Skip to main content
PMC home page
Molecules logoLink to Molecules
. 2019 Aug 21;24(17):3028. doi: 10.3390/molecules24173028

Madeira Wine Volatile Profile. A Platform to Establish Madeira Wine Aroma Descriptors

Rosa Perestrelo 1, Catarina Silva 1, José S Câmara 1,2,*
Editors: Rosa Maria de Sá Perestrelo, José Sousa Câmara
PMCID: PMC6749321  PMID: 31438523

Abstract

In the present study we aimed to investigate the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that may potentially be responsible for specific descriptors of Madeira wine providing details about Madeira wine aroma notes at molecular level. Moreover, the wine aroma profile, based on the obtained data, will be a starting point to evaluate the impact of grape variety (Malvasia, Bual, Sercial, Verdelho and Tinta Negra), type (sweet, medium sweet, dry and medium dry), and age (from 3 to 20 years old) on Madeira wine sensorial properties. Firstly, a comprehensive and in-depth Madeira wine volatile profiling was carried out using headspace solid-phase microextraction combined with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (HS–SPME/GC–qMS). Secondly, a relation among the varietal, fermentative and aging aroma compounds, and their aroma descriptors with the Madeira wine sensorial properties was assessed. A total of 82 VOCs, belonging to different chemical families were identified, namely 21 esters, 13 higher alcohols, ten terpenic compounds, nine fatty acids, seven furanic compounds, seven norisoprenoids, six lactones, four acetals, four volatile phenols and one sulphur compound. From a sensorial point of view, during the aging process the wine lost its freshness and fruitiness odor related to the presence of some varietal and fermentative compounds, whereas other descriptors such as caramel, dried fruits, spicy, toasty and woody, arose during ageing. The Maillard reaction and diffusion from the oak were the most important pathways related with these descriptors. A relationship-based approach was used to explore the impact of grape variety, wine type, and age on Madeira wine sensorial properties based on shared number of VOCs and their odors.

Keywords: wine, VOCs, potential odorants, HS–SPME, GC–qMS

1. Introduction

Madeira wine is a fortified Portuguese wine produced in Madeira Island over the last centuries playing an important role in the Island economy. The specific characteristics of Madeira wine arise from a set of specific conditions including the terroir, unique grape varieties and the singular winemaking process. The fermentation process is stopped by the addition of natural grape spirit in order to obtain an ethanol content of 18–22% (v/v). Some wines are submitted to an aging process in oak casks, in cellars, at temperatures up to 30 °C, and humidity levels between 70 and 75%, while the majority of wines are submitted to a baking process, i.e., the wine is placed in large coated vats and the temperature is slowly increased at about 5 °C per day, and maintained at 45–50 °C for at least 3 months. After this treatment, the wine is allowed to undergo a maturation process in oak casks for a minimum of 3 years [1,2].

Wine volatile composition plays an important role in wine quality since it promotes several sensations during wine consumption, odors (due to molecules that can bind olfactory receptors) and can affect flavor (combination of aroma and taste) in mouth retro-nasally, that lead to consumer acceptance or rejection. The wine aroma consists of a combination of several hundred of different volatile organic compounds (VOCs), most of which are present in trace amounts (usually at μg/L or ng/L level) [3]. Nevertheless, the presence of a molecule at a concentration above its odor threshold (OT), is sufficient to provide a characteristic product aroma (impact odorant). Nevertheless, even when present at concentrations below their OTs, may contribute to the overall wine aroma, as a result of the interactions with other molecules [4].

Different extraction techniques, such as solid phase extraction (SPE) [5,6,7,8,9] and liquid-liquid extraction [5,10,11,12,13] have been applied on the establishment of volatile profile of Madeira wine. However, most of these approaches present several disadvantages, such as time- and labor-intensive, large solvent and sample amount, which can lead to analyze losses and a reduction in sensitivity. Currently, the trend in the analyze of VOCs is more focused in the use of miniaturized sample preparation, increasing of efficiency of analysis, no solvent techniques, such as solid-phase microextraction (SPME) [7,10,14,15], stir bar sorptive extraction (SBSE) [14] and microextraction by packed sorbents (MEPS) [7] followed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) process have been used for that purpose. GC-MS is user-friendly, fast, selective and very sensitive method to establish the volatile signature of several food matrices. In addition, it was also equipped with powerful data systems that are used not only to control and acquire data from the GC and MS, but also to identify flavor components by automated matching against reference libraries of spectra of known odorants [16].

The Madeira wines volatile composition has been topic of several studies, as the data obtained has been useful in the elucidation of basic flavor chemistry. Enormous efforts were focused on the topic of varietal (e.g., terpenoids, norisoprenoids) [14,17,18], pre-fermentative (e.g., C6 alcohols and aldehydes) [11], fermentative (e.g., alcohols, esters, acids, carbonyl compounds) [5,8,14], and finally aging aroma compounds (e.g., volatiles extracted from oak, like volatile phenols, lactones) [5,8,15,19]. Few studies have focused on the establishment of potential impact odorants, which could contribute individually to the Madeira wine aroma [6]. Campo et al. [6] build a hierarchical list of the odorants using gas chromatography-olfactometry (GC-O) that express the aroma of Madeira wines. The GC–O profile of Madeira wines lacks on varietal compounds (e.g., terpenoids, cystein-derived thiols), is rich in sotolon, phenylacetaldehyde, (Z)-whiskey lactone and of some volatile phenols (e.g., guaiacol, 4-vinylguaiacol, m-cresol). Madeira wines contain a huge number of intense odorants not identified which were not even detected in the corresponding young wines [6]. Sotolon has also been previously reported as powerful odorant, responsible for burnt, curry, honey, nutty, spicy, walnut odors of Madeira wines, depending on their concentration and enantiomeric distribution [12,20].

This research aimed to provide details about Madeira wine aroma notes at molecular level, as it can be useful to explain its peculiar aroma. Moreover, the wine aroma profile is a natural starting point for a systematic search for principles to evaluate the impact of grape variety, type, and age on Madeira wine sensorial properties. Therefore, Madeira wines from different varieties (Malvasia, Bual, Sercial, Verdelho and Tinta Negra), types (sweet, medium sweet, dry and medium dry), and ages (from 3 to 20 years old) were analyzed. Firstly, in-depth Madeira wine volatile profiling (e.g., terpenic compounds, norisoprenoids, sulphur compound, alcohols, esters, lactones, furanic compounds, acetals) was carried out using HS–SPME/GC–qMS. Secondly, a relation among the varietal, fermentative and aging aroma compounds, and their aroma descriptors with the Madeira wine sensorial properties was performed. A relationship-based approach was used to explore the impact of grape variety, wine type, and age on Madeira wine sensorial properties based on shared number of VOCs and their odor descriptors.

2. Results and Discussion

HS–SPME/GC–qMS methodology was used to establish the Madeira wine volatile profiling, as a sensitive technique to explain the unique aroma descriptors of Madeira wines. Considering the five grape varieties under study, a set of 82 VOCs (Table 1), namely 21 esters, 13 higher alcohols, ten terpenic compounds, nine fatty acids, seven norisoprenoids, seven furanic compounds, six lactones, four acetals, four volatile phenols and one sulphur compound (Tables S1 and S2), have been identified by matching the obtained mass spectra with the reference compounds spectra in NIST Mass Spectral Search Program with a resemblance percentage above 80% and by comparison of the KIs calculated (KIcalc) with the values reported in the literature (KIlit) for polyethylene glycol (or equivalent) column.

Table 1.

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) identified in Madeira wines by headspace solid-phase microextraction tandem with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (HS–SPME/GC–qMS), and the corresponding odor thresholds and odor descriptors.

RT (min) 1 KIcalc 2 KIlit 3 ID 4 Chemical Families OTs (µg/L) 5 Odor descriptors 6
Terpenic compounds
7.34 1150 1158 MS, RI, Std β-Pinene 6 7 Citrus, floral, fruit, green, pine, sweet, terpenic, wood
8.38 1178 1182 MS, RI, Std Limonene 8 10 Citrus, fruit, wood
18.96 1430 1433 MS, RI (E)-Linalool oxide 500 Floral, green, rose, sweet
19.16 1445 1451 MS, RI (Z)-Linalool oxide 500 Floral, green, rose, sweet
22.88 1537 1537 MS, RI, Std Linalool 15 Citrus, lavender, floral, fruit, green, muscat, sweet
24.01 1561 1566 MS, RI, Std β-Caryophyllene - 9 Fruit, green, spice, wood
28.58 1673 1669 MS, RI, Std α-Terpineol 250 Anise, floral, fruit, mint, oil, toothpaste
31.38 1764 1762 MS, RI, Std Citronellol 30 Citrus, clove, floral, fresh, green, rose, sour, sweet
39.86 1981 2009 MS, RI, Std Geraniol 20 Citrus, floral, fruit, waxy
41.99 2125 2134 MS, RI δ-Cadinol - Almond, green, waxy, wood
Norisoprenoids
21.47 1498 1507 MS, RI, Std Vitispirane I 800 Camphor, eucalyptus, spice, wood
21.57 1501 1510 MS, RI, Std Vitispirane II - Camphor, eucalyptus, spice, wood
26.22 1614 1623 MS, RI, Std β-Cyclocitral 5 Floral, sweet
30.86 1742 1755 MS, RI, Std TDN 10 2 Floral, fruit, pleasant, wine
32.33 1785 1790 MS, RI, Std β-Damascenone 6 0.05 Floral, fruit, honey, sweet, tobacco
34.79 1844 1840 MS, RI, Std Geranyl acetone 60 Floral, fruit, green, waxy, wood
36.34 1910 1912 MS, RI, Std β-Ionone 0.10 Floral, violet
Higher Alcohols
4.78 1074 1057 MS, RI, Std Butan-2-ol - Alcohol, oil, wine
6.12 1113 1112 MS, RI, Std 2-Methylpropan-1-ol 40,000 Alcohol, bitter, glue, leek, licorice
7.87 1165 1176 MS, RI, Std Hexan-2-ol - Fatty, fruit, wine
9.51 1206 1206 MS, RI, Std 3-Methylbutan-1-ol 30,000 Alcohol, balsamic, burnt, cheesy, fruit, pungent, ripe onion
15.15 1350 1354 MS, RI, Std Hexan-1-ol 8000 Floral, fruit, green, herbal, mild, toasty, sweet, wood
15.23 1352 1362 MS, RI, Std (E)-3-Hexen-1-ol 400 Fresh, green, grass, leaf
16.11 1371 1379 MS, RI, Std (Z)-3-Hexen-1-ol 400 Fresh, green, grass, leaf
22.25 1514 1510 MS, RI, Std 2-Ethylhexan-1-ol 270 Citrus, fresh, floral, oil, sweet
22.43 1521 1524 MS, RI (R,S)-Butan 2,3-diol 120,000 Fruit
23.93 1556 1556 MS, RI (R,R)-Butan-2,3-diol 120,000 Fruit
32.29 1784 1783 MS, RI, Std Decan-1-ol 400 Fatty
35.31 1861 1869 MS, RI, Std Benzyl alcohol 200,000 Blackberry, floral, fruit
36.42 1915 1910 MS, RI, Std 2-Phenyethyl alcohol 14,000 Floral, herbal, honey, pollen, rose, spice, sweet
Sulphur compound
29.65 1701 1723 MS, RI, Std Ethyl 3-(methylthio)propionate 7 Fruit, pineapple
Esters
4.68 1055 1047 MS, RI, Std Ethyl butanoate 20 Acetone, bubblegum, caramel, fruit
4.71 1061 1053 MS, RI, Std Ethyl 3-methylbutanoate 3 Anise, apple, blackcurrant, citrus, fruit, sweet
6.51 1125 1120 MS, RI, Std Isoamyl acetate 30 Banana, fresh, fruit, sweet
10.04 1222 1220 MS, RI, Std Ethyl hexanoate 5 Anise, caramel, fruit, wine
10.31 1254 1262 MS, RI, Std Hexyl acetate 10 Acid, citrus, fruit, green, herbal, rubber, spice, tobacco
10.52 1279 1276 MS, RI, Std Ethyl pyruvate - Caramel, ethereal, fruit, vegetable, sweet
14.67 1339 1340 MS, RI Ethyl lactate 154,636 Acidic, ethereal, fruit, sweet
18.16 1416 1414 MS, RI, Std Ethyl octanoate 2 Fruit, must, soap, sweet, waxy
20.98 1478 1483 MS, RI, Std Ethyl 3-hydroxybutanoate 20,000 Coconut, grape, nutty
26.58 1617 1624 MS, RI, Std Ethyl decanoate 200 Fruit, pleasant, soap, sweet, waxy
28.07 1659 1661 MS, RI, Std Diethyl succinate 500,000 Fabric, floral, fruit, lavender, potato, sweat
29.34 1693 1696 MS, RI Ethyl 3-hydroxyhexanoate 265 Citrus, fruit, green, sweet
29.72 1715 1708 MS, RI Ethyl 9-decenoate 100 Fruit, fatty
32.07 1773 1775 MS, RI, Std Ethyl benzeneacetate - Fruit
34.52 1838 1837 MS, RI, Std Ethyl dodecanoate 500 Fruit, soap, sweet
34.99 1857 1839 MS, RI, Std Ethyl salicylate - Balsamic, cooling, floral, fruit, spice, sweet
35.58 1873 1870 MS, RI Benzyl butanoate - Floral, fruit, jasmin, sweet,
35.87 1880 1883 MS, RI, Std Ethyl 2-phenylacetate 250 Floral
66.75 2354 2358 MS, RI, Std Diethyl tartrate - -
68.62 2420 2440 MS, RI, Std Ethyl succinate - Fruit
70.49 2486 2499 MS, RI Ethyl citrate - Floral
Acids
18.51 1425 1426 MS, RI, Std Acetic acid 200,000 Pungent, vinegar, sour
23.52 1547 1557 MS, RI, Std 2 -Methylpropanoic acid 200,000 Cheesy, fatty, phenolic, sweaty
25.97 1600 1607 MS, RI, Std Butanoic acid 10,000 Buttery, cheesy, rancid, sweaty
27.56 1645 1647 MS, RI, Std 3-Methylbutanoic acid 3000 Cheesy, rancid, sweaty
34.49 1837 1840 MS, RI, Std Hexanoic acid 3000 Cheesy, pungent, rancid, sweaty
36.92 1978 1981 MS, RI, Std 2-Ethylhexanoic acid - Cheesy
41.82 2098 2089 MS, RI, Std Octanoic acid 10,000 Cheesy, fatty, fresh, moss
48.56 2321 2317 MS, RI, Std Decanoic acid 15,000 Cheesy, fatty, soap
67.81 2392 2407 MS, RI Undecylic acid 40 Oil
Acetals
4.99 1094 1096 MS, RI, Std 1,1-Diethoxyethane 1000 Liquorices, nutty, pungent, wood
21.86 1512 1525 MS, RI, Std Cis-dioxane - Wood
26.84 1642 1639 MS, RI, Std Cis-dioxolane - Wood
31.01 1755 1740 MS, RI, Std Trans-dioxane - Wood
Furanic compounds
18.03 1412 1434 MS, RI, Std 2-Acetylfuran - Balsamic-cinnamic, cereal, sweet, toast, tobacco
20.86 1465 1458 MS, RI, Std 2-Furfural 14,100 Almond, caramel, sweet, wood
22.45 1526 1524 MS, RI, Std 1-(2-Furyl)-1-propanone - Radish, spice
23.67 1550 1560 MS, RI, Std 5-Methyl-2-furfural 20,000 Acid, almond, caramel, coffee, spice, toast
26.01 1606 1606 MS, RI, Std Ethyl 2-furoate 16,000 Balsamic, scorched tone, vanilla
68.15 2412 - MS, RI, Std 5 -Ethoxymethyl-2-furfural 6 Curry, spice
75.02 2501 2509 MS, RI, Std 5-Hydroxymethyl-2-furfural 10,000 Almond, cardboard, nutty
Lactones
25.71 1594 1595 MS, RI, Std Butyrolactone 35,000 Caramel, coconut, cream, peach
29.01 1690 1694 MS, RI, Std γ-Hexalactone 1600 Apricot, peach
36.65 1936 1933 MS, RI, Std γ-Octalactone 400 Caramel, coconut, cream, fatty, herbaceous, nutty
42.75 2197 2185 MS, RI, Std γ-Decalactone 88 Fruit, sweet
43.92 2218 2219 MS, RI (Z)-Whiskylactone 67 Caramel, coconut, nutty, toast, wood
45.44 2267 2241 MS, RI, Std γ-Dodecalactone 1000 Coconut, fruit, musk, sweet
Volatile phenols
41.63 2076 2080 MS, RI, Std 2-Phenoxyethanol - Alcoholic, floral, rose
45.13 2257 2250 MS, RI, Std Eugenol 5 Balsamic, clove, herbaceous, honey, spice
77.06 2563 2561 MS, RI, Std Vanillin 4 Sweet, vanilla
78.77 2620 2613 MS, RI, Std Methyl vanillate 990 Vanilla
Open in a new tab

1 Retention time (min); 2 Kovats index n-alkanes (C8 to C20) on a BP-20 capillary column; 3 Kovats index reported in literature for equivalent capillary column [21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30]; 4 Method of identification: MS, mass spectrum comparison using NITS library; RI: retention index in agreement with literature value; Std: confirmed by authentic standard; 5 Odor threshold determined in 10–12% v/v ethanol [6,31,32,33,34,35,36]; 6 Odor descriptors [6,11,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45]; 7 Odor descriptors in bold are the potential aroma notes of Madeira wines; 8 VOCs in bold are common to all Madeira wines analyzed; 9 No information was found in literature; 10 TDN: 1,2-dihydro-1,1,6-trimethylnaphtalene.

A range between 0 and 35 (|KIcalc − KIlit|) was obtained for KIcal compared to the KIlit reported in the literature for GC with polyethylene glycol GC column or equivalent. This difference in KI is acceptable (<5%) taking into account that the literature data is obtained from a large range of GC stationary phases (several commercial GC columns are composed of polyethylene glycol or equivalent stationary phases). The relative concentration of each VOC and their relative standard deviation (%RSD) in dry/medium dry and sweet/medium sweet are available as Supplementary Material on Tables S1 and S2, respectively. Sixty-nine VOCs were common in all wine samples analyzed, namely seven terpenic compounds, six norisoprenoids, 13 alcohols, 21 esters, 9 acids, four acetals, seven furanic compounds and two volatile phenols (Tables S1 and S2).

The number of identified VOCs ranged from 77 to 79 for Malvasia wines, from 78 to 79 for Bual wines, from 76 to 80 for Sercial wines, and from 77 to 80 for Verdelho wines, for young and old wines, respectively. For Tinta Negra variety, different types of wines were considered. It was observed that the number of VOCs ranged from 77 to 79 for dry, from 80 to 82 for medium dry, from 76 to 80 for sweet, and from 79 to 81 for medium sweet, for young and old wines, respectively.

2.1. Potential Impact Odorants of Madeira Wines

As observed in Table 2, young (3 to 5 years old) Madeira wines are characterized by freshness and fruitiness descriptors (e.g., citrus, floral, fruity), whereas the old (10 to 20 years old) Madeira wines are characterized by caramel, dried fruits, spice, toast and wood notes based on sensory analysis [6,46]. The information reported in Table 2 was obtained by a panelist of eleven expert judges belonging to different Madeira wine companies, such Madeira Wine Company, Barbeito, Borges, Justinos, and some employees from Instituto do Vinho Madeira, and also supported on previous studies [6,46].

Table 2.

Madeira wines sensory analysis obtained from different grape varieties, types, and ages.

Madeira Wine Sensory Analysis
Variety Younger wines (3 to 5 Years Old) Older wines (10 to 20 Years Old)
Malvasia Almond, banana, citrus, cocoa, floral, tobacco, wood Almond, caramel, dried fruits, spice, tobacco, toast, vanilla, wood
Bual Almond, banana, cocoa, floral, tea Almond, caramel, dried fruits, spice, tea, toast, wood
Sercial Citrus, honey, mushroom, waxy Dried fruits, honey, spice, toast, vanilla, wood
Verdelho Banana, floral, honey, mushroom, spice Dried fruits, ethereal, honey, spice, toast, wood
Tinta Negra Citrus, ripe fruit, tea, wood Caramel, dried fruits, spice, tea, toast, wood
Open in a new tab

A relationship-based approach consisting of two different nodes was built: (i) 15 Madeira wine aroma notes, and (ii) 82 VOCs that are known to explain each of these aroma notes (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Madeira wine aroma notes (middle column), together with the chemical families (82 VOCs) that explain its aroma notes (left and right columns). Volatile compounds are shown in boldface if shared at least two or more aroma odors.

The concentration and OT of each VOC is necessary to determine its contribution to overall Madeira wine aroma. In the current research, a semi-quantification was performed in order to establish a potential relationship between Madeira wines profiling and their odor descriptors with wines sensorial evaluation. As observed in Figure 1, different aroma notes were found for the same VOC, which could be influenced by odor the intensity evaluation, as well as VOCs concentration and nature of matrix analyzed. So, the resulting aroma relationship-based approach is too complex to achieve more information [6,11,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45]. A projection of this relationship-based approach is the aroma system (Figure 2), in which two nodes (Madeira wine aroma notes) are linked if they share at least one aroma note. The color line represents the number of shared compounds.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Aroma system. Each color represents an aroma note. The color line corresponds to the number of shared VOCs.

According to the obtained results, the grape variety seems to have a great impact in the sensorial properties of young Madeira wines, among several other parameters (e.g., vinification procedure). Specific aroma notes are linked to grape variety, as for example Malvasia and Bual grapes, used to produce sweet and medium sweet wines characterized by almond and cocoa odors. Dry and medium dry Madeira wines, obtained from Sercial and Verdelho grapes, are characterized by mushroom and honey notes. These grape varieties specific notes are shared, on average, by three VOCs. However, few aroma notes are connected between these grape varieties. Malvasia, Bual and Verdelho grapes are connected by flower and fruit odors and are shared, on average, by 31 VOCs, whereas the citrus odors linked to Malvasia, Tinta Negra and Sercial are shared by nine VOCs. In terms of Madeira aroma notes, young wines from Malvasia and Bual grapes are the most complex, contrarily to the observed for Tinta Negra, Sercial and Verdelho (Figure 2). For the oldest wines, it was observed that several aroma notes (e.g., dried fruit, spice, toast, wood) were present in all varieties under study. On average, eight VOCs that may explain these notes were shared by these varieties. Figure 2 shows that oldest wines, from the five varieties, presented higher aroma similarity than in youngest ones, which suggest the powerful impact of aging process on Madeira wine aroma.

2.1.1. Young Madeira Wines

Taking into account the OTs [6,31,32,33,34,35,36] and odor descriptor [6,11,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45] reported in Table 1, as well as the relative concentration of VOCs (Tables S1 and S2), the citrus odor characteristic of Malvasia, Sercial and Tinta Negra wines (Table 2) could be explain by the presence of some terpenic compounds, such as α-pinene, limonene, linalool, citronellol, geraniol, and some esters, like hexyl acetate, ethyl 3-methylbutanoate and ethyl 3-hydroxyhexanoate, and 2-ethylhexan-1-ol (Table 3). All these varietal and fermentative compounds are present in Malvasia, Sercial and Tinta Negra wines at relative concentrations higher than their respective OT.

Table 3.

Potential impact odorants of Madeira wine.

Odor Descriptor Madeira Wines Potential Odorant
Citrus Malvasia, Sercial, TN α-pinene, limonene, linalool, citronellol, geraniol, hexyl acetate, ethyl 3-methylbutanoate, ethyl 3-hydroxyhexanoate, 2-ethylhexan-1-ol
Floral Malvasia, Bual, Verdelho α-pinene, linalool, citronellol, geraniol, β-cyclocitral, TDN 1, β-damascenone, geranyl acetone, β-ionone, 1-hexanol, 2-phenylethyl alcohol
Waxy Sercial geraniol, geranyl acetone, ethyl octanoate, ethyl decanoate
Almond Malvasia, Bual, Tinta Negra δ-cadinol
Caramel Malvasia, Bual ethyl butanoate, ethyl hexanoate, ethyl pyruvate, (Z)-whiskylactone
Ethereal Verdelho ethyl lactate, ethyl pyruvate
Spice Malvasia, Bual, Verdelho, Sercial, TN hexyl acetate, 2-phenyethyl alcohol, 5-(ethoxymethyl)furfural, eugenol
Toast Malvasia, Bual, Verdelho, Sercial, TN (Z)-whiskylactone
Wood Malvasia, Bual, Verdelho, Sercial, TN δ-cadinol
Vanilla Malvasia, Sercial ethyl 2-furoate, vanillin, methyl vanillate
Open in a new tab

1 TDN: 1,2-dihydro-1,1,6-trimethylnaphthalene; TN: Tinta Negra.

α-Pinene, linalool, citronellol, geraniol, β-cyclocitral, 1,2-dihydro-1,1,6-trimethylnaphthalene (TDN), β-damascenone, geranyl acetone, β-ionone, 1-hexanol and 2-phenylethyl alcohol are some varietal aroma compounds that could explain the floral odor related to Malvasia, Bual and Verdelho young wines (Table 3). By the other hand, linalool oxide and α-terpineol cannot explained the floral odors, since they are present in Malvasia, Bual and Verdelho wines at relative concentrations lower than their OT. Generally, the relative concentration of these varietal VOCs (e.g., α-pinene, linalool, citronellol) decreased during aging process (Tables S1 and S2), which could explain the absence of these odors in old wines. Some varietal compounds, linalool [6], β-damascenone [10] and TDN [47] have been reported as important odorants related to violet, exotic fruit and/or exotic floral descriptors of young wines. The waxy odor of Sercial young wine could be explained by the presence of some terpenic compounds (e.g., geraniol, geranyl acetone) and esters (e.g., ethyl octanoate, ethyl decanoate), since their relative concentration decreased slightly during aging process and present low OTs (Table 1). Finally, the almond odor of Malvasia and Bual young wines could be explained by the presence of δ-cadinol.

2.1.2. Old Madeira Wines

The caramel descriptor characteristic of older Malvasia, Bual and Tinta Negra wines suggests the presence of some esters (e.g., ethyl butanoate, ethyl hexanoate, ethyl pyruvate), furans (e.g., 2-furfural, 5-methyl-2-furfural), and some lactones (e.g., γ-butyrolactone, γ-octalactone, (Z)-whiskylactone). The relative concentration of furans and lactones increased during Madeira wines aging (Figure 3b). Nevertheless, 2-furfural (OT = 14,100 µg/L), 5-methyl-2-furfural (20,000 µg/L), and γ-butyrolactone (OT = 35,000 µg/L) could not be used to explain the caramel descriptor since their relative concentration (Tables S1 and S2) was lower than their respective OTs (Table 1). Campo et al. [6] reported that furfural, 5-methylfurfural, 5-hydroxymethylfurfural and 5-ethoxymethylfurfural were not detected in the GC–O assays, in spite of the fact that these furanic compounds are quantitatively important, are not relevant to the aroma of Madeira wine. Moreover, phenylacetaldehyde, sotolon, (Z)-whiskylactone and some volatile phenols from wood are important odor active compounds in Madeira wines [6]. In the current study, from these three VOCs, only (Z)-whiskylactone was detected.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Total relative concentration (μg/L) of major (a) and minor (b) chemical families identified in Madeira wine.

Thus, based on the OTs, ethyl butanoate, γ-octalactone and (Z)-whiskylactone could be the VOCs responsible for the caramel descriptor characteristic of older Malvasia, Bual and Tinta Negra wines, since their relative concentrations (Tables S1 and S2) were higher than their OTs. The ethereal descriptor characteristic of Verdelho wines suggests the presence of ethyl lactate and ethyl pyruvate. Perhaps, these two VOCs were also presented in all Madeira wines analyzed, the relative concentration of ethyl pyruvate in Verdelho wines (on average 3.54 µg/L) was higher than the remaining Madeira wines (on average 1.49 µg/L).

The presence of hexyl acetate, 2-phenyethyl alcohol, 5-(ethoxymethyl) furfural and eugenol could explain the spicy notes characteristic of old Madeira wines, since their relative concentration was higher than their respective OTs (Table 1). Other VOCs that could explain the spicy notes were ethyl pyruvate and ethyl salicylate, however no information related to their OTs is available. 2-Acetylfuran, 5-methyl-2-furfural and (Z)-whiskey lactone could explain the toast odor, as their relative concentration increased remarkably during aging process (Tables S1 and S2). Nevertheless, taking into account the relative concentration and OTs, (Z)-whiskey lactone is the potential odorant responsible for the toast notes characteristic of older Madeira wines. The vanilla odor related to Malvasia and Sercial wines could be explained by the presence of ethyl 2-furoate, vanillin and methyl vanillate, since a remarkably increase on relative concentration was observed for vanillin and ethyl vanillate during aging process. Vanillin is the one of the VOCs that could explain the vanilla descriptor, since its relative concentration was higher than their OT (Table 1). δ-Cadinol, and acetals, like 1,1-diethoxyethane, cis-dioxane, cis-dioxolane and trans-dioxane could explain the wood descriptor characteristic of older Madeira wines, as their relative concentration slightly increased during aging process (Tables S1 and S2). In regards to the acetals, a little contribution to the sensorial properties of all Madeira wines was expected due to its high OT, and low relative concentration. However, in previous studies, 1,1-diethoxyethane [48] has been considered an important impact odorant to wines and liquors aromas [42,48], despite its higher OT. In the current study, 1,1-diethoxiethane was present in all Madeira wines analyzed at relative concentration lower than its OT.

Dried fruits notes (e.g., almond, coconut, nutty, peanut, walnut) characteristic of old Madeira wines could be explained mainly by the presence of 2-furfural, 5-hydromethyl-2-furfural, (Z)-whiskey lactone, γ-octalactone, γ-decalactone, γ-dodecalactone and 1,1-diethoxyethane, as their relative concentration increased remarkably during aging process (Tables S1 and S2). From these VOCs, only (Z)-whiskey lactone and γ-decalactone are present at relative concentration higher than its OTs (Table 1).

From a sensorial point of view, as can be observed in Figure 3, during the aging process the wine lost their freshness and fruitness odors related mainly to the presence of terpenic compounds (e.g., linalool oxide, linalool, α-terpeniol, geraniol), norisoprenoids (e.g., TDN, β-damascenone, geranyl acetone), and ethyl esters (e.g., ethyl 3-methylbutanoate, isoamyl acetate, ethyl 3-hydroxyhexanoate), as their relative concentration decreased during aging process (Tables S1 and S2). Otherwise, other descriptors arose such as caramel, dried fruit, spice, toast and wood, that suggests the formation of VOCs by Maillard reaction (e.g., furanic compounds), takes place at 50 °C being favored at pH 4–7 [49], and diffusion from the oak to wines (e.g., lactones, volatile phenols). As can be observed in Figure 3b, the relative concentration of these chemical families increased remarkably during wine aging, which could explain the aroma complexity of older Madeira wines.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Sampling

Twenty-two monovarietal Madeira wines from five Vitis vinifera L. grape varieties (one red—Tinta Negra, and four white wines from noble varieties—Malvasia, Bual, Sercial, and Verdelho), aged from 3 to 20 years old (Y) and matured in oak casks, were used in this study. Tinta Negra is the main grape variety harvested in Madeira Island (Portugal) representing more than 80% of the vineyards. The grapes were destemmed, crushed and 50 mg/L of sulfur dioxide (SO2) was added. According to the age, the wines under study correspond to Vintage (a specific year of aged in casks, 17, 18, 19, and 20 years) and blended wines (B, an average aging period of 3, 5, 10, or 15 years). Four types of wine were used: Sweet (Malvasia, Tinta Negra, sugar content expressed as 96.1 to 150 g glucose per L), medium sweet (Bual, Tinta Negra, 80.4 to 96.1 g/L), dry (Sercial, Tinta Negra, 49.1 to 64.8 g/L), and medium dry (Verdelho, Tinta Negra, 64.8 to 80.4 g/L), and were aged in American oak casks. The ethanol content of the Madeira wines under study ranged from 18 to 19% (v/v).

3.2. Reagents and Standards

Sodium chloride (99.5%, foodstuff grade) and 4-methyl-2-pentanol (98%, internal standard) was purchased from Sigma Aldrich (Madrid, Spain), and ultrapure water was obtained from a Milli-Q system from Millipore (Milford, MA, USA). α-Pinene, linalool, α-terpeniol, citronellol, geraniol, β-ciclocitral, β-damascenone, geranyl acetone, β-ionone, butan-2-ol, hexan-2-ol, 3-methylbutan-1-ol, hexan-1-ol, (E)-3-hexen-1-ol, (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol, 2-ethylhexan-1-ol, decan-1-ol, benzyl alcohol, 2-phenethyl alcohol, ethyl butanoate, ethyl 3-methylbutanoate, isoamyl acetate, ethyl hexanoate, hexyl acetate, ethyl lactate, ethyl octanoate, ethyl 3-hydroxybutanoate, ethyl decanoate, ethyl benzeneacetate, ethyl dodecanoate, ethyl salicylate, ethyl 2-phenylacetate, ethyl succinate, acetic acid, butanoic acid, 3-methylbutanoic acid, hexanoic acid, 2-ethylhexanoic acid, octanoic acid, decanoic acid, 2-furfural, 1-(2-furyl)-1-propanone, 5-methyl-2-furfural, ethyl 2-furoate, 5-hydromethyl-2-furfural, butyrolactone, γ-hexalactone, γ-octalactone, γ-decalactone, γ-dodecalactone, 2-phenoxyethanol, eugenol, vanillin and methyl vanillate used for identification of target compounds were purchased from Sigma–Aldrich (Madrid, Spain), Acros Organics (Geel, Belgium), and Fluka (Buchs, Switzerland) with purity higher than 98%. The SPME holder for manual sampling and fiber were purchased from Supelco (Aldrich, Bellefonte, PA, USA). The SPME device included a fused silica fiber coating partially cross-linked with 50/30 μm divinylbenzene/carboxen/polydimethylsiloxane (DVB/CAR/PDMS). Prior to use, the SPME fiber was conditioned at 270 °C for 60 min in the GC injector, according to the manufacturer’s recommendations. Then, the fiber was daily conditioned for 10 min at 250 °C. The n-alkane series analytical standard, C8 to C20 straight-chain alkanes (concentration of 40 mg/L in n-hexane), used to determine the Kovat’s index (KI) was supplied from Fluka (Buchs, Switzerland).

3.3. Sensory Analysis

A descriptive sensory analysis of Madeira wines samples used in this study was conducted by a panelist of eleven expert judges (seven females, four males) with an average age of 35 (± 5.1). The eleven members of the panel are winemakers belonging to different wine companies, such Madeira Wines, Barbeito, Borges, Justinos, and some employees from Instituto do Vinho Madeira. The panelists were trained over a period of 70 days to assess wine aroma using a ‘‘Le Nez du Vin” aroma kit (supplied by Ease Scent Company, Beijing, China). The ‘‘Le Nez du Vin” is an aroma kit composed by 54 vials, where each vial contains one typical aroma character in wine, such as blackcurrant, honey, caramel, coffee, chocolate, green pepper, smoke, wood, mint, among others. The training was carried out three times each week for 60–90 min. Each wine (30 mL) was presented to panelists in standard wine tasting glasses coded with three-digit numbers, covered with a Petri dish (to minimize the escape of VOCs), at 19–22 °C, in isolated booths under daylight-type lighting, with randomized presentation order. Cold water was used as palate cleansing. All wines were evaluated in triplicate in three formal sessions that were held on different days.

3.4. Headspace Solid-Phase Microextraction Tandem with Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (HS-SPME) methodology

The HS-SPME experimental parameters were previously established [15]. Briefly, aliquots of 4 mL of the wine sample were placed into an 8 mL glass vial. After the addition of 0.5 g of NaCl, 10 µL of 4-methyl-2-pentanol (internal standard, 250 µg/L) and stirring (0.5 × 0.1 mm bar) at 400 rpm, the vial was capped with a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) septum and an aluminum cap (Chromacol, Hertfordshire, UK). The vial was placed in a thermostatted bath adjusted to 40.0 ± 0.1 °C for 5 min, and then the DVB/CAR/PDMS fiber was inserted into the headspace for 30 min. Three independent aliquots of each sample were analyzed in triplicate. Blanks, corresponding to the analysis of the coating fiber not submitted to any extraction procedure, were run between sets of three analysis.

3.5. GC–qMS Analysis for Madeira Wines Profiling

The GC–qMS methodology was based on a previous study [50]. After the extraction/concentration step, the SPME coating fiber containing the VOCs was manually introduced into the GC injection port at 250 °C (equipped with a glass liner, 0.75 mm I.D.) and kept for 7 min for desorption. The desorbed VOCs were separated in an Agilent Technologies 6890N Network gas chromatography equipped with a BP-20 fused silica capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm I.D. × 0.25 μm film thickness) supplied by SGE (Darmstadt, Germany) connected to an Agilent 5973N quadrupole mass selective detector. Helium (Air Liquid, Portugal) was used as the carrier gas at a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min (column-head pressure: 12 psi). The injections were performed in the splitless mode (7 min). The GC oven temperature was programmed as follows: 45 °C (1 min) then ramped at 2 °C/min to 100 °C (3 min), 5 °C/min to 130 °C (5 min), and finally 2 °C/min to 220 °C (2 min). For the MS system, the temperatures of the transfer line, quadrupole and ionization source were 250, 150 and 230 °C, respectively; electron impact mass spectra were recorded at 70 eV and the ionization current was about 30 μA. The acquisitions were performed in full scan mode (30–300 m/z). The VOCs identification was achieved as follows: (i) comparison the GC retention times and mass spectra with those of the standard, when available; (ii) all mass spectra were also compared with the data system library (NIST, 2005 software, Mass Spectral Search Program v.2.0d; Nist 2005, Washington, DC); (iii) Kovat’s index (KI) values were determined according to the van den Dool and Kratz equation [51]. For the KI determination, a C8–C20 n-alkanes series was used, and the values were compared, when available, with values reported in the literature for similar columns [21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30].

The VOCs concentration was estimated, semi quantitatively, using the added amount of 4-methyl-2-pentanol (IS) according the following equation: VOCs concentration = (VOC GC peak area/IS GC peak area) × IS concentration. However, our main aim is regarding the relation between the varietal, fermentative and aging aroma compounds, and their aroma descriptors with the Madeira wine sensorial properties. This semi quantification approach was already performed in previous scientific studies [52,53].

4. Conclusions

This study represents the first detailed research about the Madeira wines volatile profiling and its association with odor descriptors. An in-depth relation among the varietal, fermentative and aging aroma compounds and their odor descriptors with the Madeira wine sensory analysis (described by a trained panelist) was established. The Madeira wine aroma notes, the VOCs and their aroma descriptors, showed the data complexity and the difficulty to get information. From the aroma system, it can be verified that grape variety is an important parameter that influences the sensorial properties of young Madeira wines, whereas the old wines are highly influenced by the aging process.

From a sensorial point of view, during the aging process the wine lost its freshness and fruitiness odors, and other descriptors arise such as caramel, dried fruit, spice, toast and wood, that suggests the formation of VOCs by Maillard reaction (e.g., furanic compounds), and diffusion from the oak to wines (e.g., lactones, volatile phenols). In addition, young Madeira wines obtained from Malvasia and Bual grape varieties are more complex than those obtained from Tinta Negra, Sercial, and Verdelho. This trend is not observed for the old Madeira wines since, independently of the grape variety used, their aroma notes are balanced which means that aging process has a higher impact on aroma rather than grape variety.

It is important to point out that a detailed database about volatile composition of Madeira wine and the correspondent aroma descriptors was built, which may be useful to improve information about the specific aroma of Madeira wine and will represent a powerful tool to help on winemaker decisions.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge H.M. Borges Company for kindly providing the samples, and the information related to sensory properties of Madeira wines.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online, Table S1: Relative concentration (µg/L) and relative standard deviation (%RSD) of VOCs identified by HS-SPME/GC-qMS in dry (Sercial and Tinta Negra) and medium dry (Verdelho and Tinta Negra) Madeira wines, Table S2: Relative concentration (µg/L) and relative standard deviation (RSD) of VOCs identified by HS-SPME/GC-qMS in sweet (Malvasia and Tinta Negra) and medium sweet (Bual and Tinta Negra) Madeira wines.

Click here for additional data file. (333.5KB, pdf)

Author Contributions

R.P. performed the design of experiments, GC-MS, data analysis data analysis and manuscript preparation; C.S. performed the support to the experiments, GC-MS and data analysis. J.S.C. performed the manuscript preparation and editing.

Funding

This research was also funded by FCT-Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (project PEst-OE/QUI/UI0674/2013, CQM, Portuguese Government funds), and Associação Regional para o Desenvolvimento da Investigação Tecnologia e Inovação (ARDITI) through the project M1420-01-0145-FEDER-000005—Centro de Química da Madeira—CQM+ (Madeira 14–20). The authors also acknowledge for PhD grant (SFRH/BD/97039/2013) to Catarina L. Silva

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Footnotes

Sample Availability: Samples of the compounds are not available from the authors.

References

  • 1.Perestrelo R., Albuquerque F., Rocha S.M.S.M., Câmara J.S.J.S. Distinctive characteristics of madeira wine regarding its traditional winemaking and modern analytical methodologies. Adv. Food Nutr. Res. 2011;63:207–249. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-384927-4.00007-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Perestrelo R., Petronilho S., Câmara J.S., Rocha S.M. Comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography with time-of-flight mass spectrometry combined with solid phase microextraction as a powerful tool for quantification of ethyl carbamate in fortified wines. The case study of Madeira wine. J. Chromatogr. A. 2010;1217:3441–3445. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2010.03.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Sánchez-Palomo E., Trujillo M., Ruiz A.G., Viñas M.A.G. Aroma profile of malbec red wines from La Mancha region: Chemical and sensory characterization. Food Res. Int. 2017;100:201–208. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2017.06.036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Lytra G., Tempere S., Le Floch A., de Revel G., Barbe J.-C. Study of Sensory Interactions among Red Wine Fruity Esters in a Model Solution. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013;61:8504–8513. doi: 10.1021/jf4018405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Pereira A.C., Reis M.S., Saraiva P.M., Marques J.C. Analysis and assessment of Madeira wine ageing over an extended time period through GC-MS and chemometric analysis. Anal. Chim. Acta. 2010;660:8–21. doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2009.11.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Campo E., Ferreira V., Escudero A., Marqués J.C., Cacho J. Quantitative gas chromatography-olfactometry and chemical quantitative study of the aroma of four Madeira wines. Anal. Chim. Acta. 2006;563:180–187. doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2005.10.035. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Mendes B., Gonçalves J., Câmara J.S. Effectiveness of high-throughput miniaturized sorbent- and solid phase microextraction techniques combined with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis for a rapid screening of volatile and semi-volatile composition of wines—A comparative study. Talanta. 2012;88:79–94. doi: 10.1016/j.talanta.2011.10.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Pereira A.C., Reis M.S., Saraiva P.M., Marques J.C. Madeira wine ageing prediction based on different analytical techniques: UV–vis, GC-MS, HPLC-DAD. Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 2011;105:43–55. doi: 10.1016/j.chemolab.2010.10.009. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Pereira V., Cacho J., Marques J.C. Volatile profile of Madeira wines submitted to traditional accelerated ageing. Food Chem. 2014;162:122–134. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.04.039. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Câmara J.S., Alves M.A., Marques J.C. Changes in volatile composition of Madeira wines during their oxidative ageing. Anal. Chim. Acta. 2006;563:188–197. doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2005.10.031. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Perestrelo R., Fernandes A., Albuquerque F.F., Marques J.C., Câmara J.S. Analytical characterization of the aroma of Tinta Negra Mole red wine: Identification of the main odorants compounds. Anal. Chim. Acta. 2006;563:154–164. doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2005.10.023. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Câmara J.S., Marques J.C., Alves M.A., Silva Ferreira A.C. 3-Hydroxy-4,5-dimethyl-2(5H)-furanone levels in fortified Madeira wines: Relationship to sugar content. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004;52:6765–6769. doi: 10.1021/jf049547d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Câmara J.S., Marques J.C., Alves A., Ferreira A.C.S. Heterocyclic acetals in Madeira wines. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2003;375:1221–1224. doi: 10.1007/s00216-003-1818-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Alves R.F., Nascimento A.M.D., Nogueira J.M.F. Characterization of the aroma profile of Madeira wine by sorptive extraction techniques. Anal. Chim. Acta. 2005;546:11–21. doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2005.05.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Perestrelo R., Barros A.S., Câmara J.S., Rocha S.M. In-depth dearch focused on furans, lactones, volatile phenols, and acetals as potentialage markers of Madeira wines by comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography with time-of-flight mass spectrometry combined with solid phase microextraction. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2011;59:3186–3204. doi: 10.1021/jf104219t. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Mellon F.A. CHROMATOGRAPHY|Combined Chromotography and Mass Spectrometry. Encycl. Food Sci. Nutr. 2003:1294–1301. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Câmara J.S., Alves M.A., Marques J.C. Development of headspace solid-phase microextraction-gas chromatography–mass spectrometry methodology for analysis of terpenoids in Madeira wines. Anal. Chim. Acta. 2006;555:191–200. doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2005.09.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Câmara J.S., Herbert P., Marques J.C., Alves M.A. Varietal flavour compounds of four grape varieties producing Madeira wines. Anal. Chim. Acta. 2004;513:203–207. doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2004.01.024. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Pereira V., Albuquerque F.M., Ferreira A.C., Cacho J., Marques J.C. Evolution of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) and furfural (F) in fortified wines submitted to overheating conditions. Food Res. Int. 2011;44:71–76. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2010.11.011. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Pereira V., Leça J.M., Gaspar J.M., Pereira A.C., Marques J.C. Rapid determination of sotolon in fortified wines using a miniaturized liquid-liquid extraction followed by LC-MS/MS analysis. J. Anal. Methods Chem. 2018;2018:1–7. doi: 10.1155/2018/4393040. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Cejudo-Bastante M.J., Durán E., Castro R., Rodríguez-Dodero M.C., Natera R., García-Barroso C. Study of the volatile composition and sensory characteristics of new Sherry vinegar-derived products by maceration with fruits. LWT—Food Sci. Technol. 2013;50:469–479. doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2012.08.022. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Lee S.-J., Noble A.C. Characterization of odor-active compounds in Californian chardonnay wines using GC-olfactometry and GC-mass spectrometry. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003;51:8036–8044. doi: 10.1021/jf034747v. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Spínola V., Perestrelo R., Câmara J.S., Castilho P.C. Establishment of Monstera deliciosa fruit volatile metabolomic profile at different ripening stages using solid-phase microextraction combined with gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. Food Res. Int. 2015;67:409–417. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2014.11.055. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Agnihotri V.K., Agarwal S.G., Dhar P.L., Thappa R.K., Kapahi B.K., Saxena R.K., Qazi G.N. Essential oil composition of Mentha pulegium L. growing wild in the north-western Himalayas India. Flavour Fragr. J. 2005;20:607–610. doi: 10.1002/ffj.1497. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Choi H.-S. Lipolytic effects of citrus peel oils and their components. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006;54:3254–3258. doi: 10.1021/jf052409j. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Mallia S., Fernández-García E., Olivier Bosset J. Comparison of purge and trap and solid phase microextraction techniques for studying the volatile aroma compounds of three European PDO hard cheeses. Int. Dairy J. 2005;15:741–758. doi: 10.1016/j.idairyj.2004.11.007. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Gürbüz O., Rouseff J.M., Rouseff R.L. Comparison of aroma volatiles in commercial Merlot and Cabernet Sauvignon wines using gas chromatography−olfactometry and gas chromatography−mass spectrometry. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006;54:3990–3996. doi: 10.1021/jf053278p. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kim T.H., Shin J.H., Baek H.H., Lee H.J. Volatile flavour compounds in suspension culture ofAgastache rugosa Kuntze (Korean mint) J. Sci. Food Agric. 2001;81:569–575. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.845. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Culleré L., Escudero A., Cacho J., Ferreira V. Gas chromatography-olfactometry and chemical quantitative study of the aroma of six premium quality Spanish aged red wines. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004;52:1653–1660. doi: 10.1021/jf0350820. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Zhao Y., Xu Y., Li J., Fan W., Jiang W. Profile of volatile compounds in 11 brandies by headspace solid-phase microextraction followed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. J. Food Sci. 2009;74:C90–C99. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2008.01029.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Bertagnolli S.M.M., Bernardi G., Donadel J.Z., Fogaça A.D.O., Wagner R., Penna N.G. Natural sparkling guava wine: Volatile and physicochemical characterization. Ciência Rural. 2017;47 doi: 10.1590/0103-8478cr20151509. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Fazzalari F.A. Compilation of odor and taste threshold values data. American Society for Testing and Materials; West Conshohocken, PA, USA: 1978. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Ferreira V., Aznar M., López R., Cacho J. Quantitative gas chromatography-olfactometry carried out at different dilutions of an extract. Key differences in the odor profiles of four high-quality Spanish aged red wines. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2001;49:4818–4824. doi: 10.1021/jf010283u. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Ferreira V., López R., Cacho J. Quantitative determination of the odorants of young red wines from different grape varieties. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2000;80:1659–1667. doi: 10.1002/1097-0010(20000901)80:11&#x0003c;1659::AID-JSFA693&#x0003e;3.0.CO;2-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Guth H. Quantitation and sensory studies of character impact odorants of different white wine varieties. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1997;45:3027–3032. doi: 10.1021/jf970280a. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Peinado R.A., Moreno J.A., Muñoz D., Medina M., Moreno J. Gas chromatographic quantification of major volatile compounds and polyols in wine by direct injection. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004;52:6389–6393. doi: 10.1021/jf049369o. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Ribéreau-Gayon P., Glories Y., Maujean A., Dubourdieu D. Handbook of Enology, The Chemistry of Wine: Stabilization and Treatments: Second Edition. Volume 2. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.; Chichester, UK: 2006. [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Acree T., Arn H. Flavornet Home Page. [(accessed on 14 February 2019)]; Available online: http://www.flavornet.org/
  • 39.Díaz-Maroto M.C., Guchu E., Castro-Vázquez L., de Torres C., Pérez-Coello M.S. Aroma-active compounds of American, French, Hungarian and Russian oak woods, studied by GC–MS and GC–O. Flavour Fragr. J. 2008;23:93–98. doi: 10.1002/ffj.1859. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Ducruet V., Fournier N., Saillard P., Feigenbaum A., Guichard E. Influence of packaging on the aroma stability of strawberry syrup during shelf life. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2001;49:2290–2297. doi: 10.1021/jf0012796. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.El-Sayed A.M. The Pherobase: Database of insect pheromones and semiochemicals. [(accessed on 7 July 2018)]; Available online: http://www.pherobase.com.
  • 42.Fan W., Qian M.C. Characterization of aroma compounds of Chinese “Wuliangye” and “Jiannanchun” liquors by aroma extract dilution analysis. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006;54:2695–2704. doi: 10.1021/jf052635t. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Genovese A., Gambuti A., Piombino P., Moio L. Sensory properties and aroma compounds of sweet Fiano wine. Food Chem. 2007;103:1228–1236. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2006.10.027. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Giri A., Osako K., Okamoto A., Ohshima T. Olfactometric characterization of aroma active compounds in fermented fish paste in comparison with fish sauce, fermented soy paste and sauce products. Food Res. Int. 2010;43:1027–1040. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2010.01.012. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Leffingwell D., Leffingwell J.C. Odor detection thresholds of GRAS flavor chemicals. [(accessed on 1 July 2018)]; Available online: http://www.leffingwell.com.
  • 46.Silva H.O., Guedes De Pinho P., Machado B.P., Hogg T., Marques J.C., Câmara J.S., Albuquerque F., Silva Ferreira A.C. Impact of forced-aging process on Madeira wine flavor. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2008;56:11989–11996. doi: 10.1021/jf802147z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Sacks G.L., Gates M.J., Ferry F.X., Lavin E.H., Kurtz A.J., Acree T.E. Sensory threshold of 1,1,6-trimethyl-1,2-dihydronaphthalene (TDN) and concentrations in young Riesling and Non-Riesling wines. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2012;60:2998–3004. doi: 10.1021/jf205203b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Moreno J.A., Zea L., Moyano L., Medina M. Aroma compounds as markers of the changes in sherry wines subjected to biological ageing. Food Control. 2005;16:333–338. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2004.03.013. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Pereira V., Santos M., Cacho J., Marques J.C. Assessment of the development of browning, antioxidant activity and volatile organic compounds in thermally processed sugar model wines. LWT. 2017;75:719–726. doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2016.10.022. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Perestrelo R., Rodriguez E., Câmara J.S.J.S. Impact of storage time and temperature on furanic derivatives formation in wines using microextraction by packed sorbent tandem with ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography. LWT—Food Sci. Technol. 2017;76:40–47. doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2016.10.041. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.van Den Dool H., Dec. Kratz P. A generalization of the retention index system including linear temperature programmed gas—liquid partition chromatography. J. Chromatogr. A. 1963;11:463–471. doi: 10.1016/S0021-9673(01)80947-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Perestrelo R., Silva C., Silva P., Câmara J.S. Unraveling Vitis vinifera L. grape maturity markers based on integration of terpenic pattern and chemometric methods. Microchem. J. 2018;142:367–376. doi: 10.1016/j.microc.2018.07.017. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Kang W., Xu Y., Qin L., Wang Y. Effects of different β-D-glycosidases on bound aroma compounds in Muscat grape determined by HS-SPME and GC-MS. J. Inst. Brew. 2010;116:70–77. doi: 10.1002/j.2050-0416.2010.tb00400.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Click here for additional data file. (333.5KB, pdf)

Articles from Molecules are provided here courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

RESOURCES