WIESBADEN, GERMANY WIESBADEN, GERMANY APRIL 11, 2019 APRIL 11, 2019 BIOLOGICAL TOOLS IN WINEMAKING ADAPTED TO A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT A CHANGING TO ADAPTED IN WINEMAKING TOOLS BIOLOGICAL MICROBIOLOGICALBIOLOGICAL TOOLSSTRATEGIES TOIN OPTIMIZE WINEMAKING WINE ADAPTED REGIONALITY TO A CHANGINGAND PERSONALITY ENVIRONMENT 2425 THE XXIXes ENTRETIENS SCIENTIFIQUES LALLEMAND 2425 ISBN 978-2-9818091-2-4 www.lallemandwine.com 9 782981 809124 WIESBADEN, GERMANY, APRIL 11, 2019 BIOLOGICAL TOOLS IN WINEMAKING ADAPTED TO A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT PROCEEDINGS OF THE XXIXes ENTRETIENS SCIENTIFIQUES LALLEMAND ISBN978-2-9818091-2-4 (printed version) ISBN 978-2-9818091-3-1 (pdf version) Legal deposit Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2020 Library and Archives Canada 2020 DISCLAIMER: Lallemand has compiled the information contained herein and, to the best of its knowledge, the information is true and accurate. Lallemand offers this publication for use by winemaking professionals world- wide as a compendium of existing knowledge, both scientific and anecdotal. It is the user’s sole responsibility to determine whether any of the information contained herein is of benefit. The information, techniques and procedures presented in this publication are not to be considered as any type of expressed or implied guarantee for any aspect of the winemaking process in any wine-producing country. Lallemand Inc. Montreal, Canada H1W 2N8 Moduli Publicité. Communication Inc., Longueuil, Canada, J4G 2K1 The reprint or digital publication of any part of this book without permission from Lallemand is prohibited and illegal. CONTENTS BIOLOGICAL TOOLS IN WINEMAKING ADAPTED TO A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT 125th ANNIVERSARY OF THE GEISENHEIM YEAST IMPACT OF MICRONUTRIENT LIMITATIONS AND BREEDING CENTER: LOOKING BACK. ......................5 NITROGENOUS STATUS ON YEAST CELL DEATH IN M. Grossmann ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATIONS ....................................................44 125th ANNIVERSARY OF THE GEISENHEIM YEAST Dr. Bruno Blondin BREEDING CENTER .................................................11 Jürgen Wendland HOW TO PREVENT ALTERATIONS DURING VINIFICATION WHILE REDUCING THE USE OF SO COMPARING EFFICIENCY STRATEGIES IN YEASTS 2 WITH BIOPROTECTION? TWO EXAMPLES: COLD WITH ECONOMICALLY SUCCESSFUL WINERIES. ...17 SOAK AND AGING ..................................................49 M. Grossmann Dr. Pierre Martini ENHANCING PHENOLIC MATURITY OF SYRAH WITH EVIDENCE BEHIND THE EFFECTIVENESS THE APPLICATION OF A NEW FOLIAR SPRAY ........21 OF GLUTATHIONE-RICH SPECIFIC INACTIVATED Dr. Szabolcs Villangó YEAST IN PRESERVING WINE ..................................57 LACHANCEA THERMOTOLERANS Florian Bahut THE ACIDIFYING YEAST ..........................................37 ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATION OF SWEET WINES WITH Dr. Antonio Morata TORULASPORA DELBRUECKII / MALOLACTIC FERMENTATION BY USING LACTOBACILLUS PLANTARUM ...........................................................69 Johannes Burkert – 3 – 125th ANNIVERSARY OF THE GEISENHEIM YEAST BREEDING CENTER: LOOKING BACK Manfred Grossmann Department of Microbiology and Biochemistry, Hochschule Geisenheim University, von-Lade-Strasse 1, 65366 Geisenheim, Germany The beginning Brief timeline: It all started in 1872 when Eduard von Lade was granted 1894: Julius Wortmann. The isolation of pure yeast cul- an allowance by Prussian King Wilhelm I to install the tures and their practical applications marked a milestone Koenigliche Lehranstalt für Obst und Weinbau zu Geisen- for improving quality in wine production. heim with the goal of establishing applied research and 1924: The Yeast Station was integrated as part of the Plant study programs in the fields of horticulture and viticul- Physiological Research Station of the Geisenheim Re- ture. Hermann Müller, the grapevine breeder known to search Center headed by Karl Kroemer. this day for introducing the Müller-Thurgau grape, began his career at the Geisenheim Station in 1876 not only as 1932: The Plant Physiological Research Station was re- a breeder but also a microbiologist (a lesser known fact named the Botanical Institute and was led by Hugo about Müller). Schanderl. The main research focus at that time was to look at problematic film-forming yeasts and other spoiling Microbes and microbiology became increasingly impor- yeasts and their interaction with pure yeast cultures. Hugo tant in the years that followed, especially after the revo- Schanderl wrote the first textbook on the microbiology of lutionary findings of Emil Christian Hansen (brewing) and must and wine. Louis Pasteur (winemaking). Julius Wortmann continued to build on these developments when he became head 1966: Helmut Hans Dittrich stepped in as head of the of the Plant Physiology Experimental Station in Geisen- department. Research focused on the physio-metabolic heim in 1891. Through his research, he identified wine activities of microorganisms in must. Priority areas in- yeasts as the main microbes that determine quality dur- cluded the fermentation processes and selection of yeasts ing alcoholic fermentation. This prompted him to start the with low formation of SO -binding substances as well as 2 Geisenheim Yeast Culture and Breeding Station in 1894. investigations into the origins of and potential strategies From that point on, wine producers had access to pure, for avoiding the main aroma off-flavours, such as acetic well-tested yeast strains they could use to inoculate their notes, ester notes, sulfur off-flavours, sweet wine disease, grape musts. and so on, which can be caused by microorganisms. Today, the department sees 1894 as the starting point for 1994: Manfred Grossmann took over as head of the De- wine microbiology R&D and instruction at Geisenheim. partment of Microbiology and Biochemistry. The depart- ment’s research focused on stress research, aroma devel- opment and biotechnological implementation of microbial processes in juice, wine and wine-associated products. 2019: Jürgen Wendland is now head of the department. – 5 – BIOLOGICAL TOOLS IN WINEMAKING ADAPTED TO A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT Topics 1995-2018 YEAST Bacteria Molds various impact Fermentation capacity factors Flavour formation Pos./neg./release of bound aroma substances Central importance of genetical background and yeast nutrition FIGURE 1: Department of Microbiology and Biochemistry: 1995–2018 R&D plan From 1995 to 2018 Figure 1 presents a brief summary of the main R&D topics Yeast nutrition was identified as a very important key for over the last 23 years. The bulk of the department’s work regular fermentations and the formation of pleasing fer- involved research on yeasts relevant to winemaking, fol- lowed by bacteria (mainly lactic acid bacteria) and, to a mentation flavours. Thanks to the findings of the Geisen- lesser extent, molds (mainly the impact of Botrytis-infect- heim Center, which were also backed by the results French ed grapes on yeast activity and flavour formation). and Austrian researchers, the European wine act allowed 6 Siha3 1 2 3 Mischung Spontan 5 4 3 Level [mm] 2 1 0 i-BUAC 3-MEBUAC 2-MEBUAC HEXAC PHEEAC FIGURE 2: Comparison of ester contents of single strains versus mixed culture (Mischung) – 6 – 125th anniversary of the Geisenheim Yeast Breeding Center: Looking back 100 ºOe 0.5 pH 3.1 fermentation temp. 20ºC Methionol 0.4 0.3 S. cerev. st. 9 MeSAc 0.2 [AS/AIS] EtSAc 2417 0.1 0 0.5 0.4 S. cerev. st. 1, 2, 3 0.3 0.2 [AS/AIS] 2417 0.1 0 0.5 0.4 S. cerev. st. 3 0.3 0.2 [AS/AIS] 0.1 0 0.5 0.4 S. cerev. st. 1 0.3 0.2 [AS/AIS] 0.1 0 0.5 0.4 S. cerev. st. 2 0.3 0.2 [AS/AIS] 0.1 0 0.5 0.4 spontaneous 0.3 0.2 [AS/AIS] 0.1 0 1000 1076 1152 1228 1304 1380 1546 1532 1608 1684 1760 1836 1912 1988 2064 2140 2216 2292 2368 2444 2520 2596 [linear retention index] FIGURE 3: Formation of sulfur-containing esters by single strains vs. their use in mixed culture the addition of 100 g/hL of fermentation salts (diammo- cur if strains come together that do not act synergistically. nium-phosphate (DAP) and ammonium-sulfate) in 2003. Proper and intensive testing of their behaviour is absolute- Prior to that, the limit had been set at only 30 g/hL. The ly necessary before they can be used at the commercial increase in nitrogen concentration also helped consider- scale. Knowing the properties of each yeast strain used ably in the prevention of sulfur off-flavours, also known as within such a mixture provides no clue as to what the reductive flavours. outcome of such a mixed fermentation will be. Sought- after flavour compounds could wind up being less formed The Geisenheim department also initiated the use of in a mixed culture than in single strains. Figure 2 gives an mixed yeast cultures on a commercial scale. The first step example comparing the flavour profiles of single strains in the process was to closely examine mixtures of Sac- versus their use as a mixed culture. charomyces cerevisiae strains. Although the activity of mixed cultures is closer to the conditions in spontaneous However, one important outcome of our mixed culture fermentations, it turned out that unwanted effects can oc- studies points to the possibility of even using strains that – 7 – BIOLOGICAL TOOLS IN WINEMAKING ADAPTED TO A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT might have an attractive fermentation flavour but also a whether they are spontaneous yeasts, commercial non- tendency to produce reductive flavours under certain con- engineered or genetically engineered yeasts strains. ditions. Normally such behaviour would preclude the use With the steady increase in commercially