Wine Science ForumOxygen and wine Quality

Stéphane Vidal

• Global leading supplier of high performance closures for still wine-2.3 Billion closures and 13% market share

• HQ in North Carolina with manufacturing in the USA, Belgium, China and Argentina

• Products based on low density co-extruded foam

• Embracing oxygen management as the primary closure performance criteria influencing wine quality

• Development of new sustainable closures with Select Bio

Nomacorc Overview

History of O2 Management at Nomacorc

• Co-extrusion enables production of closures with consistent and controllable oxygen transfer rates

• Early studies indicated closures with different OTR’s resulted in wines of variable quality

• Desire to further knowledge and understanding on how OTR influenced wine development

• Research confirmed the importance of oxygen management

• Industry investigations suggest a need for improved control throughout wine making

O2 Management Strategy

Light

2005

Premium

2006

Classic+

2008

Smart+

2009

Value

2010

Select Series

2011

Classic

1999

Smart

2004

2nd

GEN1st

GEN3rd

GEN

2013

2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 20111999 2004 2013

Global Research Programs

NomaSense Analyzer 1st Generation 2nd Gen

Select Bio

Post-Bottling Control

O2

Win

e E

volu

tion

REDUCTION

OXIDATION

O2 Management & Wine Faults

Total TCA Oxided Reduced Brett Rott SO2 Micro0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 6.6

1.8 1.8 1.7

0.9

0.30.1 0.1

% Faults

O2 Management Faults

London International Wine Challenge (5 yr – Average)

O2 Management & Wine Consistency

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 300

10

20

30

40mean

Free

SO

2 [m

g/lit

er]

Source: Wines & Vines, May 2012, p.57

Wine Number

30 Top Selling Wines in US 2009

To go further

AimsAssess BtB by chemical analysesCharacterize possible factors responsible for BtBEvaluate sensory implications

What we did

25 white wines purchased at major retail outlets in FrancePrice range 4-7 €; only 2011 wines10 bottles/wineChemical analyses and sensory difference test

SO2 data

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 260

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Fre

e S

O2

(

mg

/L)

10 wines with a maximum variation greater than 4 mg/L

7 wines btw 4-7 mg/L1 wine 8.5 mg/L2 wines >10 mg/L

12%40%

SO2 data by closureA

mori

m (

N1)

Ric

h X

ibert

a (

N9)

GF

(N14)

Tre

scass

e (

N19)

Alv

aro

Coelh

o (

C2)

Bourr

ass

e (

C7)

Port

oco

rk (

C11)

Am

ori

m (

C16)

BC

B (

C22)

DIA

M (

A4)

DIA

M (

A13)

DIA

M (

A23)

Ganau (

A10)

Bourr

ass

e (

A12)

Bourr

ass

e (

A15)

Tre

scase

(A

21)

Nom

aco

rc (

S20)

Nom

aco

rc (

S3)

Nom

aco

rc (

S8)

Nom

aco

rc (

S18)

Nom

aco

rc (

S24)

Vin

nova (

S5)

Inte

gra

(S17)

Am

ori

m (

T6)

W25

natural cork colmatated cork agglomerated cork synthetic (co-ex-truded)

synthetic (moulded)

1+1 screw-

cap

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

2.7

8.8

16.4

3.9 4.2 4.43.1

5.7 5.24.1

2.53.3

1.60.9 1.4

2.41.0

2.3 2.4 2.84.3

5.5

10.6

0.5

2.2

Free SO2 difference (max. - min.)

Fre

e S

O2

(m

g/L

)

Natural Colmated Microagglo Nomacorc

Inj. molded

1+1

Others

SC

Natural and injected molded worst performing in terms of SO2 consistencyNomacorc and microagglo best performingColmated showed no extreme variations, but was consistently average

Closure TechnologyB

ott

le t

o B

ott

le V

ari

ati

on

?

Filling levels

2,7

8,8

16,4

3,9

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

A 1405 A 1409

Bottle with larger HS also had lower SO2 , but overall HS volume not correlated with SO2 : combination of bad fill level+bad inerting with maybe closure effect too

Fill level inconsistency also observed in other cases, but with negligible impact on SO2

Capillarity?

4,1

2,53,3

1,60,9 1,4

2,4

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Diam 3

A 404 A 403A 407

Random migration of wine into the closure was observed, possibly indicating inconsistent closure structure. Impact of this on FSO2 was minor, but wines were found to be sensorially different

And with Screw Caps?

14

15

How to reveal micro-leakage?

Typical DO pick-up during bottling

Sensory study

Wines exhibiting max-min FSO2 differences greater than 4 mg/L were submitted to duo-trio test

The bottles with the min and the max FSO2 level were selected for the test

Internal Oxygen Management Research Center in Nimes (France)

Sensory variations

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 260

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Fre

e S

O2

(

mg

/L)

6 of the wines found different (24% of total wines)

Consumers can pick tiny differencesBouchon et

apport d’oxygène

SO2 libre (mg/L)

SO2 total (mg/L)

A 420 A 520 A 620

Select 100 (+1.5 mg d’O2)

6.87 64.56 0.1628 0.1305 0.0199

Select 300 (+2.7 mg d’O2)

3.91 49.45 0.2041 0.1677 0.0221

Test triangulaire0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

29

25

Triangular test results

Nombre de réponses incor-rectesNombre de réponses correctes

41%

59%

Preference

select 100select 300

00.5

11.5

22.5

3

0

40

80

120

0.45 0.47

2.5 2.311883

Analyses d'arômes

TDN (1,1,6-triméthyl-1,2-dihydronaphtalène) µg/Lβ-damascénone µg/LThiols (3-mercaptohexan-1-ol) ng/L

TD

N e

t β-d

am

ascénone (

µg/L

)

Thio

ls (

ng/L

)

Must Preparation

Maturation (barrel aging, micro-oxygenation)

Bottling (TPO) & Bottle Aging (OTR)

Deg

ree o

f O

xyg

en

Exp

osu

re

“Share wine research findings relating to oxygen management and suggest practical solutions for improving control and wine quality”

The objective of today

Two Distinct Situations

Total Oxygen Pick-up

Validated technology

24

Luminescence technology

1. Emission of blue light directed on the sensor

2. Sensor excitation3. Emission of red light captured

by optical fiber

Sensors

25

26

Flexibility of measurements

1. In the tank Use of dipping probe DO measurement Inerting performance

check

2. During the process Use of sight glasses DO measurement Inerting performance check

3. At bottling TPO quality control Inerting performance Filling heads consistency Corking heads consistency

Mapping the Process & Defining Strategies

Winemaking Process

Steps where we want to control oxygen

Steps where we want to avoid oxygen

Control Procedures in Winemaking

Control Procedures During Aging

Bottling Control Procedures

To get closure benefits we need to master bottlingDissolved OxygenHead Space OxygenTotal Package OxygenTotal Consumed Oxygen

Post-Bottling Control Procedures

Conclusion

• Lots of defects linked to non controlled oxygen pick-up during bottling and post-bottling

• Technical solutions to better control critical steps exist:

– Measuring to continuously audit production

– Technical solutions exist…

– But they need to be monitored and evaluated

• Real potential for improvement of wine quality

Wine Science ForumOXYGEN AND WINE QUALITY

Dr. Maurizio Ugliano

Enological Research Manager, Nomacorc

Prof. Dr. Rainer JungStellvertretender

Institutsleiter Geisenheim University

Prof. Dr. Dominik Durner

Professor EnologyNeustadt Wine Campus

DLR Rheinpfalz

“Oxygen and its influence on wine

aroma development”

“Oxygen during conditioning

and bottling”

“Understanding Oxygen Demand in Red Wines”

THANK YOU