Monthly Archives: March 2012

Resveratrol Shown to Delay Onset and Significantly Reduce Symptoms of Rheumatoid Arthritis in the Mouse Model

Posted on March 29, 2012 by Becca| Leave a comment
http://arthritishubs.com/wp-content/
uploads/2011/05/arthritis.jpg

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a relatively common inflammatory disease that affects roughly 1-2% of the global population.  With increasing age, prevalence of the disease increases, with roughly 5% of women over the age of 55 diagnosed.  Whether or not one is afflicted with the disease depends on a variety of factors, including genetics and environmental factors such as smoking, obesity, and periodontal disease.  It is thought that T and B cells play an important role in the beginnings and persistence of the disease, resulting in several effective treatments including one with B-cell depleting agents (rituximab) and costimulatory blockage (abatacept). 

T cells act to stimulate several cells within the immune system, including macrophages, with then release a whole array of inflammatory mediators, which give rise to joint inflammation and eventual destruction.  Currently, medications to combat RA are targeted to reduce inflammation in the joints, including methotrexate, sulphasalazine, and glucocorticoids.  However, there are a large number of patients that these types of therapies are not effective against the disease, thus other treatment options need to be explored.  There are some recombinant immune-modulating drugs that target many different immune receptors (not just inflammatory cells) are currently under development and study, though long-term effects are not known and the treatments themselves could potentially be very expensive.

Some natural compounds with anti-inflammatory properties are just now being seriously considered as possible therapies for RA.  As we’ve learned many times through this blog, resveratrol is one such compound.  Known to have antimicrobial properties, as well as cardiovascular protection benefits, is has also been found that resveratrol, which is found in high levels in the skins of grapes and also red wine, possesses anti-inflammatory properties as well.  In the rabbit model, researchers have shown that resveratrol can reduce lipopolysaccharide-induced joint inflammation.  Also, studies have shown that alcohol itself (not just the resveratrol in the red wine) may be protective against RA.

The study presented today aimed to test the hypothesis that resveratrol could lessen experimental arthritis in the mouse model, and that it does so by modulation of autoreactive immune responses.

Methods

Male mice were experimentally induced with collagen-induced arthritis (CIA).  After being inoculated with the disease, mice were either treated with resveratrol (trans-resveratrol dissolved in dimethyl sulphoxide) on day 10 (to test prevention of disease expression) or day 23 (to test treatment against established disease).  Those mice being tested for treatment against the established disease were first injected at day 23, and then daily from day 23 to day 33.  Doses were 20mg/kg, with or without resveratrol.  Control mice received injections of dimethyl sulphoxide alone, with no resveratrol.   Development of arthritis was monitored until day 38.

Standard immunological procedures were performed to measure T cell levels, as well as other various cytokines and antibodies known to be involved in CIA/RA.  In addition to cellular and immunological analysis, histological analysis examining joint pathology was also performed. 

Results

Treatment Against Development of CIA and Established Disease

  •       Control mice developed severe CIA at day 21.

o   Mice receiving 20mg/kg of resveratrol significantly reduced incidence of disease, the number of paws affected, footpad thickness, and clinical index compared with control mice.

o   15mg/kg of resveratrol had no significant effect on the development or severity of CIA.

o   Resveratrol treatment significantly reduced cell infiltration into the joint, synovial hyperplasia and adjacent cartilage and bone erosion compared with control mice.

§  Results suggest resveratrol could prevent the development of collagen-induced arthritis.

  •        Resveratrol-treated mice significantly and rapidly reduced the clinical symptoms of CIA from the second dose on, compared with the control mice.

o   Joint analysis at day 36 showed significant reduction of cell infiltration, synovial hyperplasia and bone erosion compared to control mice.

o   The therapeutic effect of resveratrol lasted at least one week, without subsequent resveratrol treatments.

§  Results suggest resveratrol has a therapeutic effect on ongoing inflammatory arthritis.

Immune Mechanisms

  •       Resveratrol at the dose of 20mg/kg significantly prevented the development of IgG2a and IgG1 (collagen-specific) compared with control mice.

o   This reduction was also found in mice treated with resveratrol once CIA was already established.

  •       Resveratrol at the dose of 20mg/kg did NOT significantly influence the levels of total IgG1 or IgG2a.

o   These results suggest that resveratrol selectively controls the collagen-specific B-cell response (in CIA) rather than acting as a general B-cell depleting/suppressing factor.

  •       There were no significant differences in serum levels of IL-2 and IL-10 in resveratrol treated mice versus control mice, nor were there any effects on the cytokine profiles of these mice after resveratrol treatment.
  •       Lymph nodes from control mice had significantly higher levels of IL-17, IFNγ, TNFα, IL-1β, granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor, macrophage inflammatory protein 1α, IL-5, and IL-13 compared to resveratrol-treated mice.
  •       Resveratrol treatment had no significant influence on levels of IL-4, IL-10, or IL-2 in draining lymph node cells.
  •       T cells from draining lymph nodes in mice treated with resveratrol showed reduced expression of IL-17 and IFNγ.
  •       Resveratrol treatment reduced the numbers of total cells, CD4 IL-17+ Th17 cells, and CD4 IFNγ+ Th1 cells in draining lymph nodes compared to control mice.

o   These results suggest resveratrol may suppress expansion and cytokine production in Th17 and Th1 cells in mice with CIA.

o   Resveratrol may also suppress Th17 cell polarization and proliferation.

Conclusions

This study is the first of its kind to show that resveratrol, found in grape skins and red wine, can effectively prevent and treat experimentally induced inflammatory arthritis.  Resveratrol, therefore, may be a novel treatment for arthritis, other treatments of which have been dominated by synthetically manufactured drugs.  This paper did not examine the actual mechanisms of why resveratrol is successful in treating inflammatory arthritis, though they do make several suggestions (of which I will not go into right now).

The results of this study seem very promising, in that both the immunological and histological analyses appeared to point to marked reductions in both the onset of disease, and also in the amelioration of the disease once established for mice treated with resveratrol at different time points.  Of course, this being a murine model, it’s not to say that this result will be comparable in humans.  We, of course, do not know the answer to that at the moment, thereby clinical research trials would need to be performed to be certain.

The study mentioned early on that alcohol has been shown to be effective against inflammatory arthritis, however, never do they actually test it in the experiment (though, I suppose that wasn’t the goal of the experiment).  Now that we know resveratrol plays a role in ameliorating the symptoms of inflammatory arthritis in the mouse model, I’d be curious to see the next study using not only resveratrol treatments, but also red wine treatments, and perhaps red wine minus the alcohol treatments, to determine which component plays a bigger role, or if the combination of the resveratrol and alcohol has synergistic or antagonistic effects on arthritis development and treatment.

I’d love to hear what you all this about this topic!  Please feel free to comment below (html tags will be deleted).

Source: Xuzhu, G., Komai-Koma, M., Leung, B.P., Howe, H.S., McSharry, C., McInnes, I.B., and Xu, D. 2012. Resveratrol modulates murine collagen-induced arthritis by inhibiting Th17 and B-cell function.  Annals of Rheumatic Disease 71: 129-135.

DOI: 10.1136/ard.2011.149831



I am not a health professional, nor do I pretend to be. Please consult your doctor before altering your alcohol consumption habits. Do not consume alcohol if you are under the age of 21. Do not drink and drive. Enjoy responsibly!

Posted in Health

Tagged , , , , , ,

Alternatives to Casein as Non-Allergenic Fining Agents for White Wine

Posted on March 27, 2012 by Becca| 5 Comments

http://www.yfilling.com/blog/wp-content/
uploads/white_wine_and_glass.jpg

Fining agents are extremely common in the wine industry, and are used to clarify wine, control browning caused by oxidation, and improve overall stability of the finished wine.  Animal proteins have often been used, however, with recent knowledge that contaminated animal proteins can cause severe health problems in humans; fining agents of vegetable or other origin have been considered.  Aside from possible contamination, allergic reaction risk in humans is another reason why the wine industry is considering other alternatives for fining agents of wine.  One of the most common fining agents of animal origin is casein, which is derived from milk proteins.  Potassium caseinate, which is derived from casein by dissolving it in aqueous potassium hydroxide, is more often used in wine production than casein itself, due to its higher solubility in wine.

These fining agents of animal protein origin are used quite frequently in the wine industry.  For example, in France (as of 2007), 2060 million liters of wine per year were fined with casein, which equates to approximately 41% of French wines.  Similarly, up to 20% of German wines are fined with casein (again, as of 2007).

One potential alternative to casein as a fining agent in wine is polyvinylpolypyrrolidone (PVPP), a synthetic water-soluble polymer, which is known to effectively remove phenols from wine via adsorption.  It is suggested that PVPP could be used either by itself, or combined with lower levels of casein to reduce the oxidation potential of wines.  PVPP works to remove phenols from wine by hydrogen bonding between the carbonyl group on the PVPP molecule and the hydroxyl groups on the phenolic compounds.  Casein fines wine by directly inhibiting the oxidation of polyphenols into quinones by formation of casein-quinone conjugates.  Since PVPP has been shown to effectively remove phenols from wine, it could be a potentially non-allergenic alternative to casein for wine fining.  On the down side, PVPP tends to be much more expensive, though it is at least more effective at lower concentrations.

Another possible alternative to casein as a wine fining agent is commercial pea protein, a non genetically-modified protein that is currently used in vegan wine production.  It is a non-allergenic protein, and studies have found that it does not leave significant residues behind in either red or white wines. 

Studies investigating alternatives to casein as a wine fining agent are not common.  The goal of the study presented today was to evaluate the potential of a selection of allergen-free fining agents (pea protein and PVPP) as alternatives to casein (specifically, potassium caseinate). 

Methods

Wine used for this study was a white blend (2007 vintage) of 60% Trajadura and 40% Loureiro from the Vinho Verde region (north of Portugal).  The chemical profile of the wine was as following:  alcohol content was 90.7g/L, titratable acidity was 7.0g/L as tartaric acid, volatile acidity was 0.18g/L as acetic acid, the pH was 3.37, free sulfur dioxide was 44mg/L, and total sulfur dioxide was 128mg/L.

Experiment 1:  Individual fining agents and a commercial formulation of fining agents was added to the experimental wine at laboratory and semi-industrial scales.  Individual fining agents included potassium caseinate at 0.4g/L, pea protein at 0.4g/L, and PVPP at 0.25g/L.  The commercial formulation of fining agents was composed of pea protein and PVPP at a ratio of 0.25g/L pea protein: PVPP.  This experiment was performed to compare the effects of fining agent alternatives to potassium caseinate.

Experiment 2:  This experiment was performed at a laboratory scale using four commercial formulations of fining agents:  1) bentonite and potassium caseinate (0.65g/L); 2) bentonite and pea protein (0.65g/L); 3) bentonite, PVPP, and potassium caseinate (0.55g/L); and 4) bentonite, PVPP, and pea protein (0.55g/L).  This experiment was performed to determine if caseinate could be replaced by pea protein in commercial formulations.

Both experiments were performed in 1000mL flasks for the laboratory scale, and 500L tanks for the semi-industrial scale.  A no fining agent wine was used as the control.  Fining agents were thoroughly mixed into the wine, and allowed to remain in contact with it for 7 days at 20oC.  After this time, samples were centrifuged before analysis.  All samples were run in duplicate.

The following chemical characteristics were measured for each wine treatment sample: phenolic content (both flavonoid and non-flavonoid), polyphenolic content, turbidity, browning potential, color, alcohol content, pH, titratable acidity, volatile acidity, free sulfur dioxide, and total sulfur dioxide.

A sensory analysis was performed by a trained panel with “extensive” wine experience.  Wines were sampled at three different sessions; two for the laboratory scale samples, and one for the semi-industrial scale samples.  Samples were presented in a randomized fashion, and were not identified to the panelist as any particular treatment.  Panelists were asked to score on a 5-point intensity scale 15 different attributes: visual (limpidity, ton and color intensity), aroma (limpidity, intensity, finesse, harmony and vegetable), and taste (flavor limpidity, flavor intensity, body, flavor harmony, persistence, mouth end and vegetable flavor).  A total score was calculated by taking the average of the visual, aroma, and taste scores.   All sessions occurred between 10am and 12noon in individual booths following standardized protocols.

Results

Phenols

  •       Most of the fining agents significantly decreased the levels of total phenols in the sample wines, with the exception of pea protein/PVPP formulation.
  •       The fining agents had a greater influence of the flavonoid phenols than any other phenol.
  •       The results from the semi-industrial scale were statistically similar to the results from the laboratory scale.
  •       Alternative fining agents had a greater effect on non-flavonoid phenols than traditional fining agents, however all agents significantly reduced all measured types of phenols.

Color

  •       Samples including potassium caseinate (either alone or in a commercial formulation) were most effective at reducing the browning potential of the wine, which would ultimately lead to a more stable wine. 
  •       Wine color was significantly reduced by all fining agents.
  •       Clarification capacity was higher for pea protein, followed by formulations with PVPP or bentonite.
  •       PVPP was not effective in increasing clarity in either experiment.

o   This suggests that perhaps the sedimentation of PVPP powder particles may be difficult by gravity alone.

  •       After adding PVPP, lightness values were unchanged.

o   This suggests no clarifying action on the part of PVPP.

  •       Yellowness values decreased for all fining agents.

o   The greatest decrease in yellowness was for wines fined with potassium caseinate.

  •       Chroma (yellowness and redness) decreased significantly for pea protein, potassium caseinate, and formulations of pea protein and PVPP.
  •       Hue-angle values increased for pea protein, potassium caseinate, PVPP, and formulations with pea protein and PVPP.

o   This suggests that some yellow pigments may have been removed.

  •       Color variation (the geometric mean of lightness, redness, and yellowness) was greatest for potassium caseinate and pea protein, followed by formulations of pea protein with PVPP and pea protein with bentonite.

Sensory Analysis

  •       There were no sensory differences between any of the treatment sample wines.

o   These results suggest the addition of pea protein or other alternatives to casein has no sensory impact on the finished wines.

Conclusions

According to the results of this study, potassium caseinate, pea protein, and PVPP all decreased the concentrations of phenols in the finished wine.  It was also found that only potassium caseinate, the animal protein most often used in winemaking, was effective at reducing browning potential of the wine.  Finally, there were no sensory differences between the wines produced from all of the tested fining agents.

The authors of this study suggest that these results using pea protein as an allergy-free alternative to casein as a wine fining agent is a real possibility, though more research would most certainly need to be completed.  Pea protein was not as effective as casein in regards to reducing oxidation potential; though using pea protein in a formulation with more effective fining agents would be an acceptable alternative to animal protein-based agents alone.

I’d love to hear what you all think about this topic!  Feel free to comment below (any HTML tags will be deleted).

Source: Cosme, F., Capão, I., Filipe-Ribeiro, L., Bennett, R.N., and Mendes-Faia, A. 2012. Evaluating potential alternatives to potassium caseinate for white wine fining: Effects on physiochemical and sensory characteristics. LWT-Food Science and Technology 46: 382-387.

DOI: 10.1016/j.lwt.2011.12.016
I am not a health professional, nor do I pretend to be. Please consult your doctor before altering your alcohol consumption habits. Do not consume alcohol if you are under the age of 21. Do not drink and drive. Enjoy responsibly!

Posted in Health

Tagged , , , , , ,

Selection of Brancellao Grapes from a Specific Location on a Cluster May Create Different Styles of Wine

Posted on March 22, 2012 by Becca| Leave a comment

According to many studies, the aromatic composition of grape berries may provide information for predicting the quality of the finished wine.  Aromatic compounds in the grape berry come from metabolic processes, mainly in the forms of terpenes, norisoprenoids, benzenes, and C6 alcohols.  Volatile compounds, particularly those in the free form, are directly involved with the aroma of the finished wine.  Other compounds, such as bound glycosides, are odorless but can contribute to the aroma of a finished wine when they are transformed into volatile compounds by the process of hydrolysis.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_qqiwGJ6t0g/Tjp3g7L3GnI/
AAAAAAAABsQ/az6NwgiI_yQ/
s1600/Miniatura_Corto.jpg

Where these volatile compounds are located in the grape is not equal, in that many more of them are located within the skins of the berry.  The concentrations of specific volatile compounds are different between varietals as well, and may vary greatly depending upon a variety of external factors, such as climate, terroir, viticulture practices, and winemaking practices.  Even within the same grape vine, different clusters of grapes may vary in their concentrations of volatile compounds.  One study even found that there are significant differences in the volatile composition of grapes located on the shoulder of a single cluster, and grapes located on the tip of that same cluster.  Finally, the stage of ripening plays one of the biggest roles in the aromatic characteristic of grapes, since free and bound compounds are being accumulated and altered throughout the maturation process. 

The goal of the study presented today was to examine in detail the volatile composition of Brancellao berries (V. vinifera), a grape native to Galicia, NW Spain, that is also known as Serradelo and Alvarelhao (in Portugal).  The authors also examined grapes from two different positions within the grape cluster; the shoulder and the tip.  The results of this study could have important implications for winemaking practices and Brancellao wine quality.

Methods

Brancellao grapes were harvested in 2009 from an experimental vineyard in Salcedo, Pontevedra (NW Spain).  The vineyard area was 1.4ha, and the soil was sandy loam (70.1% sand, 16.1% silt, 13.8% clay) with 7.3% organic matter.  Varietal identity was confirmed using genetic microsatellite protocols.  Vines were planted in 1993, and all were subjected to identical pruning and cultivation practices. 

Figure 1 from Noguerol-Pato et al, 2012

At veraison, some clusters were dropped, leaving the same number of clusters on each vine.  Three sampling sessions were performed between September and October of 2009, with 10 day intervals in between each sampling.  The first session occurred on 1/3 of the vines, taking care to separate grapes depending upon if they were located on the shoulder of the cluster or on the tip (see Figure 1 for these locations).  For each sampling period, about 3kg of grapes were collected.  The second and third sessions occurred using the same exact methods; however, the grapes were sampled on different grape vines than the session prior.

For each sample, probable alcohol degree and total acidity were measured, as well as volatile compound composition.  The samples were separated not only by location on the cluster, but were also separated by skins and flesh.  For all samples, odor activity values (OAV) were calculated.  These values identify the contribution of each volatile compound to grape aroma.  OAV’s were calculated by dividing the total concentration of the volatile compound by its’ odor threshold value.

Results

Individual Compounds

  •       There were significant differences between grapes at the tip and at the shoulder in regards to probable alcohol degree at the first sampling session.

o   No significant differences were found in the 3rdsampling.

  •       Total acidity of must showed significant differences in the 3rd sampling.

o   Highest levels were found in the shoulders.

  •       Free monoterpenes in berry flesh increased 40% in tips and in shoulders in the 3rd sampling when compared with the 1st sampling.

o   This increase was mainly due to a 60% increase in geraniol.

o   Increases were relatively similar between tip and shoulder grapes, however, in absolute terms, the tips should higher levels of monoterpenes in the 3rd sampling compared with the shoulders.

  •       Free monoterpenes were associated with the grape skins.

o   These compounds were higher in the 3rdsampling for both cluster positions.

§  For tips, this increase was due to geranic acid.

§  For shoulders, there were no significant increases were found for any monoterpene, though geranic acid tended to increase, leading to 39% increase of monoterpenes by the 3rdsampling.

  •       Bound monoterpenes were higher than free monoterpenes in the flesh of the berries at all times.

o   Linalool increased the most in all cluster locations and times.

  •       Free norisoprenoids were reduced the 3rdsampling for both tips and shoulders, as well as in both the skins and the flesh of the berries.
  •       There were no changes in bound norisoprenoids.
  •       Free aldehydes were found mainly in the skins.

o   The two compounds found in highest concentrations were hexanal and trans-2-hexenal.

o   In berry flesh, these compounds decreased during ripening in the tips and increased during ripening in the shoulders.

o   In skins, there were no significant differences between tips and shoulders.

o   At the 3rd sampling, grapes at the shoulders had higher levels of aldehydes than the tips, except for trans-2-hexenal in the skins.

  •       For bound aldehydes, the only significant differences were found in the berries from the tips; hexanal in the flesh decreased 55% and trans-2-hexenal in the skins increased 116%.
  •       Highest levels of free C6 alcohols were for hexanol and trans-2-hexenol.

o   In flesh, these compounds decreased by 33% in the tips, and 47% in the shoulders.

o   In skin, hexanol decreased in the shoulders whereas trans-2-hexenol decreased in the tips.

o   Berries from the tips showed highest levels of C6alcohols in the flesh, whereas berries in the shoulder showed highest levels of these compounds in the skin.

  •       For free aromatic alcohols, there appeared to be a transfer from the skin to the flesh throughout the sampling process.

o   This is likely due to bound aromatic alcohols decreasing in the skin and increasing in the flesh in free form.

  •       Lower free volatile phenol levels were found in flesh compared to the skin.

o   In flesh, these compounds decreased in the 3rdsampling, but increased in the skin in both cluster positions.

  •       Bound volatile phenols were found mostly in the flesh of berries.

o   In tips, concentrations increased throughout the sampling process, whereas in the shoulders, levels remained relatively constant (except for vanillin, which increased by 80%).

  •       For Brancellao grapes, it appears as though grapes located at the tip of the cluster are ahead in developing aromatic compounds than grapes located at the shoulder.

General Chemical Classes

  •       In the 3rd sampling, monoterpenes were dominant in the flesh, and their free forms were dominant in the skins.

o   Berries from the tips had higher levels of these compounds in the flesh, whereas berries from the shoulders had higher levels of these compounds in the skins.

o   Tips had higher concentrations of monoterpenes in general, though mostly in the bound form.

  •       Norisoprenoids were higher in the skins than in the flesh for either position. 

o   In the skins, these compounds were mostly in the free form, whereas in the flesh, most of these compounds were in the bound form.

o   Both positions had similar levels of norisoprenoids, though the tips showed higher levels of the bound form.

  •       Aldehydes were mostly concentrated in the skin in the free form, with no significant differences between tips and shoulders.

o   There were more free aldehydes in flesh of the shoulder berries compared with the tips, where they were mainly in the bound form.

  •       C6 alcohols were mainly present in free form.

o   In the tips, these compounds were found mostly in the flesh, whereas in the shoulders, these compounds were found in the skins (4x higher than in the flesh).

o   Generally speaking, grapes from the tips had higher concentrations of C6 alcohols than grapes from the shoulders.

  •       Aromatic alcohols were present mainly in the bound form.

o   These alcohols were rarely present in the skin, and were found mostly in the flesh.

o   These compounds were found in higher levels in the tips than in the shoulders.

  •       Volatile phenols showed highest levels in the bound form in the flesh, particularly in the tips whereas the skins showed higher levels of the free volatile fraction.

o   In general, grapes from the tips had higher levels of volatile phenols, mainly in the bound form.

  •       For miscellaneous compounds, pantolactone was the highest contributor. 

o   This compound appeared only in the flesh of berries, with higher levels occurring in the shoulders.

o   Free pantolactone was similar for both tips and shoulders, whereas bound pantolactone was contained more in the shoulders.

  •       In general, concentrations of free volatiles were similar for both tip and shoulder berries, with the main differences occurring with the bound forms.

OAV’s / Odor Descriptors

  •       OAV’s higher than 1 contributed to wine aroma.
  •       The terpene with the highest OAV value was linalool (orange flowers).
  •       Aldehydes with major sensory impacts were hexanal and trans-2-hexenal (grass).
  •       Eugenol (clove), 4-vinylguaiacol (phenolics), and vanillin (vanilla) all displayed high OAV values.
  •       The main odor contributors found in the berries were floral and herbaceous tones.

o   Berries from the shoulders were richer in floral and herbaceous notes than those from the tips.

o   Spicy notes were found at higher levels in the tips.

o   In general, linalool (orange flowers) was the most active floral odor in the tips, whereas β-ionone (violet) was the most active floral odor in the shoulders.

Conclusions

The results of this study showed that there was very little variability between shoulders and tips in regards to probable alcohol degree and total acidity, though more importantly, significant differences were found in the aromatic composition of the grapes in the different positions.

The authors suggest that these results may be useful for wineries that are considering separating grapes from the shoulders and tips, in order to make different styles of wine with different aromatic characteristics and quality.  Since there were significant differences between grapes from the shoulders and grapes from the tips, wineries would be able to combine various amounts of shoulder grapes and tip grapes at different times in order to produce a finished wine with a specific desired aromatic profile.

Also, since it was found that aromatic alcohols were found mainly in the bound form, the use of glycolytic enzymes during the maceration process could be employed in order to free the bound aromatic alcohols and increase the desired floral notes produced by the berries.

Overall, I thought this was a very fascinating experiment were interesting results that could have direct applications for improving wine quality (at least in regards to Brancellao wines).  One thing I would have liked to see in this experiment was a sensory analysis comparing what they predicted would occur with the aromatic profile based on the detailed chemistry analysis with an actual sensory analysis of finished wines created from different combinations of shoulder grapes and tip grapes under different winemaking protocols.

What do you all think about this topic?  Please feel free to comment below (no HTML tags, please).

Source:  Noguerol-Pato, R., González-Barreiro, C., Cancho-Grande, B., Santiago, J.L., Martínez, M.C., Simal-Gándara, J. 2012. Aroma potential of Brancellao grapes from different cluster positions. Food Chemistry 132: 112-124.

DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.10.042
I am not a health professional, nor do I pretend to be. Please consult your doctor before altering your alcohol consumption habits. Do not consume alcohol if you are under the age of 21. Do not drink and drive. Enjoy responsibly!

Posted in Enology, Viticulture

Tagged , , , , ,

Who’s Your Daddy?: Gamay

Posted on March 20, 2012 by Becca| 2 Comments

For today’s “Who’s Your Daddy” post, we will be exploring the origins of the Gamay grape.

Also known as Bourguignon noir, Petit Bourguignon, Gamay Beaujolais, Petit Gamai, Blauer Gamet, Gamay noir a jus blanc, and Gamay noir,Gamay is a very old grape that has been certainly mentioned as early as the mid-14th century, though further speculation puts the presence of Gamay grapes in the Burgundy region of France even as early at the 3rd century (unconfirmed).  During the mid-14th century, Gamay was thought to have helped in the recovery of the Black Death, though was later outlawed in 1395 by the Duke of Burgundy Philip the Bold, due to its harshness and overall poor quality relative to its abundance.

http://weimax.com/images/Beaujolais_Sign.gif

The edict that the Duke of Burgundy signed demanded that Gamay vines be ripped up as they were “despicable and disloyal”.  Later in 1459, the grandson of Philip the Bold, the new Duke of Burgundy Philip the Good, reiterated his family’s disdain for the grape, stating that it could “fool foreigners” (a.k.a. the Christian church).  The Duke continued to urge Burdundy to produce Pinot Noir instead of Gamay, though Gamay was still being produced further south in Beaujolais. 

Gamay is grown primarily in the Burgundy-Beaujolais region of France, as well as the Loire Valley in France and Valais in Switzerland.  Other plantings of Gamay are hard to come by, though it can sometimes be found in vineyards in California after it was introduced there in 1973, and also in regions of Italy, Austria, Romania, Argentina, Chile, and other regions throughout the United States.

In Beaujolais, Gamay is found in Beaujolais Nouveau wines, which are released in a big celebratory manner the third Thursday in November.  Not only are Gamay grapes used in Beaujolais Nouveau wines, but they are also used for Beaujolais Villages, as well as the 10 Beaujolais Crus (Brouilly, Chénas, Chiroubles, Côte de Brouilly, Fleurie, Juliénas, Morgon, Moulin-à-Vent, Regnié and Saint-Amour).

Gamay vines are considered to have relatively early bud break, with moderately vigorous growth.  Gamay vines are best suited for relatively cool climates, with few known limitations in regards to soil type preferences, though does well in soils with granite and limestone.  It is often recommended that Gamay vines be planted on hill slopes, in order to avoid potential high productivity and vigorous vines producing grapes with lower fruit anthocyanins and tannins.  In general, it is recommended to plant Gamay vines in a similar manner to Pinot Noir vines, in medium fertility soils. 

In terms of the wines Gamay grapes produce, they are often higher in acidity, low in tannin, more lightly colored, and fruit forward red wines.  Those that do not enjoy Gamay wines liken the flavor to “melted black cherry Jell-o”.  In order to avoid too high of acidity, Gamay winemaking often employs the use of carbonic maceration (fermenting grapes with carbon dioxide), in order to intensify the grape’s fruity and floral notes, including banana, bubblegum, cotton candy, and vanilla.  Wines produced from Gamay grapes tend to be light-bodied, sometimes with a purple tint.  Most wines made from Gamay grapes are designed to be consumed in their youth, however, some Crus, such as Chénas, Juliénas, Morgon, and Moulin-à-Vent may age up to 10 years.  The younger wines tend to be more fruitful and tropical, whereas the aged wines may have black currant and cherry notes.

So, “Who’s Your Daddy”, Gamay?

Genetic research performed in the late 1990’s at the University of California at Davis has revealed the genetic parentage of many grape varieties, including Gamay. 

Without further ado, Gamay grapes are a product of the parent grapes:

Pinot Noir……

 

….and….

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/
thumb/7/72/Heunisch-wei%C3%9F08.jpg/
215px-Heunisch-wei%C3%9F08.jpg

……Gouais Blanc

Interestingly, these are the exact same parents as the Chardonnay grape!  Looks like Gamay and Chardonnay are sisters!

Are you familiar with Gamay or Beaujolais wines?  Any favorites?  You’re welcome to comment by leaving your thoughts below!
I am not a health professional, nor do I pretend to be. Please consult your doctor before altering your alcohol consumption habits. Do not consume alcohol if you are under the age of 21. Do not drink and drive. Enjoy responsibly!

Posted in Genetics

Tagged , , , , ,