Cargando…

Emerging Non-Thermal Technologies as Alternative to SO(2) for the Production of Wine

SO(2) is an antioxidant and selective antimicrobial additive, inhibiting the growth of molds in the must during the early stages of wine production, as well as undesirable bacteria and yeasts during fermentation, thus avoiding microbial spoilage during wine production and storage. The addition of SO...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Silva, Filipa V. M., van Wyk, Sanelle
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8469166/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34574285
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/foods10092175
_version_ 1784573860883988480
author Silva, Filipa V. M.
van Wyk, Sanelle
author_facet Silva, Filipa V. M.
van Wyk, Sanelle
author_sort Silva, Filipa V. M.
collection PubMed
description SO(2) is an antioxidant and selective antimicrobial additive, inhibiting the growth of molds in the must during the early stages of wine production, as well as undesirable bacteria and yeasts during fermentation, thus avoiding microbial spoilage during wine production and storage. The addition of SO(2) is regulated to a maximum of 150–350 ppm, as this chemical preservative can cause adverse effects in consumers such as allergic reactions. Therefore, the wine industry is interested in finding alternative strategies to reduce SO(2) levels, while maintaining wine quality. The use of non-thermal or cold pasteurization technologies for wine preservation was reviewed. The effect of pulsed electric fields (PEF), high pressure processing (HPP), power ultrasound (US), ultraviolet irradiation (UV), high pressure homogenization (HPH), filtration and low electric current (LEC) on wine quality and microbial inactivation was explored and the technologies were compared. PEF and HPP proved to be effective wine pasteurization technologies as they inactivate key wine spoilage yeasts, including Brettanomyces, and bacteria in short periods of time, while retaining the characteristic flavor and aroma of the wine produced. PEF is a promising technology for the beverage industry as it is a continuous process, requiring only microseconds of processing time for the inactivation of undesirable microbes in wines, with commercial scale, higher throughput production potential.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8469166
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84691662021-09-27 Emerging Non-Thermal Technologies as Alternative to SO(2) for the Production of Wine Silva, Filipa V. M. van Wyk, Sanelle Foods Review SO(2) is an antioxidant and selective antimicrobial additive, inhibiting the growth of molds in the must during the early stages of wine production, as well as undesirable bacteria and yeasts during fermentation, thus avoiding microbial spoilage during wine production and storage. The addition of SO(2) is regulated to a maximum of 150–350 ppm, as this chemical preservative can cause adverse effects in consumers such as allergic reactions. Therefore, the wine industry is interested in finding alternative strategies to reduce SO(2) levels, while maintaining wine quality. The use of non-thermal or cold pasteurization technologies for wine preservation was reviewed. The effect of pulsed electric fields (PEF), high pressure processing (HPP), power ultrasound (US), ultraviolet irradiation (UV), high pressure homogenization (HPH), filtration and low electric current (LEC) on wine quality and microbial inactivation was explored and the technologies were compared. PEF and HPP proved to be effective wine pasteurization technologies as they inactivate key wine spoilage yeasts, including Brettanomyces, and bacteria in short periods of time, while retaining the characteristic flavor and aroma of the wine produced. PEF is a promising technology for the beverage industry as it is a continuous process, requiring only microseconds of processing time for the inactivation of undesirable microbes in wines, with commercial scale, higher throughput production potential. MDPI 2021-09-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8469166/ /pubmed/34574285 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/foods10092175 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Silva, Filipa V. M.
van Wyk, Sanelle
Emerging Non-Thermal Technologies as Alternative to SO(2) for the Production of Wine
title Emerging Non-Thermal Technologies as Alternative to SO(2) for the Production of Wine
title_full Emerging Non-Thermal Technologies as Alternative to SO(2) for the Production of Wine
title_fullStr Emerging Non-Thermal Technologies as Alternative to SO(2) for the Production of Wine
title_full_unstemmed Emerging Non-Thermal Technologies as Alternative to SO(2) for the Production of Wine
title_short Emerging Non-Thermal Technologies as Alternative to SO(2) for the Production of Wine
title_sort emerging non-thermal technologies as alternative to so(2) for the production of wine
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8469166/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34574285
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/foods10092175
work_keys_str_mv AT silvafilipavm emergingnonthermaltechnologiesasalternativetoso2fortheproductionofwine
AT vanwyksanelle emergingnonthermaltechnologiesasalternativetoso2fortheproductionofwine