w i n e M A K IN G
1400.00
a)
600.00
500.00
1000.00
Concentration (ug/L)
Concentration (ug/L)
1200.00
800.00
600.00
Cross-cut exposed
Parallel exposed
400.00
5-methylfurfural (0.67)
gallic acid (0.70)
0.00
Week
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Figure 2: Time course of furfural extraction
from cross-cut and parallel-exposed wood
(Experiment 1). The cross-cut exposure
extraction solution was changed after
removing the fifth sample.
vanillic acid (1.43)
syringaldehyde (1.58)
Figure 1: a) Structures of furfural (0.46), and
vanillin (1.21). b) 5-methylfurfural (0.67),
gallic acid (0.70), vanillic acid (1.43), and
syringaldehyde (1.58).
CA: Tim OLSON
MERCIER
Tel. (707) 321 9640
tim@mercierbarrels.com
22 p r acti c al w i ne ry & v i n e yard JANUARY 20 14
300.00
200.00
100.00
200.00
b)
400.00
compounds. Marta Cano-Lopez demonstrated that tasters could detect differences in finished wine exposed to
different formats of barrel alternatives
such as powder, shavings and cubes,
with the effect being most pronounced
after six months, indicating a different
rate of release of flavor compounds from
each barrel alternative format.9
Our goal was to determine the relative
contribution of cross-cut grain exposure
to the rate of extraction of flavor molecules from toasted oak. By applying
epoxy to seal one type of grain (cross-cut
0.00
0
Week
2
4
6
8
10
12
Figure 3: Time course of vanillin extraction
from cross-cut exposed wood (Experiment
1). Extraction solution was changed after
removing the fifth sample.
or parallel) on toasted oak cubes, we
were able to separately measure extraction from the cross-cut axis and the parallel axis of oak cubes.
Two different experiments were conducted: The first on a smaller scale with
equivalent masses of oak and measurement of furfural and vanillin by SPMEGC-MS. The second experiment used
equivalent masses and surface areas of
oak (but different grain exposures), larger
sample volume, more frequent sampling
and monitoring of a larger number of
molecules by HPLC in order to measure
