The key role of vineyard parcel in shaping flavonoid profiles and color characteristics of Cabernet Sauvignon wines combined with the influence of harvest ripeness, vintage and bottle aging

Abstract

Recently, revealing the terroir influence on wine chemical features has drawn increasing interest. This study aimed to explain how wine flavonoid signatures were altered by vineyard parcel, harvest ripeness, vintage and bottle aging. Six commercial Cabernet Sauvignon vineyards were selected in the Manas region to produce wines at three harvest ripeness in three seasons (2019-2021) and aged for three years. The six vineyards had little difference in mesoclimate conditions while varying greatly in soil composition. Results showed high vineyard pH (> 8.5) could accelerate grape ripening rate and increase wine flavonol concentration. Vineyards with moderate nutrition produced wines with abundant anthocyanin derivatives and maintained color characteristics during aging. The role of detailed anthocyanin derivatives in regulating wine color was clarified. As the harvest ripeness elevated, wine's flavonoid profiles were altered and gained a higher red color intensity. This work provides chemical mechanisms underlying single-vineyard wines and a theoretical basis for targeted wine production.

Keywords: Aging; Anthocyanin derivatives; Color; Flavonoid compounds; Ripeness; Single-vineyard wine; Soil; Terroir.

Fig. 1

Daily temperature changes and harvest dates in the ripening period of six experimental vineyards in the 2019–2021 growing seasons.

Fig. 2

Oenological parameters of the must (a) and the wines (b) of Cabernet Sauvignon obtained from six experimental vineyards and three ripeness levels in the 2019–2021 growing seasons. TSS, total soluble solids; TiA, titratable acidity; TA, total acidity. Different letters within a plot indicate significant differences among vineyards (Duncan’s multiple range test at p < 0.05).

Fig. 3

Multivariate analysis based on wine phenolic compounds to evaluate the influence of vintage (a, 3D principal component analysis), vineyard parcel (b, 3D two-way orthogonal partial least square with discriminant analysis) and harvested ripeness (c, 2D two-way orthogonal partial least square with discriminant analysis). The left parts of figures a, b and c were score plots and the right parts were loading plots.

Fig. 4

Color characteristics (a) and their correlations with phenolic compounds (b) and concentrations of anthocyanin derivatives (c) in Cabernet Sauvignon wines obtained from six experimental vineyards and three ripeness levels in the 2019–2021 growing seasons. T-mono-an, total concentration of monomeric anthocyanins; T-an-de, total concentration of anthocyanin derivatives; T-flavo, total concentration of flavonols; T-flava, total concentration of flavanols; T-ph-acid, total concentration of phenolic acids. The abbreviations of detailed phenolic compounds in (b) are shown in Supplementary Table 3. *, the correlation reaches a significant level at p < 0.05 (Pearson correlation); **, the correlation reaches a significant level at p < 0.01 (Pearson correlation). Different letters in (c) indicate significant differences among vineyards or ripeness levels (Duncan’s multiple range test at p < 0.05).

Fig. 5

Changes in phenolic profiles (a), four types of anthocyanins derivatives (b) and their roles in maintaining color characteristics (c) of different vineyard wines during aging.