Different postharvest dehydration rates affect quality characteristics and volatile compounds of Malvasia, Trebbiano and Sangiovese grapes for wine production

被引:119
作者
Bellincontro, A
De Santis, D
Botondi, R
Villa, I
Mencarelli, F [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Viterbo, Dept Food Sci & Technol, Viterbo, Italy
[2] Europanel, Laives, BZ, Italy
关键词
grapes; volatiles; dehydration; sugars; acidity;
D O I
10.1002/jsfa.1889
中图分类号
S [农业科学];
学科分类号
09 ;
摘要
Experiments were carried out using an innovative technology for dehydration based on the passage of air through a tunnel. It was possible to study the postharvest behaviour, at different rates of dehydration, of Malvasia, Trebbiano and Sangiovese grapes. Malvasia and Trebbiano grapes were picked with 17.5% SSC (soluble solids content), while Sangiovese grapes were harvested fully ripe with 26% SSC. All the grapes, in different experiments, were placed in the tunnel with an air speed of 1-1.5 m s(-1), 42% RH (relative humidity) and a temperature of 21 degreesC. After 18 days the weight loss was 50 and 34% respectively in tunnel-treated Malvasia and Trebbiano grapes, while it was only 13-14% in control grapes (outside the tunnel: RH around 65% and temperature about 20 degreesC without ventilation). The SSC rose to 35 and 27% respectively in tunnel-treated Malvasia and Trebbiano grapes compared with 23 and 21% respectively in control grapes. In the case of Sangiovese grapes, after 7 days (the end of treatment) the weight loss was 20.5% in tunnel-treated grapes and 10.5% in control grapes. The SSC rose to 32% and the acidity increased from 4.8 to 5.8 g l(-1) in tunnel-treated grapes compared with 29% and 5 g l(-1) respectively in control grapes. Total phenols and anthocyanins almost doubled in tunnel-treated Sangiovese berries. Volatile compound analysis revealed a higher ethanol concentration in all tunnel-treated grapes but a lower concentration of ethyl acetate and acetic acid. (C) 2004 Society of Chemical Industry.
引用
收藏
页码:1791 / 1800
页数:10
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]  
Amati A., 1983, VIGNEVINI, V10, P27
[2]  
[Anonymous], AM J ENOL VITIC
[3]  
Bellincontro A., 2002, IND BEVANDE, V182, P538
[4]  
Ben-Yehoshua S., 1987, Postharvest Physiology of Vegetables, P113
[5]  
CORTE V, 2001, ENOLOGO, V12, P87
[6]  
Crouzet J., 1986, REV FR OENOL, V102, P42
[7]   Differential screening indicates a dramatic change in mRNA profiles during grape berry ripening. Cloning and characterization of cDNAs encoding putative cell wall and stress response proteins [J].
Davies, C ;
Robinson, SP .
PLANT PHYSIOLOGY, 2000, 122 (03) :803-812
[8]  
Davies DD, 1980, BIOCH PLANTS COMPREH, P581, DOI DOI 10.1016/B978-0-12-675402-5.50020-9
[9]   Effect of a novel physical pretreatment process on the drying kinetics of seedless grapes [J].
Di Matteo, M ;
Cinquanta, L ;
Galiero, G ;
Crescitelli, S .
JOURNAL OF FOOD ENGINEERING, 2000, 46 (02) :83-89
[10]  
Di Stefano R., 1989, ENOTECNICO, V25, P83