Monitoring effects of ethanol spray on cabernet franc and merlot grapes and wine volatiles using electronic nose systems

Bruce W. Zoecklein, Yamuna S. Devarajan, Kumar Mallikarjunan, Denise M. Gardner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The ability of two electronic nose systems (conducting polymer and surface acoustic wave-based) to differentiate volatiles of grapes and wines treated with an aqueous ethanol spray (5% v/v) at veraison was evaluated. Ethanol spray induced fruit ethylene production immediately posttreatment, which then declined progressively. The electronic nose evaluations of grape volatiles were compared with Cabernet franc and Merlot physicochemistry and with wine gas chromatographic and aroma sensory data. Canonical discriminant and principal component analysis found that both electronic nose systems and the physicochemical measures (Brix, TA, pH, color intensity and hue, total phenols, glycosides, and berry weight) were able to discriminate between ethanol-treated and untreated grapes and wines for both cultivars. Grape physicochemical treatment differences were due mainly to variations in hue, phenolic-free glycosides, and total phenols. Aroma sensory evaluations using a consumer panel differentiated between ethanol treatments and controls for Merlot, but not for Cabernet franc wines.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)351-358
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Enology and Viticulture
Volume62
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2011

Fingerprint

Electronic Nose
electronic nose
Vitis
Wine
wines
grapes
Ethanol
ethanol
monitoring
Phenols
Glycosides
phenols
glycosides
Fruit
odors
wine cultivars
brix
Principal Component Analysis
ethylene production
small fruits

Keywords

  • Cabernet franc
  • Electronic nose
  • Merlot
  • Volatiles

Cite this

Monitoring effects of ethanol spray on cabernet franc and merlot grapes and wine volatiles using electronic nose systems. / Zoecklein, Bruce W.; Devarajan, Yamuna S.; Mallikarjunan, Kumar; Gardner, Denise M.

In: American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, Vol. 62, No. 3, 01.09.2011, p. 351-358.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a0d30e09571f4684975147683f7e5224,
title = "Monitoring effects of ethanol spray on cabernet franc and merlot grapes and wine volatiles using electronic nose systems",
abstract = "The ability of two electronic nose systems (conducting polymer and surface acoustic wave-based) to differentiate volatiles of grapes and wines treated with an aqueous ethanol spray (5{\%} v/v) at veraison was evaluated. Ethanol spray induced fruit ethylene production immediately posttreatment, which then declined progressively. The electronic nose evaluations of grape volatiles were compared with Cabernet franc and Merlot physicochemistry and with wine gas chromatographic and aroma sensory data. Canonical discriminant and principal component analysis found that both electronic nose systems and the physicochemical measures (Brix, TA, pH, color intensity and hue, total phenols, glycosides, and berry weight) were able to discriminate between ethanol-treated and untreated grapes and wines for both cultivars. Grape physicochemical treatment differences were due mainly to variations in hue, phenolic-free glycosides, and total phenols. Aroma sensory evaluations using a consumer panel differentiated between ethanol treatments and controls for Merlot, but not for Cabernet franc wines.",
keywords = "Cabernet franc, Electronic nose, Merlot, Volatiles",
author = "Zoecklein, {Bruce W.} and Devarajan, {Yamuna S.} and Kumar Mallikarjunan and Gardner, {Denise M.}",
year = "2011",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.5344/ajev.2011.11005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "62",
pages = "351--358",
journal = "American Journal of Enology and Viticulture",
issn = "0002-9254",
publisher = "American Society for Enology and Viticulture",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Monitoring effects of ethanol spray on cabernet franc and merlot grapes and wine volatiles using electronic nose systems

AU - Zoecklein, Bruce W.

AU - Devarajan, Yamuna S.

AU - Mallikarjunan, Kumar

AU - Gardner, Denise M.

PY - 2011/9/1

Y1 - 2011/9/1

N2 - The ability of two electronic nose systems (conducting polymer and surface acoustic wave-based) to differentiate volatiles of grapes and wines treated with an aqueous ethanol spray (5% v/v) at veraison was evaluated. Ethanol spray induced fruit ethylene production immediately posttreatment, which then declined progressively. The electronic nose evaluations of grape volatiles were compared with Cabernet franc and Merlot physicochemistry and with wine gas chromatographic and aroma sensory data. Canonical discriminant and principal component analysis found that both electronic nose systems and the physicochemical measures (Brix, TA, pH, color intensity and hue, total phenols, glycosides, and berry weight) were able to discriminate between ethanol-treated and untreated grapes and wines for both cultivars. Grape physicochemical treatment differences were due mainly to variations in hue, phenolic-free glycosides, and total phenols. Aroma sensory evaluations using a consumer panel differentiated between ethanol treatments and controls for Merlot, but not for Cabernet franc wines.

AB - The ability of two electronic nose systems (conducting polymer and surface acoustic wave-based) to differentiate volatiles of grapes and wines treated with an aqueous ethanol spray (5% v/v) at veraison was evaluated. Ethanol spray induced fruit ethylene production immediately posttreatment, which then declined progressively. The electronic nose evaluations of grape volatiles were compared with Cabernet franc and Merlot physicochemistry and with wine gas chromatographic and aroma sensory data. Canonical discriminant and principal component analysis found that both electronic nose systems and the physicochemical measures (Brix, TA, pH, color intensity and hue, total phenols, glycosides, and berry weight) were able to discriminate between ethanol-treated and untreated grapes and wines for both cultivars. Grape physicochemical treatment differences were due mainly to variations in hue, phenolic-free glycosides, and total phenols. Aroma sensory evaluations using a consumer panel differentiated between ethanol treatments and controls for Merlot, but not for Cabernet franc wines.

KW - Cabernet franc

KW - Electronic nose

KW - Merlot

KW - Volatiles

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80052401083&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80052401083&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5344/ajev.2011.11005

DO - 10.5344/ajev.2011.11005

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:80052401083

VL - 62

SP - 351

EP - 358

JO - American Journal of Enology and Viticulture

JF - American Journal of Enology and Viticulture

SN - 0002-9254

IS - 3

ER -