FY20 Enology Research Second Quarter Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
OHIO AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER OHIO GRAPE INDUSTRIES COMMITTEE FY 2020 ENOLOGY RESEARCH QUARTERLY REPORT (2nd Quarter) October 1, 2019 – December 31, 2019 Principal Investigator: Todd Steiner Enology Program Manager and Outreach Specialist Co-Investigator: Patrick Pierquet, Research Cellar & Laboratory Manager Enology Project Collaborators: Dr. Imed Dami, HCS, Viticulture Andy Kirk, AARS Branch Manager OARDC/OSU Department of Horticulture & Crop Science 1680 Madison Avenue Wooster, OH 44691 Enology FY 20 2nd Quarter Research Project Activities Report A. Enology Research Projects A1.a. Conduct Research Regarding Fining/Filtering/Wine Stability in Multiple Varieties of Red and White Commercially Produced Ohio Wines Project Title: Effect of Pectolytic Enzymes on Chambourcin Wine Quality Wines from this study were analyzed for color (420 and 520 nm), hue and total phenolics during the 1st and 2nd quarter reporting periods for treatment effects on red wine quality. Results are presented in the tables and figures below for each analysis. Further evaluation and discussion will be provided in the FY 20 Enology Annual Report. Color Intensity (“Sum”) of the finished wines was analyzed by UV spectrophotometry and reported in (Table 1). Wine color intensity represents the summation of absorbance at 420nm and 520 nm. It is evident that the use of enzymes in this study expressed a higher color intensity compared to the control for Chambourcin wines. This was observed for all enzyme treatments whether singular or combined. Table 1. Color Intensity (Hue) on Enzyme Treatment of Chambourcin Wine The “Hue” value represents the ratio of absorbance at 420 nm/520 nm. This parameter indicates that wines with lower Hue values are closer to the bright red spectrum, whereas higher Hue values indicate a wine with more brick hues or moving away from the red spectrum in color. Although there did not appear to be any major differences in hue between the enzyme treatments, the data in (Figure 1) below shows that the control wine expressed a higher hue value compared to all 3 enzyme treatments. Figure 1. Enzyme Treatment on Hue Values of Chambourcin Wines Chambourcin Color HUE 0.740 0.720 0.700 0.680 0.660 0.640 0.620 0.600 Control ColorPro ColorX Both Enzymes Another important property of red wines is the total phenolic content. These compounds contribute astringency, bitterness, color, body and mouthfeel to the wine. Chambourcin wines from this study were assayed for total phenolics using the industry standard “Folin Ciocalteu” method. From data in (Figure 2) below, it is clear that each of the enzyme treatments exhibited an increase in total phenolic content of the Chambourcin wines. Figure 2. Enzyme Treatment on Total Phenolics of Chambourcin Wines Chambourcin Total Phenolics 900.000 880.000 860.000 840.000 820.000 800.000 780.000 760.000 740.000 Control ColorPro ColorX Both Enzymes In addition to the analyses of color and total phenolics, these wines were served to a gathering of wine industry members at several 2019 Post Fermentation Workshops and the 2019 OSU South Centers workshop for sensory evaluation of wines from this study. Further information will be presented in the FY 20 enology annual report to OGIC regarding any perceived treatment effects observed. A1.b. Conduct Research Regarding Fining/Filtering/Wine Stability in Multiple Varieties of Red and White Commercially Produced Ohio Wines Project Title: Effect of Mannoproteins and CMC as an Efficient Cold stabilization Among other parameters previously analyzed, wines in this study were examined for conductivity change initially after bottling and currently being measured while writing this 2nd quarter report. Treatments effects will be evaluated relative to temperature and aging at 6 months. Results will be reported in the FY 20 enology annual report to OGIC. A1.c. Conduct Research Regarding Fining/Filtering/Wine Stability in Multiple Varieties of Red and White Commercially Produced Ohio Wines Project Title: The Effect of Enzymes on White and Rose Wine Quality Sauvignon Blanc and Cabernet Franc (Rosé production) were harvested from Kingsville on 10/17/19 and10/24/19 respectively, crushed/destemmed and pressed for juice extraction. After juice clarification, the Sauvignon Blanc treatments were applied as follows: 1) Stimula Sauvignon Blanc (Lallemand), 2) Scottzyme, Cinn-Free and 3) Lallzyme Beta. Lallzyme Beta was added after primary fermentation due to sugar being an inhibiting factor of this enzyme activity. Cabernet Franc Rosé production included both the Cinn-Free and Beta treatments but also evaluated two separate yeast strains (Lallemand – Rhone 4600 and IOC Be Fruits). (Table 2) shows the initial must data for Sauvignon Blanc and Cabernet Franc. The wines are currently undergoing cold stabilization during. They will later be racked off the tartrates, sulfited and be held under standard winemaking practices until bottling. Wines will be chemically analyzed for final composition. Sensory evaluation trials will also be performed to help determine any perceived treatment effects. Results will be reported in the annual report to OGIC. Table 2. Must Data for Sauvignon Blanc and Cabernet Franc Rosé Wines Grape Variety Harvest Treatment pH 1% T.A. %Brix Date Sauvignon Blanc (K) 10/17/2019 Pressed 3.18 0.81 21.7 Cabernet Franc Rosé (K) 10/28/2019 Skin Contact 3.39 0.68 22.8 A2. Identify the Ideal Controlled Temperatures for Fermentation and Storage of Multiple Varieties of Red and White Commercially Produced Ohio Wines. Project Title: Effect of Cellar Aging Temperature on White and Red Wine Quality We are currently gathering additional information and research citations during the 2nd quarter reporting period with the intent to write up a brief fact sheet/bulletin during the remainder of the FY 20 reporting period. A3. Conduct Chemical Analysis of Commercially Produced Ohio Wines and report on Consistent Flaws. Project Title: Ohio Commercial Wine Analysis Study A total of 36 Ohio Commercial wines during the FY 20 2nd Quarter reporting period were analyzed at OARDC consisting of either chemical or sensory evaluation or both pending initial evaluation and winery desires. This does not include wines which were evaluated on winery site visits or the post fermentation workshops which are included in the FY 20 2nd quarter enology extension report to OGIC. Chemical and microbial stability continued to be important during this time. Blending and fining recommendations was also a high priority for wines of the current vintage in further improving wine quality A4. Collaborate with Viticulture Research Program to Evaluate Newly Released Grape Varieties and Advanced Selections for Grape and Wine Quality in Ohio. Project Title: Varietal Evaluation (Wooster, AARS and OSU South Centers) Thanks to excellent fall ripening conditions in catching us up on desired must parameters, this should provide nice vintage conditions for continuing to evaluate some of the varieties listed below in (Table 3) in addition to testing some new varieties for research purposes and industry feedback Most fruit arrived at the cellar in very good condition, with little rot or under-ripeness. Wines from the 2019 vintage went through fermentation trials (primary and secondary) well and are currently going through cold stabilization. Standard winemaking and cellaring practices will be performed until bottling. Chemical analysis will be measured for standard parameters. Sensory evaluation will occur at both OARDC and enology extension related events for research and industry feedback. This information will be provided in the FY 20 enology annual report to OGIC. Table 3. 2019 Vintage Must Analysis of Varietal Study 2019 Harvest Initial Must Analysis Grape Variety Harvest Treatment pH % T.A. Brix Date *(K) Arneis 10/17/2019 Traditional 3.21 0.78 20.5 (K) Ortega 9/6/2019 Skin Contact 3.17 0.63 17.4 (K) Petit Manseng 11/7/2019 Traditional 2.83 1.39 25.3 (K) Sauvignon Blanc 10/17/2019 Traditional 3.18 0.81 21.7 (K) Siegerrebe 9/6/2019 Skin Contact 3.38 0.53 17.5 (K) Cabernet Franc Rose' 10/28/2019 Skin Contact 3.39 0.68 22.8 (K) Frontenac Rose' 10/17/2019 Field Blend 3.11 1.29 24.6 Sauv Blanc (K) Regent Rose' 10/14/2019 Skin Contact 3.57 0.53 20.4 (K) Cabernet Franc 10/28/2019 Traditional 3.24 0.89 22.3 (K) Gamay 10/17/2019 Carbonic Maceration (K) Gamay 10/17/2019 Traditional 3.25 0.98 20.2 (K) Regent 10/14/2019 Traditional 3.39 0.54 20.1 (K) Teroldego 11/7/2019 Partial C.M. *(W)Aromella 9/25/2019 Traditional 3.02 0.93 21.4 (W) LaCrescent 9/25/2019 Traditional 3.06 1.11 24.5 (W) NY 81 9/25/2019 Skin contact 2.99 0.72 20.5 (W) Sauvignon Blanc 9/17/2019 Traditional 2.91 0.81 21.9 (W) Verdejo 9/25/2019 Traditional 3.25 0.57 22.1 (W) Verdelho 9/19/2019 Traditional 3.01 0.74 24.2 (W) Chambourcin Rose' 10/24/2019 Skin Contact 3.27 0.87 23.1 (W) Chambourcin 10/24/2019 Traditional 3.22 0.72 23.1 *(K) represents Kingsville, (W) represents Wooster B. Communication and Outreach Several of the wines from the above studies have been tasted at enology workshops with discussion on winemaking practices and any perceived sensory evaluation effects based on treatments. Winery best practices were also identified upon additional discussions based on comments and reactions. C. The Ohio Grape and Wine Conference The 2nd quarter reporting period involved much time within the research component evaluating specific speakers in doing literature or internet searches on area of expertise for potential topics of interest at this year’s conference. This may also involve our own personal involvement with the individual speakers as research colleagues or experience in presenting talks together at other grape and wine conferences across the U.S.