Evolution of Soil Over the Past 1 Million Years Determines Terroir in Wine

 

—————————————————————————————————-

Welcome to The Academic Wino! If you are new here, please read the “About Me” page to find out more about myself and the blog. If you would like to receive free updates on articles like this by email, then sign up here or you can subscribe to the RSS feed. Also, check us out on TwitterFacebookGoogle+, and or Pinterest. Thanks for visiting!

—————————————————————————————————-

WARNING: This post is a lot longer than usual, so if you’re short on time, I’d recommend skipping to the conclusions and coming back to the rest another time ;)

As wine consumers, we hear the word “terroir” thrown around a lot when talking about the flavors, aromas, and other characteristics of particular wines. In a very basic sense, terroir is the expression of a physical place through the flavors and quality of a wine. There are a lot of factors that influence the quality and characteristics of a wine which in concert constitute this concept of terroir, including the climate of the vineyard where the grapes were grown, the soil, the geography, as well as the characteristics of the grape variety itself.

Many studies have shown that the geography component of terroir is particularly important, as the shape of the ground, the climate in the area, the availability of water, the strength and frequency of the winds, and the placement and frequency of rocks in the soil all interact with the natural characteristics of the grape itself to create a unique wine profile. It is assumed that certain types of soil are important in the expression of terroir; however, the research that has been done has only shown weak associations between the two. This association between soil type and terroir appears to be weak due to the fact that the soil of

Photo By Frederick Wildman and Sons, Ltd [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Photo By Frederick Wildman and Sons, Ltd [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

any given vineyard has likely experienced significantly different transformations and successions related to weathering, erosion, mixing with organic particles, and human intervention. While two vineyards may appear to have the same type of soil, the processes of how that soil came to be throughout the millennia may be drastically different, thus further complicating macroscopic and microscopic soil-environment interactions that ultimately contribute to the complexity of terroir.

Thinking of it another way: say two people did a math problem and came up with the answer 15. Person 1 was doing a simple math problem involving the addition of 12 and 3, while Person 2 was doing a much more complicated problem involving derivatives, differential equations, and other confusing calculus methods. The final answer is the same, but the way they got to the answers is different. One is simple, while the other is much more complicated. Taking the whole process into consideration, you end up with two completely different math problems even though the answers were the same. Applying this concept to terroir, you might have two vineyards with similar soil types, however the changes and experiences in geographical areas experienced could be very different, thus resulting in wines that are completely different from one another, perhaps with one expressing a more complicated flavor profile and the other expressing a more delicate or simple profile. This analogy isn’t perfect, but it makes sense in my head ;) . Soil is a “metastable complex system” which while the majority of the soil can be characterized as one type (i.e. clay, etc), the complexities that make up the remainder of the soil are unique to each site, resulting in the unique concept of terroir in the wine made from grapes growing in each of those soils.

The goal of the study presented today aimed to link the differences between soil characteristics of different vineyards with the changes experienced by that soil throughout the Quaternary period (i.e. the last 1 million years of the earth’s history), be it through natural means or through human intervention, and to link these characteristics and changes with the concept of terroir.

Methods

The area of focus in this study was in Montepulciano in South Eastern Tuscany region in Central Italy. Throughout the last 1 million years, the area has undergone many geographical changes, including the overlapping of layers by plate tectonics, marine depositions, lagoon sedimentation, and fluvial cutting. In other words, under the topsoil, different areas within the Montepulciano region experienced a variety of geographical and subterranean changes that resulted in unique soil layer compositions depending upon where you look. The paper presented today goes into great detail of exactly what happened with the geography at specific periods during the last 1 million years, but I will leave out the details for now for the sake of relative brevity of this post.

The climate of the area is considered to be sub-oceanic Mediterranean with some variability depending upon the geography of the specific area of focus. The top of the Chianti-Cetona ridge experiences an annual average temperature of less than 12 oC, while the valley floor experiences as annual average temperature of 14 oC. The summer months tend to be driest, while it can be very rainy in the spring and fall. Many of the vineyards are located on sloped land of 300-450 m a.s.l.

Vineyards included in the study were selected based on vegetation make-up, plant homogeneity, age, and proximity to meteorological stations (for climatic data). Planting density, training systems, canopy and bud characteristics, and grape production levels were all relatively similar between the vineyards selected for study. For each vineyard, the following measurements were recorded: grape yield per vine, number of clusters, average cluster weight and berry weight, sugar content, accumulation rate and titratable acidity of grapes. Once mature, 50kg of grapes were harvested from each vineyard and processed via small-lot winemaking techniques.

In terms of the soils, the following were measured: hydrological characteristics (drainage, runoff, permeability, and water table depth), bulk density, moisture content, aggregate stability, total porosity, and bulk density. In terms of climatic

Photo By Francesco Sgroi (originally posted to Flickr as Vigneto nel chianti) [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Photo By Francesco Sgroi (originally posted to Flickr as Vigneto nel chianti) [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

data, the following were measured: daily temperature, daily rainfall, biweekly soil temperature, and moisture content. Data including rainfall, air and soil temperatures at 50cm, Winkler’s Index, and number of days the soil was dry in the moisture control section were also available for analysis.

The following were noted by the authors as “invariant characteristics”: elevation, slope, aspect, radiation, soil particle size, rock fragments, stoniness of the surface, drainage, runoff, root depth, bulk density, field capacity, wilting point, available water capacity, and aggregate stability.

Vineyard/viticulture results were compared with the invariant characteristics data as well as the climate data. Major geological events were also reconstructed using specialized geographic software.

Results

Note: there are an incredible amount of details in the results section of this paper—for sake of length/time, I’ll just highlight the major findings, though if you have specific questions about certain things, just ask and I’ll dig deeper into the paper to see if I can find an answer for you.

• Annual average rainfall amounts and annual average temperatures were lower over the long term.
• The lengths and intensities of summer droughts were due to variable rainfall events, and not an increase in temperature (temperatures were more regular compared with rainfall events).
• The following soil properties varied very little among the different sites: topography, radiation, root depth, stoniness, bulk density, organic carbon, pH, and cation exchange capacity.
• The following soil properties varied significantly among the different sites: soil texture, available water capacity, lime, and electrical conductivity.
• Functional soil characteristics were significantly different between soil types.
• Based on hydrological data, the sites were able to be separated into these distinct groups:
o San Gimignano, Strada, and Valiano soils. These soils were without a water deficit and saturation during the entire growing season.
o San Quirico, Quercia, Poggio Golo, and Valiano aquic soils. These soils possessed qualities of near saturation during early spring, and a moderate water deficit in the summer.
o Cusona soils. These soils were found to have a strong water deficit in the summer months.
o Monte soils. These soils were found to have a strong water deficit in the summer and near saturation conditions during the early spring.
• Air and soil temperatures were higher in the vineyards at low and average elevations.
• Winkler’s Index was significantly lower at the highest elevations.
• Annual rainfall did not vary significantly at different sites, as well as the annual number of dry days per season.
• Grape production was significantly associated with soil type.
o The highest grape yield was observed for Valiano soils, and the lowest grape yields were observed for Cusona and Monte soils.
• Grape weight was significantly associated with soil type.
o The largest grapes were observed in San Gimignano and Valiano soils.
o Since the surface:volume ratio is increased with larger berries, the ratio of polyphenols:juice is decreased, thus wine quality is also decreased.
o The smallest grapes were observed in Monte, San Qurico, Quercia, Cusano, and Valiano aquic soils (thus higher wine quality).
• Grapes from vineyards on Cusano soils had the highest average sugar levels, while grapes from vineyards on San Gimignano and Poggio Golo soils had the lowest average sugar levels.
o The same trend was noted for total acidity.
• Wines made from grapes grown in Valiano aquic, Cusona, and Monte soils showed good structure, typicity, and strong berry/cherry flavors. Sensory profile stability, however, was found to be very low in these wines.
• Wines made from grapes grown in Quercia, Poggio Golo, and San Quirico soils showed good structure, typicity, and mid-levels of berry/cherry flavors. Sensory profile stability was very strong in these wines.
• Wines made from grapes grown in Strada soils showed medium structure, medium astringency, and low levels of berry/cherry flavors. Sensory profile stability was strong in these wines.
• Wines made from grapes grown in San Gimignano and Valiano soils showed poor structure, high astringency, and low typicity.
• Sugar content, sugar accumulation rate, grape yield, cluster weight, 100 berry weight, and total acidity were significantly associated with just two invariant environmental characteristics: available water content and root depth.
o These associations explained 62% of the variation in the model using PCA analysis.
• Combining the results of yearly variability, invariant environmental characteristics, variable soil and climate characteristics, the authors were able to group different soil types into different “viticultural suitabilities”:
o Group 1: Cusona, Monte, and Valiano aquic soils. Generally, these soils were noted for “severe permanent limitations to crop cultivation” based on various factors including water table levels, water stress in general, and poor root development. Wine made from grapes grown in these soils had good structure and decent balance, but the overall quality was highly variable from year to year.
o Group 2: San Quirico, Poggio Golo, and Quercia soils. Generally, these soils showed “intermediate growing conditions”, though they were noted for having an excess of water in the spring and a deficit of water during the summer months. Wines made from grapes grown in these soils had good structure, typicity, and stability, as well as strong cherry and berry flavors.
o Group 3: San Gimignano, Strada, and Valiano soils. Generally, these soils were “excessively fertile”, with a lot of water and free oxygen available to the plants throughout the entire growing season. This resulted in basically no stress to the vines, and basically big fat watered-down grapes. Wines made from grapes grown in these soils were generally the lowest quality, with poor structure, typicity, and balance.
• In terms of landscape development with the past 1 million years, the authors go into great detail about each of the eras and how the geography had changed. Again, for space limitations, I won’t go into those details, but if you have specific questions, just ask!
• The evolution of soil formation in all of the soil types examined in this study was that it likely formed after the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age, as many artifacts from the Etrusians and Romans were quite often found in the soil profile.
o San Gimignano and Strada soils formed on marine sands rich with marine salts, organic oxides, and iron oxides. These soils also possessed good porosity. Combining these qualities plus climate characteristics, the soil could be easily broken down resulting in soil with good rooting capabilities.
o San Quirico and Quercia soils formed on marine clay and silts, which resulted in a much more solid/impermeable medium and ultimately poor rooting capabilities. These soils evolved into “blocky” sections of soil, due to a combination of poor porosity and drying/wetting cycles throughout the growing season.
o Valiano and Valiano aquic soils formed on Pleistocene fluvial-lacustrine clay. These soils are low in salt content, since the soil was formed by continental rocks and not oceanic rocks. These soils evolved to have good drainage as a result of “angular blocky aggregates” (think larger lumps of solid soil separated by pockets of air that allowed for good drainage and rooting capabilities).
o Human influence continued to change these soils further, which added another level of complexity to the mix since people were doing different things to the soil at different locations.

Conclusions

Though I left out a lot of the specific details of the study in this summary post, it is clear that there is some sort of connection between the soil and general environment and the aromatic and structural characteristics as well as the overall quality of the wine made from grapes grown in a particular environment. Throughout the last one million years, the slow evolution of the soils resulted in soils that while they may possess similar qualities and characteristics (topography, radiation, root depth, stoniness, bulk density, organic carbon, pH, and cation exchange capacity), there were some characteristics that appeared to change the soil significantly enough that each soil expressed its own unique terroir through the finished wine created from grapes grown in that soil (soil texture, available water capacity, lime, and electrical conductivity).

In particular, the authors noted that human intervention had a huge impact on the differences between soils, and things such as heavy machinery, bulldozing, and other human-made technologies implement to prepare the soil for planting likely made a significant impact on the overall expression of terroir in the finished wines.

The quality of wines produced from each geographical area is not surprising when compared with the structural and environmental characteristics of the soil. Those environments with a lot of water and poor drainage resulted in poorer quality wine, while those environments under more water and

Photo By Ryan O'Connell (Flickr: ventenac cabardes terroir) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Photo By Ryan O’Connell (Flickr: ventenac cabardes terroir) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

physiological stress resulted in the highest quality wines in this study. Knowing how the different soils developed and what wine is like when created from grapes grown in those soils may provide important information to vineyard managers and winemakers in terms of predicting how a particular vineyard will perform as well as how different soils should be handled or treated in order to have a soil worthy of planting a vineyard upon.

While this study was full of interesting information on how geological and environmental changes over the past 1 million years have shaped the soil of vineyards today, I found myself wanting to know just one more thing: Can you determine the exact compounds or soil characteristics that allow you to identify terroir? What I mean is this: we see from the results of this study that different soils undergoing different changes over evolutionary time produce different types of wine. We also know from the results of this study that only a small number of soil characteristics were actually significantly different between these different soils, while many other of the characteristics were statistically similar. How do these soil differences correlate to chemical differences found in the finished wines? Can you correlate one or more chemical compounds in the finished wine with the soil characteristics that differ between sites? Would you be able to use this information to predict where any given wine was made (or where the grapes were grown, anyway). Finally, can you correlate any one or more historical events to the specific change in the soil that caused the specific change in the wine? OK, maybe this isn’t THAT important, but it’d be cool for pure nerd’s sake!

The follow up experiment I would like to see is this: let’s take the same vineyard sites as this study used (or at least a group of several vineyard sites that produce the same wine in a slightly unique manner). Next, plant experimental vines of the same grape (same clone) at all sites. Then, after a few seasons when you have grapes mature enough for winemaking, harvest the grapes and made wine the exact same way for each site. At the same time, measure a ton of soil and environmental characteristics, as well as historical soil manipulation data. Analyze the soil and finished wine chemistry (as well as the grape chemistry prior to winemaking) and perform correlation tests and Principle Components Analysis (or some other analysis like PCA) to see if any one particular soil characteristic can be tied to uniqueness that is the terroir expressed at each individual vineyard site. Of course, this is a very rough design here and I’m sure there are some problems with it, but you get the idea!

I’d love to hear what you all think of this very long study! Would you have liked to have seen something else done during this study? What would you add/change? Please feel free to leave your comments!

Source: Costantini, E.A.C., Bucelli, P., and Priori, S. 2012. Quaternary landscape history determines soil functional characters of terroir. Quaternary International 265: 63-73.

The Impact of Organic Certification and Labeling on Wine Prices

 

—————————————————————————————————-

Welcome to The Academic Wino! If you are new here, please read the “About Me” page to find out more about myself and the blog. If you would like to receive free updates on articles like this by email, then sign up here or you can subscribe to the RSS feed. Also, check us out on TwitterFacebookGoogle+, and or Pinterest. Thanks for visiting!

—————————————————————————————————-

The following is a guest post by Laura Collier, whose passion is where wine and law intersect.  Please see her complete bio at the end of this post for more information!

Sales of organic foods have skyrocketed in the past decade. In addition to increased sales, organic foods can typically command a price premium over their conventionally farmed counterparts. As a wine industry professional, I see a moderate amount of dedicated organic wine drinkers, but generally speaking, organic wines don’t seem to have the same momentum with a broad spectrum of consumers that organic foods do. This is surprising, given the craze for many other organic products. In a paper titled Eco-Labeling Strategies: The Eco-Premium Puzzle in the Wine Industry, Magali Delmas and Laura Grant of the University of California at Santa Barbara conducted research into the impact of organic certification and organic labeling on wine prices, and provided some insight into the factors that influence consumer perceptions of organic wines.

Delmas and Grant studied information from over 13,000 California wines, including data on price, grape variety, vintage, and winery production volume. They also evaluated whether the wines were certified organic, and if so, whether the wine’s label indicated the eco-certification. The results of their study were surprising: the factors of organic certification and organic labeling had opposite impacts on the price of the wine. They found that wines certified as organic, but without the certification indicated on the label, could command a 13% higher

Photo By Dick Rochester (originally posted to Flickr as Our Daily Red) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Photo By Dick Rochester (originally posted to Flickr as Our Daily Red) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

price. However, listing the organic certification on the label reduced the price by 20%. Furthermore, by examining the Wine Spectator rating score of the wines included in the study, they found that organic certification led to a score increase of almost one point.

If organically certified wines can command a price premium, and receive higher score ratings, then why does indicating the certification on the label actually lead to a decrease in price? To answer this question, Delmas and Grant evaluated other studies and surveys of consumer perceptions of organic wines for clues. One key cause is likely the consumer confusion surrounding the labeling of organic wine. In the United States, organic wines can bear two labels, but the meaning of the different terminology is not further explained on the label. “Organic” designates a wine that is made with organically grown grapes and does not contain any added sulfites. “Made with organically grown grapes” designates a wine made from organic grapes that does contain added sulfites. There are also different organic certification requirements, logos, and phrases on the labels of organic wines from other countries. This high volume of competing labels in the marketplace, without any apparent distinctions, confuses many wine drinkers. Furthermore, many consumers associate organic wine with inferior quality. This stigma is perhaps due to early attempts by inexperienced winemakers to produce “natural” wines without filtering or the use of sulfites, which resulted in faulty, poor tasting wines. This bad reputation, coupled with the lack of consumer understanding of organic labeling, are likely contributing reasons why wines labeled as organic command a lower price.

However, if we remove the organic label, why are consumers willing to pay 13% more for an unlabeled organic wine than a conventionally farmed wine? And why do organic certified wines have higher Wine Spectator scores? Delmas and Grant theorize that organic certification has benefits that improve the quality of the wines, the winery’s practices, and the winery’s reputation. Delmas and Grant cite the belief of many winemakers that organic farming leads to healthy vines,

Photo By drdcuddy (Flickr: Italia 2010) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Photo By drdcuddy (Flickr: Italia 2010) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

healthy grapes, and better tasting wines. In the winemaking community, the driving reason behind adopting organic practices is the desire to produce better wines, and not necessarily the desire to protect the environment. Additionally, the organic certification process provides an opportunity for wineries to learn about best practices and improve their existing procedures, which could lead to higher quality wines. Finally, organic certification could raise the winery’s reputation within the industry, and could assist the winery with cultivating goodwill and avoiding government regulation as an environmentally friendly operation.

I mentioned before that as someone who works in wine retail, I haven’t noticed the fervor for organic wines that I see for organic foods. But consumer attitudes toward organic wines do not seem to me as bleak as the results of this study would indicate. Perhaps something has changed since this study? The research by Delmas and Grant was conducted in 2008, and the dataset included wines from vintages 1998 to 2005. When organic food sales took off, the change was quick and intense. As this article is now five years old, perhaps there is an organic wine revolution among consumers that is preparing to burst on the scene?

I think that the consumer demand for organic wines is steadily increasing; however, I am unsure whether the market for organic wines will ever expand as rapidly or as broadly as the market for organic foods. Personally, I have found that there is a connection between conscientious farming and quality, and I believe that as wine drinkers explore the world of wine and find out that some of their favorite wines are organic, they will begin to make the connection as well and to seek out more organic wines at retail stores and restaurants. It will be

Photo By Jorge Royan (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Photo By Jorge Royan (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

quality and taste that win consumers for organic wines. And converting consumers based on taste will take longer than converting consumers to organic foods, which many people quickly and enthusiastically jumped at because they were seeking healthier food options. For drinkers to seek out organic wines because of taste, they must first develop their own personal palate, to differentiate between wines they simply do not care for and wines that are of poor quality. Then drinkers must taste many organic wines, with the knowledge that those wines are organic, and make the connection between improved taste and the organic methods. This is certainly not an overnight process. But only time will tell. Hopefully Delmas and Grant will follow up on their research in the coming years, and expand their dataset to include wines from around the world. Organic wines and consumers currently have such a tenuous relationship, that I would not be surprised if I were surprised again by the results!

Citation: Magali A. Delmas and Laura E. Grant, Eco-Labeling Strategies: The Eco-Premium Puzzle in the Wine Industry, INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL, BEHAVIORAL, AND ECONOMIC RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS (Jan. 9, 2008), available at http://escholarship.org/uc/item/4qv7c61b.

Laura Collier is a wine consultant and lawyer in Raleigh, NC. When she’s not working at The Wine Feed, she’s exploring where the worlds of wine and the law intersect. Follow her @SpiritedLawyer on Twitter!

Let’s Talk About Sex, Baby!: The Effect of Red Wine Consumption on Sperm Performance

 

—————————————————————————————————-

Welcome to The Academic Wino! If you are new here, please read the “About Me” page to find out more about myself and the blog. If you would like to receive free updates on articles like this by email, then sign up here or you can subscribe to the RSS feed. Also, check us out on TwitterFacebookGoogle+, and or Pinterest. Thanks for visiting!

—————————————————————————————————-

(As an aside: how many of you now have that song stuck in your head after reading the title?…ahhhhh high school memories….).

The lights are turned down low, the Barry White is softly pumping through the stereo, and you’ve got yourself a nice big glass of red wine and your lover by your side…OK, without starting to making this sound too much like a bad porno movie, I’ll let your mind wander however you’d like with that and shift into a more scientific mode…

Quite some time ago, I covered an article discussing the relationship between alcohol consumption and the success rate of in vitro fertilization. This study found that increased levels of alcohol consumption negatively affects fertilization success when consumed by either men and women, though they only considered more heavy consumption (at least 4 drinks) and did not differentiate between the different types of alcohol.

Very basically, in order to have successful fertilization, a sperm must be able to penetrate the exterior wall of the egg by producing and releasing a specific type of enzyme to break down that wall. This can either happen naturally by copulation (wah wah wee wah…) or by in vitro methods outside of the body.

See page for author [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

See page for author [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Studies have found that estrogens in both male and female reproductive systems play a critical role in fertilization success. Specifically, estrogens elicit biochemical changes in the sperm that result in the activation of the little swimmers by allowing them to bind to the zona pellucida (“wall”) of the egg and go through acrosome reactions to break down that wall and fertilize the egg. Without this activation, the sperm are just bumbling around like drunken idiots looking for a good score they’re never going to get.

In addition to estrogens, studies have also found many compounds present in the environment that possess similar sperm activation activities and capabilities. Specifically, genistein, quercetin, and 8-prenylnaringenin; all classified as phytoestrogens; have been shown to have these estrogen-like activities. Genistein is found in soy and legumes, quercetin is found in parsley and red wine, and 8-prenylnaringenin is found in hops and beer. Though these compounds may behave similarly to estrogen in terms of the ability to activate sperm for fertilization, some research has indicated that “too much” of these compounds can instead have an inhibitory effect and negatively affect fertilization success.

Myricetin is another compound very similar to quercetin, which is found in very high levels in berries, tea, and red wine. According to the study presented today, very few studies have examined the effects of these estrogen-like compounds in male human reproduction, and in particular no studies have examined Myricetin. In other studies not related to human reproduction, the effects of Myricetin have been mixed: some studies have found it has antioxidative properties, while other studies have found just the opposite. Similarly, some studies have shown Myricetin has anti-carcinogen properties, while other studies have found the compound promotes tumor growth. What about the effects of Myricetin in male human reproduction? Is it helpful? Or detrimental? To date, no studies have examined this topic.

By Gilberto Santa Rosa from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. (be_sperm.) [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

By Gilberto Santa Rosa from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. (be_sperm.) [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

The study presented today aimed to evaluate the effects of Myricetin in red wine on sperm biology and potential reproductive success, with potential applications for “putting it into practice”.

Methods

To collect sperm samples, donors made sweet love to a plastic cup after 3 days of abstaining from any sexual activities. Those sperm with normal volume, count, motility, vitality and morphology were pooled together and processed.

Pooled sperm samples were separated into different treatments: 10nM Myricetin; 100nM Myricetin; 1μM Myricetin; 100nM Myricetin with 1μM ICl, AbERα, AbERβ, or 10μM LY. Positive (capacitated sperm) and negative (incapacitated sperm) controls were used. Sperm were exposed to the treatments for a 30 minute period.

The following were measured after treatment exposures: sperm protein, sperm mobility and viability, cholesterol levels in sperm, acrosin activity, glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase activity, and Acyl-CoA dehydrogenase activity.

Results

• Stimulation with 10nM and 100nM of Myricetin resulted in a 25% and 50% increase in sperm motility, respectively.
o The 100nM result was the same as the positive control.
• Stimulation with the greatest level of Myricetin (1μM) resulted in a decrease in sperm motility compared with the control and other Myricetin treatments.
• Stimulation with 10nM and 100nM of Myricetin resulted in a 20% and 30% increase in sperm viability, respectively.
o The 100nM result was the same as the positive control.
• All Myricetin treatments resulted in significant increases of cholesterol in sperm.
o The 100nM result was similar to the positive control and the 1μM treatment was less effective than the 10nM and 100nM treatments.
• Treating the sperm samples with combinations of Myricetin and either ICl, AbERα, AbERβ, or LY resulted in the reversal of this trend and effectively rendered the sperm incapacitated.
o This suggests that Myricetin may play an important role in the activation of sperm samples at certain concentrations.
• For the 10nM and 100nM Myricetin treatments, there was a significant increase in acrosin activity compared with the controls, with the 100nM treatment showing a greater increase than the 10nM treatment.
o The 100nM treatment showed a 70% increase in acrosin activity compared with the negative controls, which was almost equal to the result for the positive control.
• The highest concentrations of phosphorylated AKT were found in the 100nM Myricetin treatment samples, which was about 5 times greater than the untreated negative control.
• 100nM and 1μM Myricetin treatments showed greater increases in glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase activity than the 10nM treatment, with the 100nM Myricetin treatment being the most effective.
• Stimulation with 10nM and 100nM of Myricetin resulted in a 10% and 40% increase in acyl-CoA dehydrogenase activity compared with the untreated negative control, with the 100nM treatment being the most effective.

Conclusions

The results of this study generally showed that exposure of sperm to lower doses of Myricetin improved their mobility and viability/survival, while the higher doses of Myricetin were not as effective.

In order for a sperm to fertilize an egg, it must first become “capacitated”, which allows it to produce the enzymes necessary to penetrate the hard exterior shell of the egg and increase success of fertilization. To be successfully capacitated, cholesterol levels in sperm must increase, as well as the induction of phosphorylation of specific proteins. The results of this study showed that Myricetin, when exposed to sperm at lower doses and for a short period of time, is effective in capacitating the sperm and increasing their capacity to produce the enzymes necessary to successfully fertilize an egg by inducing these same responses in sperm samples.

While the results of this in vitro (in the lab/petri dish) study are fascinating, I’m not convinced we’d see the same thing in vivo (i.e. in the body). First, this study does not take into consideration the effect of the body’s surrounding environment on this mechanism. What I mean is that when the sperm are swimming around in the female reproductive tract, they are exposed to a lot of compounds and hormones that weren’t examined in this study. How do these female hormones and compounds influence the efficacy of Myricetin on sperm performance?

Recall: Myricetin is a compound with estrogen-like characteristics. Also recall: Myricetin at the highest doses was not as effective (and sometime inhibitory) as the lower doses in sperm performance. So, think about it: what happens when you have your sperm exposed to a small dose of Myricetin but then placed in the presence of the estrogen compounds in the female reproductive tract? Wouldn’t this result in increased estrogen-like compound concentrations and ultimately reduce the effectiveness of the Myricetin? I’m not sure, but I think a study somehow incorporating a more natural environment as found in the female reproductive tract is necessary to determine how sperm performance will be altered in “real life”.

Even if Myricetin actually does perform as similarly in vivo as it does in vitro, how much wine would a man need to drink in order to beef up his sperm performance? Studies have shown that myricetin and quercetin make up 20-50% of the flavonol component of red wine, ranging from 53 to 200mg/L.

By Meister des Rasikapriyâ-Manuskripts [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

By Meister des Rasikapriyâ-Manuskripts [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

According to the authors of this study, one would only need to consume 1-2 glasses of red wine a day in order to achieve the Myricetin levels tested in this study. However, if the extra estrogen in the female reproductive tract interacts in an inhibitory or toxic manner with the levels of Myricetin in the red wine, sperm performance, mobility, and viability may be significantly decreased instead of increased as we saw with Myricetin alone.

I would certainly take these results with a grain of salt if I were you. It’s very possible that the interaction between the Myricetin in the red wine and the estrogen in the female reproductive tract result in a inhibitory or toxic effect on the sperm, which is something that should really be studied before any real conclusions can be made here. I do wonder if when in in vitro fertilization scenarios, a man drinking a glass or two of red wine prior to donating sperm and the fertilization of the egg outside of the female body (i.e. thus without the excess estrogen) would be as beneficial as we saw in the results of this study.

Of course, a lot more research needs to be done in this field, so certainly talk with your doctor about your alcohol consumption habits if you are trying to conceive. Maybe we’ll learn more about the interaction of red wine and sperm performance in the female reproductive tract in subsequent experiments; however this study does give some indication that red wine or at the very least Myricetin supplements could play an important role in human reproductive success (or failure).

What do you all think of this study? Please share your thoughts!

Source: Aquila, S., Santoro, M., De Amicis, F., Guido, C., Bonofiglo, D., Lanzino, M., Cesario, M.G., Perrotta, I., Sisci, D., and Morelli, C. 2013. Red Wine Consumption May Affect Sperm Biology: The Effects of Different Concentrations of Phytoestrogen Myricetin on Human Male Gamete Function. Molecular Reproduction and Development 80: 155-165.

Wine Marketing: Science or Magic?

 

—————————————————————————————————-

Welcome to The Academic Wino! If you are new here, please read the “About Me” page to find out more about myself and the blog. If you would like to receive free updates on articles like this by email, then sign up here or you can subscribe to the RSS feed. Also, check us out on TwitterFacebookGoogle+, and or Pinterest. Thanks for visiting!

—————————————————————————————————-

The following is a guest post by Larry Chandler: wine sales and marketing guru!  Please see his bio at the end of this post for more information!

This is blog post #2 billion on wine marketing. Everybody writes about it. A few of them even have something important to say.

So in summary:

1. Know your market
2. Write well
3. Watch the money roll in.

Ok, we’re getting ahead of ourselves. #3 is patently false. #2 means nothing, you either write well or know how to hire well or perhaps neither. So you may need to work on this. But #1 is the most important here, and that’s what we’ll discuss.

Let’s assume you want to sell wine. Let’s assume you actually make wine or work for a winery. Let’s also assume you make good wine. Selling bad wine requires a skill far beyond our abilities here.

Marketing and selling are not the same thing. To paraphrase marketing guru Peter Drucker, “The aim of wine marketing is to make selling wine superfluous.” So where do you start? Marketing involves everything about your brand: what your labels look like, where you might talk about your wine (advertising, social

This photo is available in the holdings of the National Archives and Records Administration, cataloged under the ARC Identifier (National Archives Identifier) 515058. [PUBLIC DOMAIN]

This photo is available in the holdings of the National Archives and Records Administration, cataloged under the ARC Identifier (National Archives Identifier) 515058. [PUBLIC DOMAIN]

media, wine events), how people can taste your wine, where they can buy it, etc. Only then will you be in a position to sell your wine. And if your wine is really good, then people who enjoy it can become your best salespeople (now called “brand ambassadors”).

Who buys your wine now? Do you even know? Do you have a tasting room? If so, you do ask for their email addresses and maybe their phone numbers. No? Why not? They are your customers. They want to buy more at some point. Don’t ignore them. Everyone talks about social media (incessantly). Important, yes. But do not neglect email. It’s still (as of this writing) crucial.

If you don’t have a tasting room, do you do winemaker dinners? Tastings at festivals? Wine store events? Do you ask for emails there?

Do you have a Facebook page? Do you bother to post interesting content? Do you reply to comments placed on your page? Facebook is not simply advertising by the way. Or shouldn’t be. Engagement (responding to people) works.

Do you perform target marketing? Do you choose to market to men, women, young people, existing customers, lovers of a particular variety, big or small spenders?

Do you check out case studies or ask other winemakers how they do it? Will a favorable or unfavorable review of your wine change your plans? Many people today denigrate existing wine publications, such as the Wine Spectator or the Wine Advocate. Don’t. Maybe they are dying breeds, but they sure ain’t dead yet. And a high score can do wonders for your brand. This may change as younger people pay less attention to wine scores.

So is this marketing science? Could be. Is it just wild guessing? Could be. How much time can you spend on reading about marketing, taking seminars, talking to fellow winemakers? You can drown in a sea of data. After all, there are only 48 hours in a day.

The answer to where you go from here, how you market is simple. Start doing it. Learn some of the basics of analytics, who your customers are, and market to them. But don’t spend all your time on it. Create a marketing plan, but don’t wait until it is perfect. Send out an email, but don’t assume you will start moving all your product. Test it, perhaps an A/B test. See if a discount works better than free shipping. Learn from this. Create interesting content, but don’t wait forever for inspiration to hit. (A short wait is fine.) Go with what you know now and spend time with the results and try it again. You may only get one chance to make your 2013 Chardonnay, but you can re-do your marketing efforts.

There is no one answer for every winery. Learn what works for you. Your winery is unique. Even with 8,000 other wineries in the US, your strategy needs to be unique to you. There is no one like you with your same product mix, your same price points, your same customers.

We know of one winery that makes only 2,000 cases of their very well respected wine, and distributes only within California. They noticed they were getting wine club members from all over the country. When they asked those new members how they heard of this brand, all replied that they had this wine in restaurants in California. So the winery knew it had to focus even more on getting on the wine lists of restaurants in California.

You can pay for marketing advice and expertise if you can afford it. If not, you

Photo By NBC Television [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Photo By NBC Television [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

can pay attention to the results and try to change your approach if it didn’t work the first time. You can also join the wine forums on Facebook and LinkedIn among other places. Valuable advice is traded there.

In summary:

1. Set up a business plan.
2. Create a marketing strategy
3. Develop tactics to fulfill your strategy
4. Learn from your mistakes
5. Try again

Oh, and don’t forget mobile devices and marketing specifically for that. But that’s a whole ‘nother post.

Wine Marketing is a science. But like making wine, it is part science, part art, and part magic.

Bio: Larry Chandler has been involved in marketing and selling wine for 20 years for both wine retailers and wineries. He also conducts tastings and lectures on wine and food pairings. His wine blog is http://overabarrel.wordpress.com and can be reached at larry@larrychandler.com.