Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jul 7;11(14):2007.
doi: 10.3390/foods11142007.

Effect of Deacidification Treatment on the Flavor Quality of Zaosu Pear-Kiwifruit Wine

Xueshan Yang  1   2 , Xinyuan Song  1 , Liu Yang  1 , Jie Zhao  1 , Xia Zhu  1   2
Affiliations

Effect of Deacidification Treatment on the Flavor Quality of Zaosu Pear-Kiwifruit Wine

Xueshan Yang et al. Foods. .

Abstract

Conventional pear-kiwifruit wine has a bland flavor and sour taste, because of excessive l-malic acid content and, consequently, little consumer appeal. An Oenococcus oeni strain, GF-2, has good malolactic fermentation (MLF) performance and high glucosidase activity. Through a Box-Behnken design, the optimum MLF parameters for deacidification by GF-2 were determined: initial pH of 3.4, 5% v/v inoculation, and temperature of 20 °C, which reduced the malic acid content by 98.3%. The changes in the content of organic acids, polyphenols, and aromatic compounds after MLF were compared with chemical deacidification. MLF significantly decreased the total concentration of organic acids by 29.7% and promoted the accumulation of aromatic esters, higher alcohols, and terpenoids, but chemical deacidification markedly decreased aromatic compound content by 59.8%. MLF wine achieved the highest sensory scores for aroma, taste, and overall acceptability. Therefore, MLF with O. oeni GF-2 has great potential to markedly improve the quality of commercial pear-kiwifruit wine.

Keywords: Oenococcus oeni; chemical composition; malolactic fermentation; pear–kiwifruit wine; sensory evaluation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Effects of malolactic fermentation parameters by Oenococcus oeni strain GF-2 on total conversion of l-malic acid in pear–kiwifruit wine: (A) initial pH; (B) malolactic fermentation temperature; (C) amount of O. oeni inoculum. Error bars indicate the SD (n = 3). Values with different letters are significantly different (p < 0.05) among the samples.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Response surface and contour plots for total conversion of l-malic acid in pear–kiwifruit wine as a function of the independent variables: (A) effect of the initial pH and malolactic fermentation temperature; (B) effect of the initial pH and inoculation amount; (C) effect of the malolactic fermentation temperature and inoculation amount.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Deacidification modulates organic acid and polyphenol accumulation in pear–kiwifruit wine: (A) organic acid; (B) polyphenol. Mixed juice: pear and kiwifruit juice at the blend ratio of 60:40. AF wine: pear–kiwifruit juice co-inoculated with Saccharomyces cerevisiae ES488 and Metschnikowia. pulcherrima 346. MLF wine: AF wine inoculated with Oenococcus oeni strain GF-2. CD wine: wine chemically deacidified by 1.0 g/L Na2CO3, 1.0 g/L K2CO3, and 5.0 g/L KHC4H4O6. Data are the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. The same symbols with different letters represent significant differences (p < 0.05).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Effects of deacidification treatment on aromatic profile of pear–kiwifruit wine: (A) commonly and uniquely aroma compounds in pear–kiwifruit juice and corresponding wines with and without deacidification treatment; (B) total concentration of aroma compounds; (C) esters; (D) alcohols; (E) volatile fatty acids; (F) terpenoids. Error bars indicate the SD (n = 3). Values with different letters are significantly different (p < 0.05) among the samples.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Sensory characteristics of pear–kiwifruit wine with and without deacidification treatment: (A) fruit wine samples; (B) sensory profiles obtained for AF wine (—), MLF wine (—), and CD wine (—); ns = not significant, ** p < 0.01, values with different letters are significantly different among the samples; (C) principal component analysis for check-all-that-apply attributes; n = 36.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Zhang S.L., Xie Z.H. Current status, trends, main problems and the suggestions on development of pear industry in China. J. Fruit Sci. 2019;36:1067–1072. doi: 10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.20190033. - DOI
    1. Song X.Y., Li J.C., Yang X.S., Zhu X. Effects of different blended ratios on aroma compounds of Zaosu pear-kiwi mixed fruit wine. Food Ferment Sci. Technol. 2021;57:39–50.
    1. FAO Statistics of Kiwifruit Area Harvested, Production and Yields in Countries Around yhe World, FAOSTAT, Food and Agriculture Organization. 2019. [(accessed on 22 June 2020)]. Available online: http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?q=KIWI&d=FAO&f=itemCode%3a592.
    1. Huang C.H., Tao J.J., Liao G.L., Xie M., Qu X.Y., Chen L., Xu X.B. Dynamic changes of phenol and antioxidant capacity during fruit development of three Actinidia species (kiwifruit) Sci. Hortic. 2020;273:109571. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2020.109571. - DOI
    1. Cai L.Q., Wang W.J., Tong J.W., Fang L.P., He X.F., Xue Q., Li Y.H. Changes of bioactive substances in lactic aci-d bacteria and yeasts fermented kiwifruit extract during the fermentation. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 2022;164:113629. doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2022.113629. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources