Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Mar 30;11(7):1011.
doi: 10.3390/foods11071011.

Technological Improvements on FML in the Chianti Classico Wine Production: Co-Inoculation or Sequential Inoculation?

Alessandro Bianchi  1 , Isabella Taglieri  1 , Francesca Venturi  1   2 , Chiara Sanmartin  1 , Giuseppe Ferroni  1 , Monica Macaluso  1 , Fabrizio Palla  3 , Guido Flamini  4 , Angela Zinnai  1   2
Affiliations

Technological Improvements on FML in the Chianti Classico Wine Production: Co-Inoculation or Sequential Inoculation?

Alessandro Bianchi et al. Foods. .

Abstract

Winemaking variables and techniques are known to affect the composition of wines. To obtain a rapid and safe fermentation course, with a reduced risk of proliferation of unwanted microbial species, frequent recourse is made to the use of selected microorganisms, which can greatly simplify the complex management of the fermentation process. In particular, selected strains of lactic acid bacteria are used, which are much more sensitive than yeasts to the operating conditions of the medium. In this regard, the overall aim of this research was to verify whether the early inoculation of homolactic acid bacteria for hexoses (Lactobacillus plantarum) carried out after 24 h, compared with that of saccharomycetes operating alcoholic fermentation, could be advantageous compared with a traditional innoculation with a different heterolactic bacterial strain for hexoses (Oenococcus oeni) operated at the end of alcoholic fermentation. The grape variety chosen was Sangiovese, the protagonist of Tuscan oenology. The evaluation focused on different aspects such as the management of winery operations, and the quality and longevity of the product; was carried out in all phases of winemaking; and analysed both from a chemical and sensory point of view.

Keywords: Lactobacillus plantarum; Oenococcus oeni; co-inoculation; sequential inoculation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The kinetics of sugars consumption and ethanol production as a function of the fermentation time (days) for the three vineyards.
Figure 1
Figure 1
The kinetics of sugars consumption and ethanol production as a function of the fermentation time (days) for the three vineyards.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The trend of malic and lactic acid as a function of the fermentation time (days) for all the three plantarum wines.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The AVN trend as a function of the aging time (days) for each vineyard and in both protocols.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The AVN trend as a function of the aging time (days) for each vineyard and in both protocols.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Fixed acidity trend as a function of the aging time (days) for each vineyard and in both protocols.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Fixed acidity trend as a function of the aging time (days) for each vineyard and in both protocols.
Figure 5
Figure 5
HCA of the GC-MS data relating to wines from the two different protocols analysed at racking at ends of aging.
Figure 6
Figure 6
PCA of the GC-MS data relating to wines from the 3 vineyards and vinified according to the two different protocols analysed at racking and at ends of aging.
Figure 6
Figure 6
PCA of the GC-MS data relating to wines from the 3 vineyards and vinified according to the two different protocols analysed at racking and at ends of aging.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Significant quantitative parameters of wines after: (a) 7 months of aging (May 2020), (b) 13 months of aging (November 2020), and (c) 17 months of aging (March 2021). The evaluation was carried out using a score (0–10). Different letters indicate statistically significant differences at p ≤ 0.05 according to the results of two-way ANOVA. Significance level *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01; * p ≤ 0.05.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Hedonic parameters of wines after: (a) 7 months of aging (May 2020), (b) 13 months of aging (November 2020), and (c) 17 months of aging (March 2021). The evaluation was carried out using a score (0–10). Different letters indicate statistically significant differences at p ≤ 0.05 according to the results of two-way ANOVA. Significance level *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01; * p ≤ 0.05; ns: not significant (p > 0.05).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bartle L., Sumby K., Sundstrom J., Jiranek V. The microbial challenge of winemaking: Yeast-bacteria compatibility. FEMS Yeast Res. 2019;19:foz040. doi: 10.1093/femsyr/foz040. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lucio O., Pardo I., Heras J.M., Krieger S., Ferrer S. Influence of yeast strains on managing wine acidity using Lactobacillus plantarum. Food Control. 2018;92:471–478. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2018.05.027. - DOI
    1. Vilela A. Modulating wine pleasantness throughout wine-yeast co-inoculation or sequential inoculation. Fermentation. 2020;6:22. doi: 10.3390/fermentation6010022. - DOI
    1. Bartowsky E.J. Oenococcus oeni and malolactic fermentation—Moving into the molecular arena. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 2005;11:174–187. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-0238.2005.tb00286.x. - DOI
    1. Devi A., Archana K.M., Bhavya P.K., Anu-Appaiah K.A. Non-anthocyanin polyphenolic transformation by native yeast and bacteria co-inoculation strategy during vinification. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2018;98:1162–1170. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.8567. - DOI - PubMed