During white winemaking, after clarification, a considerable amount of juice remains trapped in the lees. Recently, cross-flow filtration has become popular to recover a large amount of juice from lees. However, high juice recovery is observed to be consistent with a decrease in wine quality, while low recovery reduces the amount of wine that can be produced. Therefore, this study aims to find the optimal compromise between quantity and quality. We tested at industrial scale and in three replicates, qualitative changes in an elite Italian white wine as a function of different amounts of juice recovered. The length of the filtration cycle affected the juice’s chemical parameters. In some cases, uncontrolled alcoholic fermentation started before the yeast inoculum, leading to a small increase in ethanol, and higher acetic acid and ethyl acetate concentrations that can be find in the resulting wines. The phenomenon was particularly apparent in longer fermentation cycles. Furthermore, longer filtration cycles increased juice acidity and potassium, while the resulting wines changed in terms of pH, glycerol, and volatile profile. Several grape-related compounds were found in wines at different concentrations as a function of the amount of juice recovered. In particular, Z3-hexen-1-ol, p-cymene, β-ionone, and benzyl alcohol were found to increase, reaching a maximum at 65% of recovered juice before decreasing. Furthermore, several fermentation-related compounds were found to change according to the length of the filtration cycle. Our work identifies an optimal recovery point of 65%. This percentage appears the best trade-off between the flavor of wines, fermentation risk management, and the amount of juice recovered.
Grape compounds Juice recovery Process optimization Tangential filtration Wine quality
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
The authors would like to thank the Teruzzi and Puthod company for hosting the trials and Dr. Tiberio Profita which carried out part of the work during his thesis. Furthermore, the authors would like to thank the TMCI Padovan company for their technical support during the trials.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
Compliance with ethics requirements
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects.
Ribéreau-Gayon P, Denis D, Bernard D, Aline L (2006) Handbook of enology. In: The microbiology of wine and vinifications, vol 1, 2nd ed. Wiler, England, p 497Google Scholar
Konig H, Unden G, Frolich J (2009) Biology of microorganisms on grapes, in must and in wineGoogle Scholar
Giles CH, MacEwan TH, Nakhwa SN, Smith D (1960) Studies in adsorption. Part XI. A system of classification of solution adsorption isotherms, and its use in diagnosis of adsorption mechanisms and in measurement of specific surface areas of solids. J Chem Soc. https://doi.org/10.1039/JR9600003973CrossRefGoogle Scholar