued to a transparent surface (sensor dots) until there was no further change in substrate reactivity. The OCR followed first-order kinetics, regardless of the tannin. As expected, the ellagitannin showed the fastest OCR, followed by the two from grape seeds and skins and finally the gallotannin. The total O2 consumption in the red wine was almost double that of the model solution, due to the oxidation of wine substrates. The measurement of OCR is helpful for setting up an advanced winemaking protocol that makes use of tannins to reduce the use of sulfur dioxide.Entities:
Keywords: Sangiovese; antioxidants; oxygen consumption rate; sustainable winemaking; tannins
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32182679 PMCID: PMC7179462 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25051215
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Oxygen consumption parameters in model wines and Chianti red wines with tannins added. Codification of wines/tannins are detailed in Table 3.
| Sample Code | Duration of O2 Consumption (days) | TPO Consumed (mg/L) | Final O2 Level (mg/L) | Total O2 Consumed (mg/L) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st sat. | 2nd sat. | 3rd sat. | 1st sat. | 2nd sat. | 3rd sat. | 1st sat. | 2nd sat. | 3rd sat. | ||
| MWse | 43 | 29 | 14 | 7.91 | 1.24 | 1.51 | 0.87 | 7.55 | 7.71 | 10.08 |
| MWsk | 43 | 26 | 14 | 7.65 | 2.20 | 2.40 | 1.05 | 6.86 | 8.81 | 8.42 |
| MWet | 43 | 29 | 14 | 6.96 | 3.29 | 1.88 | 0.33 | 4.97 | 6.83 | 11.86 |
| MWgt | 30 | 29 | 14 | 3.10 | 2.51 | 1.06 | 4.94 | 4.16 | 8.27 | 6.68 |
| Control | 7 | 16 | 27 | 6.57 | 13.3 | 9.37 | 2.31 | 0.70 | 0.67 | 19.76 |
| CHse | 10 | 18 | 27 | 8.57 | 8.03 | 8.64 | 0.89 | 0.67 | 0.58 | 20.32 |
| CHsk | 10 | 20 | 26 | 8.72 | 8.06 | 8.65 | 1.10 | 0.16 | 0.34 | 20.37 |
| CHet | 10 | 26 | 28 | 7.92 | 9.11 | 9.13 | 0.43 | 0.46 | 0.56 | 20.33 |
| CHgt | 14 | 22 | 30 | 6.70 | 7.71 | 7.84 | 1.80 | 0.45 | 0.74 | 19.61 |
sat. = saturation.
Figure 1Oxygen consumption over time in the model solution containing tannins, for three consecutive saturations. Legend: (Δ) grape seed tannin; (■) grape skins tannin; (○) ellagitannin; (x) gallotannin.
Figure 2Total Package Oxygen (TPO) consumption by Chianti red wine control (○) and added with grape skin tannin (●) over four subsequent saturations.
Figure 3Example of first order kinetic model of Total Package Oxygen (TPO) consumption over four saturation added with oenological grape skins tannins. Legend: (○) first saturation; (●) grape skins tannin; (□) ellagitannin; (■) gallotannin.
First-order kinetic equations for the consumption of oxygen on model solutions and wines.
| Experiment | 1st Saturation | 2nd Saturation | 3rd Saturation | 4th Saturation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MWse | y = −0.053x + 2.107 (R2 = 0.99) | y = −0.005x + 2.159 (R2 = 0.97) | y = −0.012x + 2.218 (R2 = 0.97) | |
| MWsk | y = −0.049x + 1.947 (R2 = 0.98) | y = −0.011x + 2.177 (R2 = 0.95) | y = −0.020x + 2.343 (R2 = 0.99) | |
| MWet | y = −0.071x + 1.715 (R2 = 0.98) | y = −0.017x + 2.046 (R2= 0.94) | y = −0.019x + 2.194 (R2 = 0.98) | |
| MWgt | y = −0.016x + 1.984 (R2 = 0.93) | y = −0.011x + 2.242 (R2 = 0.99) | y = −0.010x + 2.255 (R2 = 0.96) | |
| Control wine | y = −0.133x + 1.857 (R2 = 0.77) | y = −0.119x + 1.792 (R2 = 0.92) | Y = −0.096x + 2.087 (R2 = 0.96) | y = −0.091x + 2.047 (R2 = 0.99) |
| CHse | y = −0.242x + 1.911 (R2 = 0.94) | y = −0.148x + 1.954 (R2 = 0.97) | y = −0.102x + 1.902 (R2 = 0.96) | y = −0.077x + 2.030 (R2 = 0.96) |
| CHsk | y = −0.218x +1.982(R2 = 0.95) | y = −0.134x + 1.916 (R2 = 0.96) | y = −0.131x + 1.987 (R2 = 0.98) | y = −0.078x + 2.090 (R2 = 0.98) |
| CHet | y = −0.307x + 1.896 (R2 = 0.98) | y = −0.121x + 1.912(R2= 0.94) | y = −0.102x + 2.131 (R2 = 0.99) | y = −0.071x + 2.085 (R2 = 0.99) |
| CHgt | y = −0.105x+ 1.724 (R2 = 0.77) | y = −0.133x + 1.854 (R2 = 0.97) | y = −0.081x + 1.903 (R2 = 0.96) | y = −0.087x + 2.207 (R2 = 0.99) |
Tannins and dosages used in the experiment.
| Sample Code | Sample Composition | Tannin Composition |
|---|---|---|
| MVse | Model wine solution + seed tannin 1 g/L | Seed tannin: 733 mg TPC/L of which 188 mg tannins/L (as CE) |
| MVsk | Model wine solution + skin tannin 1 g/L | Skin tannin: 856 mg TPC/L of which 172 mg tannins/L (as CE) |
| MVet | Model wine solution + ellagitannin 1 g/L | Ellagitannin: 478 mg TPC/L of which 53 mg tannins/L (as CE) |
| MVgt | Model wine solution + gallotannin 1 g/L | Gallotannin: 877 mg TPC/L of which 404 mg tannins/L (as CE) |
| CH | Chianti red wine (control) | total polyphenolic compounds (TPC) 2458 mg/L as catechin equivalent (as CE) |
| CHse | Chianti red wine + seed tannin 0.1 g/L | Tannin as above |
| CHsk | Chianti red wine + skin tannin 0.1 g/L | Tannin as above |
| CHet | Chianti red wine + ellagitannin 0.1 g/L | Tannin as above |
| CHgt | Chianti red wine + gallotannin 0.1 g/L | Tannin as above |