Influence of Yeast and Enzyme Formulation on Prosecco Wine Aroma During Storage on Lees

This study investigated the impact of two yeast strains (SP665 and CGC62) and glucanase enzyme treatments (A-D) on the secondary fermentation kinetics and aroma profile of sparkling Prosecco wines. The strains exhibited markedly different fermentation behaviors: SP665 induced rapid refermentation, reaching 8.5 bar in 46 days, while CGC62 showed a slower fermentation rate, reaching 6.5 bar in 64 days. Despite these kinetic differences, basic enological parameters after refermentation and following three months of lees aging were similar for both strains. A total of 66 volatile compounds across various chemical families were identified and quantified. Principal component analysis (PCA) revealed that aging time (T1 vs. T2) was the main driver of variability (50.74% of total variance), with SP665 and CGC62 wines showing distinct profiles. At T1, SP665 wines had higher levels of acetate esters and norisoprenoids, while CGC62 wines were richer in volatile sulfur compounds (VSCs) and monoterpenoids. At T2, SP665 wines showed increased levels of carbon disulfide, higher alcohols, and ethyl butanoate, whereas CGC62 wines retained higher concentrations of varietal compounds and certain esters. The effect of glucanase enzymes varied depending on yeast strain and aging stage. Enzyme treatments, especially C (β-glucanase) and D, influenced the concentration of several aroma compounds, particularly in CGC62 wines, enhancing varietal aromas and esters. However, the impact on SP665 wines was more limited and emerged primarily after aging. Although differences in aroma composition were statistically significant, most changes were below olfactory perception thresholds. Overall, glucanase enzymes and yeast selection influenced aroma development, though their effects may have limited sensory relevance.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Beverages
Published
2026-01-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/beverages12010008
Primary Topic
Fermentation and Sensory Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Influence of Yeast and Enzyme Formulation on Prosecco Wine Aroma During Storage on Lees

Anita Boscaini, Jessica Anahi Samaniego Solis, Andrea Dal Cin, Naíssa Prévide Bernardo et al.
Beverages
Fermentation and Sensory Analysis
article

Influence of Yeast and Enzyme Formulation on Prosecco Wine Aroma During Storage on Lees

Anita Boscaini, Jessica Anahi Samaniego Solis, Andrea Dal Cin, Naíssa Prévide Bernardo, Giovanni Luzzini, Davide Slaghenaufi, Olga Cuevas i Melis, Maurizio Ugliano, Vittorio Zandonà
article en

Abstract

This study investigated the impact of two yeast strains (SP665 and CGC62) and glucanase enzyme treatments (A-D) on the secondary fermentation kinetics and aroma profile of sparkling Prosecco wines. The strains exhibited markedly different fermentation behaviors: SP665 induced rapid refermentation, reaching 8.5 bar in 46 days, while CGC62 showed a slower fermentation rate, reaching 6.5 bar in 64 days. Despite these kinetic differences, basic enological parameters after refermentation and following three months of lees aging were similar for both strains. A total of 66 volatile compounds across various chemical families were identified and quantified. Principal component analysis (PCA) revealed that aging time (T1 vs. T2) was the main driver of variability (50.74% of total variance), with SP665 and CGC62 wines showing distinct profiles. At T1, SP665 wines had higher levels of acetate esters and norisoprenoids, while CGC62 wines were richer in volatile sulfur compounds (VSCs) and monoterpenoids. At T2, SP665 wines showed increased levels of carbon disulfide, higher alcohols, and ethyl butanoate, whereas CGC62 wines retained higher concentrations of varietal compounds and certain esters. The effect of glucanase enzymes varied depending on yeast strain and aging stage. Enzyme treatments, especially C (β-glucanase) and D, influenced the concentration of several aroma compounds, particularly in CGC62 wines, enhancing varietal aromas and esters. However, the impact on SP665 wines was more limited and emerged primarily after aging. Although differences in aroma composition were statistically significant, most changes were below olfactory perception thresholds. Overall, glucanase enzymes and yeast selection influenced aroma development, though their effects may have limited sensory relevance.

BeveragesVol. 12(1)
University of Verona (IT), Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 96%
Fermentation and Sensory Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.