Ci a ion: Gomis-Bellmun , A.;
Cla e , A.; Puig-Pujol, A.;
Pé ez-Elo ondo, F.J.; Gue e o, L.
De elopmen o a Desc ip i e P o ile
and Re e ences o he Assessmen o
Tas e and Mou h eel Desc ip o s o
P o ec ed Designa ion o O igin
Wines. Foods 2022,11, 2970.
h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/
oods11192970
Academic Edi o s: De ek V. By ne
and Hildega de Heymann
Recei ed: 10 Augus 2022
Accep ed: 19 Sep embe 2022
Published: 22 Sep embe 2022
Publishe ’s No e: MDPI s ays neu al
wi h ega d o ju isdic ional claims in
published maps and ins i u ional a il-
ia ions.
Copy igh : © 2022 by he au ho s.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Swi ze land.
This a icle is an open access a icle
dis ibu ed unde he e ms and
condi ions o he C ea i e Commons
A ibu ion (CC BY) license (h ps://
c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/
4.0/).
oods
A icle
De elopmen o a Desc ip i e P o ile and Re e ences o he
Assessmen o Tas e and Mou h eel Desc ip o s o P o ec ed
Designa ion o O igin Wines
Anna Gomis-Bellmun 1, Anna Cla e 2, Anna Puig-Pujol 1,2 , F ancisco JoséPé ez-Elo ondo 3
and Luís Gue e o 2,*
1Ca alan Ins i u e o Vine and Wine (INCAVI), Plaça Àgo a 2, 08720 Vila anca del Penedès, Spain
2Food Quali y and Technology, Ins i u e o Ag i ood Resea ch and Technology (IRTA), Finca Camps i A me ,
17121 Monells, Spain
3Labo a o io de Análisis Senso ial Euskal He iko Unibe si a ea (LASEHU), Lac ike Resea ch G oup,
Uni e sidad del País Vasco/Euskal He iko Unibe si a ea (UPV/EHU), Cen o de in es igación Lasca ay
Ike gunea, A enida Miguel de Unamuno 3, 01006 Vi o ia-Gas eiz, Spain
*Co espondence: lluis.gue [email p o ec ed]; Tel.: +34-972630052
Abs ac :
P oduce s o PDO (P o ec ed Designa ion o O igin) wines mus submi o he EU au ho i-
ies’ echnical speci ica ions ha include he speci ic senso y desc ip ion o each p oduc ypology,
o be subsequen ly checked by he compe en au ho i y in each coun y. Un o una ely, he e is no
consensual and s anda dized app oach o he de elopmen o senso y con ol me hods o PDO
wines. The aim o his wo k was o de elop a senso y p o ile o he as e and mou h eel desc ip o s
ha allows he cha ac e iza ion o wines om 11 exis ing PDOs in Ca alonia (Spain), and wi h he
pu pose o ad ancing he p ocess o ha moniza ion o he o icial senso y analysis o wines. This
pape includes he selec ion p ocess o as e s, he p ocedu e used o he de ini ion and g ouping o
desc ip o s, and he de elopmen o e e ences o he selec ed a ibu es. The use o his analy ical
ool should allow PDO/PGI p oduc ce i ica ion and con ol au ho i ies o e i y compliance wi h
hei speci ica ions (desc ip i e and quan i a i e) based on objec i ely e alua ed esul s.
Keywo ds:
ha moniza ion; acc edi a ion; assesso s’ selec ion; as e s aining; TCA; o icial me hod;
senso y analysis
1. In oduc ion
Wine is an ancien alcoholic be e age oo ed in social, cul u al, and economic li e in
many places ac oss he wo ld. The wo ld’s su ace a ea comp ising ineya ds is es ima ed
o be 7.3 million hec a es and he wo ld’s global p oduc ion o wine is 260 million hec o-
li e s [
1
]. Howe e , consume s’ beha io and he ma ke s a egies adop ed a e di e en
in he so-called “Old Wo ld” coun ies (coun ies wi h a long adi ion o p oduc ion and
consump ion) and “New Wo ld” coun ies (mo e ecen p oduce s wi h limi ed consump-
ion habi s) [
2
,
3
]. The Old Wo ld coun ies p o ec , by legisla ion, he o igin o he wine
(associa ed wi h he geog aphical a ea o he ineya d) h ough he c ea ion o igu es
such as he P o ec ed Geog aphical Indica ion (PGI) o P o ec ed Designa ion o O igin
(PDO). New Wo ld coun ies ha e de eloped a di e en ia ion s a egy based on g ape
a ie ies [
4
]. Howe e , as epo ed by De ancesco e al. [
4
], he e is an eme ging deba e
on he app op ia eness o his g ape a ie y-based app oach and he endency o New
Wo ld coun ies o in oduce p o ec ed Geog aphical Indica ions (GIs) as addi ional quali y
signals linked o e oi . In ac , acco ding o Josling [
5
], p o ec ed geog aphical indica ions
can be a s a egic ool o wine p oduce s wishing o p o ide consume s wi h quali y ma ks
and in luence hei pu chasing decisions.
In gene al, consume s ha e a posi i e a i ude owa d p oduc s wi h collec i e quali y
labels, such as he P o ec ed Designa ion o O igin (PDO) o P o ec ed Geog aphical
Foods 2022,11, 2970. h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/ oods11192970 h ps://www.mdpi.com/jou nal/ oods
Foods 2022,11, 2970 2 o 17
Indica ion (PGI), bo h linked o he o igin o he p oduc [
6
]. In he same ein, G une and
Aachmann [
7
] also obse ed a a o able consume a i ude owa d PDO-labeled p oduc s,
who gene ally ind hem pa icula ly a ac i e and e alua e hem posi i ely. Wi h he aim
o p o ec ing consume s, Eu opean egula ions seek o ensu e ha p oduc s labeled wi h a
PDO, in addi ion o being p oduc s linked o a speci ic e i o y o hei p oduc ion and
p ocessing, o e a le el o p oduc quali y, which mus mee he physico-chemical and
senso y cha ac e is ics speci ic o he a ea om which hey o igina e. Thus, p oduce s o
PDO ood p oduc s and wines mus p esen EU au ho i ies a echnical speci ica ion o hei
p oduc s, which includes senso y desc ip ions acco ding o Regula ion (EU) 1308/2013 [
8
].
Mo eo e , he egula ion es ablishes ha he bodies in cha ge o con olling PDOs should
be acc edi ed in acco dance wi h he ISO s anda d 17065 [
9
], and he senso y labo a o ies
ha analyze hese p oduc s should be acc edi ed in acco dance wi h he ISO s anda d
17025 [
10
], which means he gua an ee and demons a ion o he echnical compe ence o
he labo a o y, as well as he me hod used. Pé ez-Elo ondo e al. [
11
] analyzed he s a us o
he implemen a ion o his o icial senso y con ol and highligh ed he need o ha monize a
s anda d me hodology o he senso y es ing o PDO-labeled p oduc s. To comply wi h
Eu opean egula ions and o check whe he a ce ain p oduc (wine) sa is ies he expec ed
senso y cha ac e is ics, desc ip i e senso y analysis is essen ial. Bo h acc edi ed senso y
labo a o ies and as ing panels belonging o he PDO Regula o y Councils use hei own
me hod, which may o may no be simila o o he s. Thus, un o una ely, he e is no
consensual and s anda dized app oach o he de elopmen o senso y con ol me hods o
PDO wines and, he e o e, he e is an e iden need o ha monize he me hodology, echnical
c i e ia, e e ences, and app op ia e lexicon o e e o each a ibu e analyzed [11–13].
Recen ly, Pé ez-Elo ondo and Zannoni [
14
] p o ided gene ic guidelines o he sen-
so y analysis o PDO ood p oduc s, including c i e ia and ecommenda ions. In any case
and ega dless o he app oach conside ed, an essen ial p elimina y s ep is o desc ibe
he senso y cha ac e is ics and he use o app op ia e e minology o he p oduc s o
be con olled.
Desc ip i e senso y analysis has been applied o many p oduc s and has been s udied
by a ious au ho s [
15
–
17
], who ag ee ha i is he mos powe ul ool o his pu pose,
since i allows bo h quan i a i e and quali a i e aspec s o he p oduc o be add essed.
The key poin o his echnique is he implemen a ion p ocess, which Mu ay e al. [
15
]
e e ed o as a desc ip i e senso y p og am. This p ocess includes he s ages o selec ing a
panel o conduc senso y e alua ions, he de e mina ion o a senso y language by which o
desc ibe p oduc a ibu es, aining he panel, and he alida ion o he panel o quan i y
he p oduc a ibu es in a eliable way. Lawless and Heymann [
17
] summa ized he
implemen a ion in h ee s eps: aining o he panelis s, de e mining panelis pe o mance
du ing aining, and e alua ing he samples. The selec ion o panelis s mus be ounded on
ac o s such as commi men and mo i a ion, a ailabili y, educa ion, and he pe sonali y
o he pa icipan s o be selec ed— ac o s ha au ho s such as Gue e o [
18
] conside
o be c ucial, in addi ion o hei senso y/physiological abili ies. To his end, he e a e
au ho s who ha e p oposed he use o di e en ini ial es s o de ec bo h he ap i udes
and he mo i a ion o judges [
18
,
19
]. Once he panel membe s ha e been selec ed, he
nex phase is he gene a ion o he a ibu es o e ms o be e alua ed in he p oduc , bo h
using he exis ing nomencla u e o he p oduc when a ailable and by gene a ing he
di e en e ms o be assessed by means o he new panel [
17
]. The nex s ep, concep
o ma ion, aims o consolida e he es ablished lexicon and o ha monize i s applica ion so
ha all as e s can use i in he same way. This s age in ol es coming o a consensus o
he in insic e e ences o all as e s and adap ing hem o he p oduc o be e alua ed [
15
].
The mos demanding pa —especially in he wo ld o wine, whe e he e is ex ensi e and
idiosync a ic use o he senso y ocabula y—is likely ag eeing on he objec i e meaning
o each desc ip o . Tas e s should be ac i ely in ol ed in he whole p ocess, so ha hei
e e ences a e bo h quali a i e ( he p esence o absence o a ce ain s imuli acco ding o
hei indi idual h eshold) and quan i a i e (poin s on he in ensi y scale) [
15
,
20
]. Fo
Foods 2022,11, 2970 3 o 17
his pu pose, di e en in ensi y scales should be used o de e mine he sui abili y o each
possible e e ence s anda d [
17
,
21
]. As s a ed by Rainey [
22
], e e ence s anda ds a e he
bes way o ensu e ha he sco es gi en by a panel a e objec i e and compa able. The
las s ep when building a desc ip i e p o ile is o selec and desc ibe how o p oceed wi h
he analysis o he samples. De eloping a common senso y me hodology o e alua e any
ype o wine, ega dless o i s o igin, is also a key poin , since he way he p oduc is
p epa ed and as ed has a no iceable e ec on he pe cei ed senso y a ibu es and on hei
in ensi y [15–17,23].
The aim o his wo k was o de elop a senso y desc ip i e p o ile ha allows he
cha ac e iza ion o wines om he 11 exis ing PDOs in Ca alonia (Spain) in an objec i e
and eliable way. Al hough he wo k has ocused on he Ca alan PDOs, i can se e
as a e e ence guide in subsequen simila asks, acili a ing i s implemen a ion in new
as ing panels and PDOs. This wo k also ocuses on g ouping unde he same e m, ague
o e en hedonic desc ip o s ha some imes appea in he speci ica ions and hinde he
ha moniza ion p ocess. Due o he la ge numbe o a ibu es o be included, his pape
ocuses exclusi ely on as e and mou h eel desc ip o s, wi h mou h eel e e ing o sapid
sensa ions ac i a ed by ee ne e endings o he igeminal ne e and as e meaning
gus a o y sensa ions de ec ed by specialized epi helial ecep o cells on he ongue [
23
].
To he bes o ou knowledge, his wo k is he i s o simul aneously p o ide a de ailed
desc ip ion o a ibu e selec ion, a ibu e educ ion, and e e ence s anda d de elopmen
o a la ge g oup o PDO wines (bo h quali a i ely and quan i a i ely).
The whole documen aims o help o he labs and/o PDOs o de elop and implemen
a senso y me hodology, p o iding hem wi h all o he ele an in o ma ion o go a s ep
u he in he ha moniza ion p ocess o he senso y analysis o wines, in ag eemen wi h
Pé ez-Elo ondo e al. [11].
2. Ma e ials and Me hods
2.1. Rec ui men and Selec ion o Tas e s
Candida es we e ec ui ed om as e s who we e membe s o exis ing panels in
Ca alan PDOs. The call was ex ended o oenologis s, sommelie s, and o he p o essionals
om he wine sec o h oughou Ca alonia. A p elimina y selec ion p ocess was ca ied
ou by means o wo sessions o h ee hou s each, aimed a e alua ing he candida es’
psychological and physiological ap i udes [
18
]. In addi ion, he candida es’ objec i e
knowledge o wine was also ob ained. Fo he isual acui y phase, he Ishiha a es [
24
]
and he online X- i e Colo es IQ exe cise [
25
] we e pe o med. A scaling exe cise was
also ca ied ou [
26
], as well as an odo and as e ecogni ion es acco ding o he ISO
s anda d [
27
,
28
] and PROP s a us [
29
]. The speci ic selec ion consis ed o ou sessions
o h ee hou s each. Du ing he i s wo sessions, he mean de ec ion h eshold o he
g oup o candida es was de e mined o ou di e en wine a ibu es ( h ee ol ac o y
and one gus a o y), acco ding o he me hod desc ibed by he In e na ional Oli e Oil
Council [
30
] adap ed o wine. The ol ac o y a ibu es e alua ed we e 2,4,6- ichlo oanisole
(Sigma-Ald ich, Ge many), blackbe y a oma (SOSA, Ba celona, Spain), and 4-e hylphenol
(Me ck, Ge many), while he e alua ed as e a ibu e was acidi y (ci ic acid solu ion).
These a ibu es we e selec ed acco ding o hei ele ance in wine [
31
,
32
], hei easiness o
s anda diza ion, and he a ailabili y o in o ma ion in he li e a u e abou hem in e ms o
h esholds. Once he mean h esholds o he g oup o candida es we e ob ained, a speci ic
sc eening es was ca ied ou acco ding o he in ensi y a ing me hod o each o he ou
a ibu es [30] in wo sessions, e alua ing wo a ibu es pe session.
2.2. Selec ion o Tas e and Mou h eel A ibu es
To selec he a ibu es o be included in he senso y p o ile, he o icial echnical
speci ica ions o he 11 P o ec ed Designa ions o O igin (PDOs) included in he p esen
s udy we e examined. A o al o 37 di e en wine ypologies we e iden i ied, some o hem
common o se e al PDOs. Thus, combining wine ypology and PDOs, a o al o 114 wine
Foods 2022,11, 2970 4 o 17
ypes we e ob ained (e.g., Aged oséwine PDO Ca alunya and Aged oséwine PDO Conca
de Ba be à) (Table 1).
Table 1.
Types o wines included om he echnical speci ica ions o he 11 Ca alan P o ec ed
Designa ions o O igin.
Wine Typology P o ec ed Designa ion o O igin
1 Whi e wine a, d, e, , g, h, i, j, k
2 Young whi e wine b, c
3 Low-alcoholic whi e wine b
4 Aged whi e wine b, c
5 Whi e wine e men ed in ba els on lees e
6 Whi e wine aged in wood e, i
7 Roséwine a, d, e, , g, h, i, j, k
8 Young oséwine b, c
9 Low-alcoholic oséwine b
10 Aged oséwine b, c
11 Roséwine e men ed in ba els on lees e
12 Roséwine aged in wood e
13 Red wine a, d, e, h, i, k
14 Young ed wine b, c, , g, j
15 Low-alcoholic ed wine b
16 Aged ed wine b, c, , g, j
17 Red wine e men ed in ba els on lees e
18 Red wine aged in wood e, i
19 Quali y spa kling wine a, c, d, e, g, h, j
20 Vi d’agulla (spa kling wine) a, b, c, d, e, g, h, j
21 Liqueu wine/ o i ied wine a, b, c, d, g, k
22 Na u al swee wine c, , h, i, k
23 Swee liqueu wine i
24 Ranci wine (desse wine wi h oxida i e no es) c, , h, i, j, k
25 Swee Ranci (swee wine wi h oxida i e no es) i
26 Mis ela (swee wine) c, h, j
27 Whi e mis ela (swee wine) e, , i, k
28 Red mis ela (swee wine) e, , i, k
29 Ga na xa (swee wine) e, , j
30 Mosca ell (swee wine) e, j
31 Classic DO Ta agona (desse wine) j
32 Sac amen al wine j
33 Swee wine e
34 La e-ha es wine ( om o e ipe g apes) e, g, i
35 Vimblanc (swee wine) , i, j
36 Dolç de ed (ice wine) g
37 Vi de inca (single- ineya d wine) i
a: PDO Alella; b: PDO Ca alunya; c: PDO Conca de Ba be à; d: PDO Cos e s del Seg e; e: PDO Empo dà; : PDO
Mon san ; g: PDO Penedès; h: PDO Pla de Bages; i: PDO P io a ; j: PDO Ta agona; k: PDO Te a Al a.
The a ibu es used by each PDO o desc ibe each ype o wine we e loca ed in hei
co esponding senso y modali y o allow ease o wo k (appea ance, odo , la o , as e, and
mou h eel). Fo each o he modali ies, he o iginal desc ip o s e ained hei o iginal name
om he o icial echnical speci ica ions o he PDO p oduc s and we e summa ized in a
able, so ha he ows con ained he ype o wine ( he 37 ypologies desc ibed in Table 1)
and he columns con ained he PDO o o igin. This pape ocuses only on he a ibu es o
he as e and mou h eel modali ies.
To selec he a ibu es o e ain, h ee wo king sessions we e ca ied ou wi h he
30 as e s, each las ing h ee hou s. In each session, he as e s we e di ided andomly
in o i e g oups o six people. The sessions we e spli in o wo pa s. In he i s pa ,
each g oup had a summa y able o all o he desc ip o s o he as e and mou h eel
modali ies on a shee o DIN A2 pape . They also had he echnical speci ica ions o
all o he PDOs as suppo ma e ial. Then, hey we e asked o g oup he desc ip o s
Foods 2022,11, 2970 5 o 17
based on hei pe cei ed simila i y, wi h he aim o iden i ying synonyms and unclea and
subjec i e e ms, and educing he numbe o a ibu es o a p ac ical and manageable
le el. A e his, each g oup had o name each as e o mou h eel based on hei own g oup
o a ibu es and had o y o de ine i . To pe o m his ask, he as e s elied on hei
own senso y knowledge and pe sonal expe ience. They also had addi ional in o ma ion
such as oenology books [
23
,
33
–
36
] and a lap op wi h in e ne access. In he second pa o
each session, an open discussion was held be ween he six g oups, led by he panel leade .
The discussion ocused on eaching a consensus abou he as e and mou h eel desc ip o s
o be e ained, hei de ini ion, and he associa ed synonyms (e.g., ough o as ingen )
o subjec i e e ms. I is impo an o no e he necessi y o main aining he ela ionship
be ween he name selec ed o a gi en a ibu e and i s synonyms as, some imes, hese
synonyms a e he e ms ha appea in he echnical speci ica ions o he PDOs. In he las
wo king session, wo nume ical o mulas we e de ined o e alua e balance and chemical
complexi y. These wo o mulas we e compu ed om he a ibu es al eady assessed.
The a ibu es ha we e e ained we e swee ness, acidi y, sal y as e, as ingency,
s uc u e, balance, chemical complexi y, alcohol in eg a ion, and p esence and in eg a ion
o ca bon dioxide. Acco ding o he demands o he echnical speci ica ions and he
eques ed in o ma ion by he di e en Regula o y Councils, swee ness, acidi y, sal y as e,
as ingency, and s uc u e we e assessed by means o a quan i a i e scale; meanwhile,
balance, chemical complexi y, alcohol in eg a ion, and p esence and in eg a ion o ca bon
dioxide we e assessed h ough quali a i e a iables (dicho omic o ca ego ical).
2.3. De elopmen o Re e ences
The de elopmen o e e ences was pe o med in di e en s eps. Fi s , he main com-
pounds ha could po en ially be used o ep esen each a ibu e and hei concen a ions
o co e he usual ange o in ensi ies pe cei ed in he wine [
23
,
36
–
38
] we e iden i ied.
Acco ding o he da abase o he 11 PDOs in ol ed in his s udy, he acidi y o mos o he
wines anged be ween 3.0 and 8.0 g/L, exp essed as a a ic acid, and he concen a ion o
o al suga s (glucose + uc ose) be ween 0.0 and 39.0 g/L. This in o ma ion was conside ed
as an indica o o he no mal concen a ion anges when p epa ing he senso y e e ences
o acidi y and swee ness. I is wo h men ioning ha in he case o swee wines, he suga
concen a ion can each up o 150 g/L [39–41].
A he same ime, he sui abili y o ou possible ma ices o adding he di e en
compounds was quali a i ely assessed. These ma ices we e aqueous, hyd oalcoholic, and a
syn he ic wine wi h o wi hou annins. Table 2shows he compounds ha we e e alua ed
o each a ibu e and he main cha ac e is ics o he di e en ma ices a e selec ing
he mos p omising ones by p e es ing hem wi h he panel. Then, o he quan i a i e
desc ip o s, a combina ion o he di e en compounds and ma ices was assessed o i s
in ensi y and sui abili y (simila i y wi h he pe cep ion o he expec ed s imuli in a eal
sample). The in ensi y was sco ed on a 15 cm semi-s uc u ed linea scale ancho ed a he
beginning o he scale wi h 0 (unde ec able) and a 10 cm (maximum ha can be ound
in a wine), lea ing he possibili y o sco ing abo e 10 when he in ensi y o he sample
was pe cei ed as excessi e. The sui abili y was measu ed on a semi-s uc u ed linea scale
o 10 cm ancho ed in bo h ex emes wi h 0 (no sui able a all) and 10 ( o ally sui able).
The answe shee con ained he de ini ion o he a ibu e and he e ms (synonyms) ha
hey included. The as e s could add any commen s hey conside ed app op ia e. Based
on he esul s ob ained, h ee o ou in ensi y poin s o he scale o each quan i a i e
a ibu e we e e ained as e e ence s anda ds. Fo each a ibu e, h ee e alua ion sessions
we e conduc ed.
Foods 2022,11, 2970 6 o 17
Table 2. The compounds, concen a ions, and ma ices es ed o each a ibu e.
A ibu e Compound Concen a ion (g/L) Ma ix 1
Acidi y
L(+)Ta a ic Acid 99.5% (Pan eac, Ba celona, Spain) 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0 aq/HA
Ci ic Acid 99.5% (Ag o in, Ciudad Real, Spain) 4.8, 6.0, 7.2, 8.4, 9.6 aq/HA
DL-Malic Acid 99% (Pan eac-AppliChem, Ba celona, Spain) 4.4, 5.4, 6.5, 7.6, 8.7 aq/HA
MixAcid LM (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) mix o lac ic and malic acids 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0 HA
MixAcid TL (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) mix o a a ic and lac ic acids 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0 HA
MixAcid TM (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) mix o a a ic and malic acids 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0 HA
MixAcid TLM (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) mix o a a ic, malic, and lac ic acids
3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0 HA
Swee ness
D(+)-Glucose (Pan eac-AppliChem, Ba celona, Spain)
D(+)-Glucose (Pan eac-AppliChem, Ba celona, Spain)
1.6, 3.1, 4.7, 6.3, 7.8
15.6, 46.9, 78.1, 109.3, 156.3
aq/HA
aq/HA
D(-)-F uc ose (Pan eac-AppliChem, Ba celona, Spain)
D(-)-F uc ose (Pan eac-AppliChem, Ba celona, Spain)
0.8, 1.7, 2.5, 3.3, 4.2
8.3, 25.0, 41.7, 58.3, 83.3
aq/HA
aq/HA
Rec i ied Concen a e G ape Mus , 64.7◦B ix, 874.10 g/L suga (Concen ados
Palleja, S.L., Ta agona, Spain)
Rec i ied Concen a e G ape Mus , 64.7◦B ix, 874.10 g/L suga (Concen ados
Palleja, S.L., Ta agona, Spain)
1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0
10.0, 30.0, 50.0, 70.0, 100.0, 130.0
HA
HA
Rec i ied Concen a e G ape Mus , 64.7◦B ix, 874.10 g/L suga (Concen ados
Palleja, S.L., Ta agona, Spain)
3.0, 10.0, 30.0, 50.0, 85.0, 130.0 SW
As ingency
VR G ape annin (La o España, E en e ia, Spain) 0.5, 2.2, 3.6, 5.0, 6.0 aq/HA
P o an Raisin, annin (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) 0.5, 2.2, 3.6, 5.0, 6.0 aq/HA
P o an Raisin, annin (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) 0.5, 2.2, 3.6, 5.0, 6.0 SW
P o an Raisin, annin (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) 0.5, 2.2, 3.6, 5.0 SW
P o an Raisin, annin (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) 0.5, 1.5, 2.2, 3.6 SW
Sal iness
NaCl (Sha lab, Spain)/NaHCO3(Pan eac, Ba celona, Spain) 0.25/0.25, 0.50/0.50, 1.0/1.0 SW
NaCl (Sha lab, Spain)/NaHCO3(Pan eac, Ba celona, Spain)/Sodium
L-Glu ama e 1-hyd a e (Pan eac-AppliChem, Ba celona, Spain)
0.25/0.25/0.25, 0.50/0.50/0.50 SW
S uc u e
STABIVIN SP, A abic gum (La o España, E en e ia, Spain) 1.2, 1.8, 2.2 (ml/L) SW
ARABINOL HC, A abic gum (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) 1.2, 1.8, 2.2 (ml/L) SW
MANNOSTAB, mannop o ein (La o España, E en e ia, Spain) 0.3, 0.5, 0.8 SW
BATTONAGE BODY, mannop o ein (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) 0.3, 0.5, 0.8 SW
NEW CEL, ca boxime hylcelulose (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) 2.0, 2.5, 3.0 SW
OENOLEES, Polysaccha ide (La o España, E en e ia, Spain) 0.3, 0.5, 0.8 SW
MANNOSTAB, mannop o ein (La o España, E en e ia, Spain) 0.05, 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7 SWT
MANNOSTAB, mannop o ein (La o España, E en e ia, Spain) 0.05, 0.2, 0.6, 1.0, 1.4 SWT
ELEVAGE Swee , mannop o ein and p oan ocianidic annin (AEB Ibé ica,
Ba celona, Spain)
0.1, 0.2, 1.2, 2.8 SW
Alcohol
in eg a ion
E hanol 96.42% / (Alcoholes Monple SA, Ba celona, Spain) 12% / , 15% / , 18% / SWT
CO2
p esence
CO2(SodaS eam Ibe ia, Mad id, Spain) 21, 2, 3 pushes on he ca bona ing
bu on
SWT
CO2
in eg a ion
CO2(SodaS eam Ibe ia, Mad id, Spain) 22, 3, 4, 5 pushes on he
ca bona ing bu on
SWT
1
aq = mine al wa e Fon del Pla No a (San es C eus, Spain), pH = 7.74; HA: hyd oalcoholic dissolu ion
12% / , using e hanol 96.42% / (Alcoholes Monple SA, Ba celona, Spain); SW (syn he ic wine): hyd oalcoholic
dissolu ion 12% / , o al acidi y o 4
±
0.5 g/L exp essed by a a ic acid, using 7.5 mL o MixAcid TLM (AEG
Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain), and 1.7g/L o po assium bi a a e 99% (Pan eac-AppliChem, Ba celona, Spain); SWT:
hyd oalcoholic dissolu ion o 12% / , o al acidi y o 4
±
0.5 g/L exp essed by a a ic acid, using 7.5 mL
o MixAcid TLM (AEG Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain), 1.7g/L o po assium bi a a e 99% (Pan eac-AppliChem,
Ba celona, Spain), 2g/L o Rec i ied Concen a e G ape Mus (64.7
◦
B ix, 874.10 g/L o suga , Concen ados
Palleja, S.L., Ta agona, Spain), and 0.05 g/L o Tannin P o an Raisin, (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain).
2
P epa ed
in he o iginal SodaS eam bo le, le a 4
◦
C o 24 h. Ca bon dioxide was added in di e en concen a ions wi h
he spa kling wa e make SodaS eam JET (SodaS eam Ibe ia, Mad id, Spain) equipped wi h a CO2cylinde .
Fo he de elopmen o he e e ences, he g oup o 30 as e s was di ided in o
wo g oups o 15 pa icipan s each. The sessions las ed o wo hou s. Each session was
di ided in o wo pa s; he i s pa in ol ed indi idual senso y e alua ion in as ing
boo hs in a s anda dized senso y oom acco ding ISO S anda d 8589 [
42
], while he second
pa comp ised an open discussion ca ied ou in a class oom equipped wi h a sc een o
display he esul s. The samples we e p esen ed monadically in 150 mL opaque whi e
plas ic cups, a a se ing empe a u e o 20
±
2
◦
C, in he same o de o all he as e s and
we e iden i ied wi h andom h ee-digi codes.
Foods 2022,11, 2970 7 o 17
2.4. S a is ical Analysis
To de e mine he in ensi y alue o each quan i a i e e e ence and i s sui abili y,
a wo-way ANOVA was pe o med ha included he samples (di e en concen a ions)
and as e s as ixed ac o s. Tukey’s Hones ly Signi ican Di e ence (HSD) pos -hoc es
was used o explo e he exis ence o s a is ical di e ences among he concen a ion da a
(
p< 0.05
). All s a is ical analyses we e pe o med using XLSTAT so wa e, e sion 2020.1
(2020) (Addinso , Pa is, F ance).
3. Resul s
3.1. Rec ui men and Selec ion o Tas e s
The ini ial g oup o candida es was made up o 96 people, o whom 81 pa icipa ed
in he p elimina y and speci ic selec ions. Finally, he 30 indi iduals who ob ained he
bes sco es in he in ensi y a ing es and did no p esen any ema kable physiological
al e a ions we e selec ed [43].
The de ec ion h esholds o he 81 candida es in an aqueous solu ion we e be ween
0.014 and 0.420 mg/L o 4-e hylphenol, 0.015 and 0.480 g/L o ci ic acid, 0.000125
and 0.008 mL/L o blackbe y a oma, and 1 and 55 ng/L o 2,4,6- ichlo oanisole. The
iden i ica ion h esholds we e be ween 0.014 and 1.680 mg/L o 4-e hylphenol, 0.030
and 0.480 g/L o ci ic acid, 0.000125 and 0.008 mL/L o blackbe y a oma, and 4 and
64 ng/L o 2,4,6- ichlo oanisole. The inal de ec ion h esholds e ained o he in ensi y
classi ica ion me hod [
30
] we e 0.097 mg/L o 4-e hylphenol, 0.0378 g/L o ci ic acid,
0.00264 mL/L o blackbe y a oma, and 36.63 ng/L o 2,4,6- ichlo oanisole. Based on
his me hod, 3 (4%), 4 (5%), 3 (4%), and 33 (41%) candida es did no pass he es o
4-e hylphenol, ci ic acid, blackbe y a oma, and 2,4,6- ichlo oanisole, espec i ely.
3.2. Tas e and Mou h eel A ibu es
Table 3shows he a ibu es selec ed o he as e and mou h eel p o iles. In addi ion,
he able con ains he de ini ion o each desc ip o , as well as o he associa ed e ms and
he ype o wine and PDO in which i was men ioned. Te ms e e ing o a ibu es such as
acidi y, as ingency, s uc u e, and balance we e common in mos wine ypologies, wi h
pe cen ages o men ion exceeding 35%. On he con a y, a ibu es such as swee ness, CO
2
p esence and in eg a ion, alcohol in eg a ion, chemical complexi y, and sal iness we e only
men ioned in a limi ed numbe o wines (17%, 11%, 9%, 4%, and 1%, espec i ely). Mos o
hese a ibu es e e o wines ha ing dis inc i e senso y cha ac e is ics (e.g., sal iness o
swee ness) ha no mally desc ibe only a ew wine ypologies, such as swee wines. In he
case o chemical complexi y and balance, he de ini ion also includes how o compu e he
inal sco e o he a ibu e.
Table 3. Selec ed a ibu es, de ini ions, associa ed e ms, and PDOs o which he e ms belong.
A ibu es De ini ion Associa ed Te ms and Codes o he PDO and Wine Typology ha
Con ain Them 1
Acidi y/sou ness Basic as e p oduced by dilu ed aqueous solu ions o mos
acidic subs ances, e.g., ci ic, malic, and a a ic acid
Acid: g1, g7, g13, g19, g20, g34, h19, j2, j16, j20
Happy: j20
F esh: a1, a7, a20, b3, b2, b7, b20, c2, c7, c19, e1, e7, e12, e11, 29, g1, g7,
h13, h19, i1, i13, j2, j7, j14, j19, j20
Acid co e: h1, h20
As ingency Complex as e sensa ion accompanied by he concen a ion,
igh ness, and pucke ing o he skin o o al mucosa p oduced by
subs ances such as annins
As ingen : j16
Tannic: a13
Ma u e annici y: 13
Unc uous: a21, b4, b21, c4, c21, c22, e5, 29, g34, i24, i25, j26, j29, j30, j35,
j32, j31
Silky: 1, j4, j7, j14, j16
Smoo h: b16, c16, g1, g7, g13, g19, g20, i1
Mellow/honeyed: a7
Vel e y: j16
C eamy: c19, h19, j19
Tas y: b14, b15, c14
Tac ile: k (all wines)
Foods 2022,11, 2970 8 o 17
Table 3. Con .
A ibu es De ini ion Associa ed Te ms and Codes o he PDO and Wine Typology ha
Con ain Them 1
Balance/equilib ium Absence o as e edges, de e mined by he di e ence be ween
he in ensi y o swee ness and he a e age in ensi y o he
as ingency and acidi y
The esul will be in e p e ed as:
−1≤ alue ≤1: Highly balanced/equilib a ed
−2≤ alue ≤2: Medium balance/equilib ium
−4≤ alue ≤4: Unbalanced/low equilib a ed
Ha mony: j1
Nice: j19
Balanced: a13, a20, b7, b20, c19, c20, d (all wines), e1, e7, e5, e6, e11, e12,
22, 28, h13, i1, i6, i24, i25, j1, j7, j13, j16, j26, j29, j30, j35, j32, j31, k (all
wines)
Elegan : 7, h13
Fine/ e ined: a13
Hones : a (all wines), e (all wines), k (all wines)
Co ec a ack (good mou h eel): i7
P ope e olu ion: i7
Chemical Complexi y Wine called complex when i has a minimum o h ee
quan i a i e as e a ibu es wi h an in ensi y >3
In ense: j24
Complex: 22, 24, 35, j16
P esence and CO2
in eg a ion
Tac ile mou h pe cep ion caused by he p esence o bubbles P esence o ca bon dioxide: d20, j19, j20
In eg a ion o ca bon dioxide: h19, j19
Spa kling: j20
CO2well in eg a ed: h19, j19
Tac ile sensa ion o ca bon dioxide: h20
Tickling in he mou h: b20, c20, h19
Pe cep ible ca bon dioxide: d20
Sal ines Sal y-mou h sensa ion, p oduced by elemen s such as luo ine,
silicium, iodine, b omine, bo on, and manganese
Sal iness: k1
S uc u e Sensa ion in he mou h in which all o he a ibu es o ac ile
sensa ions a e added
Sump uous: h7, h20
Round: b16, c16, e5, 13, j14
Body: 24, k (all wines)
Volume: 1, h19
Full: e5
Ligh : b2, b3, b7, c2, c7, c14, h1, h20, j2, j7
Fleshy: e11
Wid h: 13, h20, j24
Ve y s uc u ed: b16, c16, h7, h13, h20, i6, i13, i22, i23, i27, i28, i34, i37
S ong: h24
Blun : 24, j24
Powe ul: a7, h7, h13, h20
Swee ness Basic as e p oduced by dilu ed aqueous solu ions o na u al o
syn he ic subs ances, such as suc ose, dex ose, and aspa ame
Swee : 27, 28, 29, h22, h26, i22, i23, i27, i28, i34, j16, j20, k22, k26,
k27, k28
D y: 24, h24, j24
Gou mand: 1, 7
Honeyed: a7
Well-in eg a ed
alcohol/wa m
In eg a ion o alcohol: Wa m sensa ion ha is in balance wi h
he o he componen s
Wa mness: The mal sensa ion in he mou h ha does no bu n
In eg a ed alcohol: a1, j16, j20, k21
Wa m: a21, b21, c21, e33, 22, k21
1
Each combina ion o le e s and numbe s indica es in which PDO and wine ypology he speci ic e m is
men ioned. a: PDO Alella; b: PDO Ca alunya; c: PDO Conca de Ba be à; d: PDO Cos e s del Seg e; e: PDO
Empo dà; : PDO Mon san ; g: PDO Penedès; h: PDO Pla de Bages; i: PDO P io a ; j: PDO Ta agona; k: PDO
Te a Al a. 1: Whi e wine; 2: Young whi e wine; 3: Low-alcoholic whi e wine; 4: Aged whi e wine; 5: Whi e wine
e men ed in ba els on lees; 6: Whi e wine aged in wood; 7: Roséwine; 8: Young oséwine; 9: Low-alcoholic
oséwine; 10: Aged oséwine; 11: Roséwine e men ed in ba els on lees; 12: Roséwine aged in wood; 13: Red
wine; 14: Young ed wine; 15: Low-alcoholic ed wine; 16: Aged ed wine; 17: Red wine e men ed in ba els
on lees; 18: Red wine aged in wood; 19: Quali y spa kling wine; 20: Vi d’agulla (spa kling wine); 21: Liqueu
wine/ o i ied wine; 22: Na u al swee wine; 23: Swee liqueu wine; 24: Ranci wine (desse wine wi h oxida i e
no es); 25: Swee Ranci (swee wine wi h oxida i e no es); 26: Mis ela wine (swee wine); 27: Whi e Mis ela wine
(swee wine); 28: Red Mis ela wine (swee wine); 29: Ga na xa wine (swee wine); 30: Mosca ell wine (swee wine);
31: Classic DO Ta agona (desse wine); 32: Sac amen al wine; 33: Swee wine; 34: La e-ha es wine; 35: Vimblanc
(swee wine); 36: Dolç de ed (ice wine); 37: Vi de inca (single- ineya d wines).
3.3. Senso y Re e ences
Table 4summa izes he selec ed compounds, inal concen a ions o each e e ence
poin and a ibu e, and he mos app op ia e ma ix o be used o each o hem. In
all cases, h ee poin s o he e e ence scales we e iden i ied (low-, medium-, and high-
in ensi y), excep o swee ness, whe eby ou di e en in ensi y poin s we e e ained.
The e we e signi ican di e ences (p< 0.05) be ween he di e en poin s o he scale o
all o he quan i a i e a ibu es. Fo he quali a i e a iables, he di e en igu es e e o
he desc ip ion o each le el. Syn he ic wine, wi h (SWT) o wi hou annins (SW), was
he mos sui able ma ix o all o he a ibu es, wi h he sole excep ion o acidi y. In he
case o acidi y, he hyd oalcoholic solu ion was sco ed as he mos app op ia e. All o he
selec ed compounds and ma ices we e hose who ob ained he highes mean alues in he
sui abili y scale. In all cases, hese mean alues we e highe han 6.
Foods 2022,11, 2970 9 o 17
Table 4.
Selec ed compounds, ma ices, and concen a ions and hei co esponding in ensi y in he
senso y sco ing scale.
A ibu e Compound Selec ed Concen a ions Exp essed in g/L
o Ca ego ies o Quali a i e Desc ip o s 1
Ma ix 3
Acidi y/sou ness MixAcid TLM (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) mix o a a ic,
malic, and lac ic acids
3.0 (3), 5.0 (5), 8.0 (8) 2HA
Swee ness Rec i ied Concen a e G ape Mus , 64.7◦B ix, 874.10 g/L o
suga (Concen ados Pallejà, S.L., Ta agona Spain)
3.0 (1), 30.0 (5), 85.0 (7), 130.0 (9) SW
As ingency P o an Raisin, annin (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) 0.5 (3), 1.5 (5), 2.2 (7) SW
Sal iness NaCl (Sha lab, Ba celona, Spain)/NaHCO3
(Pan eac-AppliChem, Ba celona, Spain)
0.25/0.25 (3), 0.50/0.50 (5), 1.0/1.0 (8) SW
S uc u e ELEVAGE Swee (g/L), mannop o ein and p oan ocianidic
annin (AEB Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain)
0.1 (2), 1.2 (5), 2.8 (7) SW
Alcohol in eg a ion
E hanol 96.42% / (Alcoholes Monple SA, Ba celona, Spain) 12% / (well in eg a ed)/18% /
(poo ly in eg a ed)
SWT
CO2p esence CO2(SodaS eam Ibe ia, Mad id, Spain) 42 pushes (p esence o CO2) SWT
CO2in eg a ion CO2(SodaS eam Ibe ia, Mad id, Spain) 42 pushes (well in eg a ed)/5 pushes
(poo ly in eg a ed)
SWT
1
In b acke s is he co esponding in ensi y o ca ego y ( o quali a i e a ibu es) in he e e ence scale.
2Bu e ed
wi h 1.7, 1.7, and 4 g/L o po assium bi a a e 99%, espec i ely (Pan eac-AppliChem, Ba celona, Spain).
3HA: hyd oalcoholic
dissolu ion 12% / , wi h e hanol 96.42% / (Alcoholes Monple SA, Ba celona, Spain);
SW (syn he ic wine): hyd oalcoholic dissolu ion 12% / , o al acidi y o 4
±
0.5 g/L exp essed by a a ic
acid, using 7.5 mL o MixAcid TLM (AEG Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain) and 1.7g/L o po assium bi a a e 99%
(Pan eac-AppliChem, Ba celona, Spain); SWT: hyd oalcoholic dissolu ion o 12% / , o al acidi y o 4
±
0.5 g/L
exp essed by a a ic acid, using 7.5 mL o MixAcid TLM (AEG Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain), 1.7g/L o po assium
bi a a e 99% (Pan eac-AppliChem, Ba celona, Spain), 2g/L o Rec i ied Concen a e G ape Mus (64.7
◦
B ix,
874.10 g/L o suga , Concen ados Palleja, S.L., Ta agona, Spain), and 0.05 g/L o Tannin P o an Raisin, (AEB
Ibé ica, Ba celona, Spain).
4
P epa ed in he o iginal SodaS eam bo le, le a 4
◦
C o 24 h. Ca bon dioxide
was added in di e en concen a ions wi h he spa kling wa e make SodaS eam JET (SodaS eam Ibe ia,
Mad id, Spain) equipped wi h a CO2cylinde .
4. Discussion
4.1. Rec ui men and Selec ion o Tas e s
The ec ui men was ca ied ou ia p o essional associa ions linked o he wine
sec o . Mos o he in e es ed candida es we e expe s om he wine sec o acco ding o
he de ini ion p o ided by ISO S anda d 5492 [
44
]. All o he candida es had p e ious
expe ience wi h wine. As expec ed, hey b ough hei own knowledge and con ibu ed
ac i ely o he e e ence de elopmen p ocess, and p obably sho ened he ime needed
o he whole p ocess. On a e age, wo as ing sessions we e needed o de elop an
a ibu e. Thei con ibu ion also suppo ed he subsequen aining p ocess and, as s a ed
by Lawless and Heymann [
17
] and Gawel e al. [
45
], made he lea ning p ocess o he
e e ences s aigh o wa d.
In he p elimina y selec ion p ocess, we conside ed he physiological and psychologi-
cal ai s o he candida es, as ecommended by se e al au ho s [
17
,
18
,
28
,
46
,
47
]. Acco ding
o hem, explo ing and assessing he pe sonali y cha ac e is ics o he candida es should
imp o e he selec ion p ocess and should acili a e subsequen g oup ac i i y. In his
ein, we we e able o de ec 15 candida es wi h p oblems o a ailabili y o lack o in e es ,
who excluded hemsel es in he nex planned sessions. Rega ding he senso y skills (e.g.,
desc ip i e and disc imina o y abili y) o he candida es, wo pe sons wi h dal onism and
one mo e wi h low as e sensi i i y and a educed iden i ica ion abili y we e excluded.
Subsequen ly, he speci ic selec ion me hod [
30
] showed ha he a ibu e in which mos
as e s ailed (41%) was in he quan i ica ion and so ing o he samples wi h
2,4,6- ichlo oanisole
(TCA). This compound, in addi ion o ha ing a low senso y h eshold (4.6–5 ng/L in wa e ,
6.7–10 ng/L in d y whi e wine, and 7.1 ng/L in d y ed wine acco ding o C a e o e al. [
48
]
and Juanola e al. [
31
]), is a po en supp esso o ol ac o y signal ansduc ion a low
concen a ions [
49
,
50
] and no mally causes panelis a igue [
48
]. Despi e hese p oblems,
in ou opinion, including TCA in a selec ion p ocess is a wise decision conside ing ha
his compound is p esen in mo e han 80% o ain ed o spoiled wine, champagne, and
spi i samples collec ed om p oduce s and e u ned bo les [
31
]. In ou case, he s a ing
Foods 2022,11, 2970 16 o 17
45. Gawel, R. The use o language by ained and un ained expe ienced wine as e s. J. Sens. S ud. 1997,12, 267–284. [C ossRe ]
46. Roge s, L. Senso y Panel Managemen . A P ac ical Handbook o Rec ui men T aining and Pe o mance; Else ie : Dux o d, UK, 2018.
47.
S one, H.; Bleibaum, R.N.; Thomas, H.A. Senso y E alua ion P ac ices, 5 h ed.; Else ie : Ams e dam, The Ne he lands; Academic
P ess: London, UK, 2020. [C ossRe ]
48.
C a e o, M.C.; Bonello, F.; Al a ez, M.D.C.P.; Tsolakis, C.; Bo sa, D. The senso y e alua ion o 2,4,6- ichlo oanisole in wines. J.
Ins . B ew. 2015,121, 411–417. [C ossRe ]
49.
Takeuchi, H.; Ka o, H.; Ku ahashi, T. 2,4,6-T ichlo oanisole is a po en supp esso o ol ac o y signal ansduc ion. P oc. Na l.
Acad. Sci. USA 2013,110, 16235–16240. [C ossRe ]
50.
Takeuchi, H.; Ku ahashi, T. Ol ac o y ansduc ion channels and hei modula ion by a ie ies o ola ile subs ances. In Tas e and
Smell. Topics in Medicinal Chemis y; K au wu s , D., Ed.; Sp inge : Cham, Swi ze land, 2016. [C ossRe ]
51.
Cha onne , P.; Dubou dieu, D.; Boid on, J.N.; Pons, M. The o igin o e hylphenols in wines. J. Sci. Food Ag ic.
1992
,60, 165–178.
[C ossRe ]
52. Hoehl, K.; Schoenbe ge , G.U.; Busch-S ock isch, M. S imulus and ecogni ion h esholds o he basic as es in deionized wa e .
A e he ecommenda ions o ci ic acid oo high? E nah . Umsch. 2014,61, 130–136. [C ossRe ]
53.
Moje , J.; Ch is -Hazelho , E.; Heidema, J. Tas e Pe cep ion wi h Age: Gene ic o Speci ic Losses in Th eshold Sensi i i y o he
Fi e Basic Tas es? Chem. Senses 2001,26, 845–860. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
54. S one, H. Senso y e alua ion by quan i a i e desc ip i e analysis. Food Technol. 1974,28, 24–34.
55.
Gawel, R.; Obe hols e , A.; F ancis, I.L. A “Mou h- eel Wheel”: Te minology o communica ing he mou h- eel cha ac e is ics o
ed wine. Aus . J. G ape Wine Res. 2000,6, 203–207. [C ossRe ]
56.
Picke ing, G.J.; Demiglio, P. The whi e wine mou h eel Wheel: A lexicon o desc ibing he o al sensa ions elici ed by whi e wine.
J. Wine Res. 2008,19, 51–67. [C ossRe ]
57.
Sáenz-Na ajas, M.P.; A izcu i, J.M.; Balles e , J.; Fe nández-Zu bano, P.; Fe ei a, V.; Pey on, D.; Valen in, D. Senso y-ac i e
compounds in luencing wine expe s’ and consume s’ pe cep ion o ed wine in insic quali y. Food Sci. Technol.
2015
,60, 400–411.
[C ossRe ]
58.
Sáenz-Na ajas, M.P.; A izcu i, J.M.; Fe e o-del-Teso, S.; Valen in, D.; Fe ei a, V.; Fe nández-Zu bano, P. Chemo-senso y
cha ac e iza ion o ac ions d i ing di e en mou h eel p ope ies in ed wines. Food Res. In . 2017,94, 54–64. [C ossRe ]
59.
Kemp, B.; T ussle , S.; Willwe h, J.; Inglis, D. Applying empo al check-all- ha -apply (TCATA) o mou h eel and ex u e
p ope ies o ed wines. J. Sens. S ud. 2019,34, e12503. [C ossRe ]
60.
Eu opean Union. Commission Delega ed Regula ion (EU) 2019/33 o 17 Oc obe 2018 supplemen ing Regula ion (EU)
No 1308/2013 o he Eu opean Pa liamen and o he Council as ega ds applica ions o p o ec ion o designa ions o o igin,
geog aphical indica ions and adi ional e ms in he wine sec o , he objec ion p ocedu e, es ic ions o use, amendmen s
o p oduc speci ica ions, cancella ion o p o ec ion, and labelling and p esen a ion. In O icial Jou nal o he Eu opean Union;
Eu opean Union: B ussels, Belgium, 2019; pp. 2–45. A ailable online: h p://da a.eu opa.eu/eli/ eg_del/2019/33/oj (accessed
on 26 July 2022).
61.
Hu nagel, J.C.; Ho mann, T. Quan i a i e econs uc ion o he non ola ile sensome abolome o a ed wine. J. Ag ic. Food Chem.
2008,56, 9190–9199. [C ossRe ]
62.
E aio, I.; Albisu, M.; Ojeda, M.; Gil, P.F.; Salme ón, J.; Pé ez-Elo ondo, F.J. Senso y quali y con ol o ood ce i ica ion: A case
s udy on wine. Me hod de elopmen . Food Con ol 2010,21, 533–541. [C ossRe ]
63. Cha e s, S.; Pe ig ew, S. The dimensions o wine quali y. Food Qual. P e e . 2007,18, 997–1007. [C ossRe ]
64.
Spence, C.; Wang, Q.J. Wha does he e m ‘complexi y’ mean in he wo ld o wine? In . J. Gas on. Food Sci.
2018
,14, 45–54.
[C ossRe ]
65.
Tempè e, S.; Ma chal, A.; Ba be, J.C.; Bely, M.; Masneu -Poma ede, I.; Ma ullo, P.; Albe in, W. The complexi y o wine: Cla i ying
he ole o mic oo ganisms. Appl. Mic obiol. Bio echnol. 2018,102, 3995–4007. [C ossRe ]
66.
Meillon, S.; Viala, D.; Medel, M.; U bano, C.; Guillo , G.; Schlich, P. Impac o pa ial alcohol educ ion in Sy ah wine on pe cei ed
complexi y and empo ali y o sensa ions and link wi h p e e ence. Food Qual. P e e . 2010,21, 732–740. [C ossRe ]
67.
Pa , W.V.; Mou e , M.; Blackmo e, S.; Pelques -Hun , T.; U dapille a, I. Rep esen a ion o complexi y in wine: In luence o
expe ise. Food Qual. P e e . 2011,22, 647–660. [C ossRe ]
68.
Fe ei a, V.; López, R.; Cacho, J.F. Quan i a i e de e mina ion o he odo an s o young ed wines om di e en g ape a ie ies. J.
Sci. Food Ag ic. 2000,80, 1659–1667. [C ossRe ]
69.
Ame ine, M.A.; Roessle , E.B.; Ough, C.S. Acids and he Acid Tas e. I. The E ec o pH and Ti a able Acidi y. Am. J. Enol. Vi ic.
1965,16, 29–37.
70.
Fon oin, H.; Saucie , C.; Teissed e, P.L.; Glo ies, Y. E ec o pH, e hanol and acidi y on as ingency and bi e ness o g ape seed
annin oligome s in model wine solu ion. Food Qual. P e e . 2008,19, 286–291. [C ossRe ]
71. Pangbo n, R.M. Tas e In e ela ionships. J. Food Sci. 1960,25, 245–256. [C ossRe ]
72.
Pangbo n, R.M.; Ough, C.S.; Ch isp, R.B. Tas e in e ela ionship o suc ose—Ta à ic acid, and ca eine in whi e able wine. Am. J.
Enol. Vi ic. 1964,15, 154–161.
73.
Szczesniak, A.S.; B and , M.A.; F iedman, H.H. De elopmen o s anda d a ing scales o mechanical pa ame e s o ex u e and
co ela ion be ween he objec i e and he senso y me hods o ex u e e alua ion. J. Food Sci. 1963,28, 397–403. [C ossRe ]
Foods 2022,11, 2970 17 o 17
74.
Sáenz-Na ajas, M.P.; A izcu i, J.M.; Fe ei a, V.; Fe nández-Zu bano, P. Insigh s on he chemical basis o he as ingency o
Spanish ed wines. Food Chem. 2012,134, 1484–1493. [C ossRe ]
75.
McMahon, K.M.; Diako, C.; Aplin, J.; Ma inson, D.S.; Cul e , C.; Ross, C.F. T ained and consume panel e alua ion o spa kling
wines swee ened o b u o demi sec esidual suga le els wi h h ee di e en suga s. Food Res. In .
2017
,99, 173–185. [C ossRe ]
76. Ough, C.S.; Ame ine, M.A. Me hods o Analysis o Mus s and Wines, 2nd ed.; John Wiley and Sons: New Yo k, NY, USA, 1988.
77. Polasko a, P.; He szage, J.; Ebele , S.E. Wine la o : Chemis y in a glass. Chem. Soc. Re . 2008,37, 2478–2489. [C ossRe ]
78.
Reade , H.P.; Dominguez, M. Fo i ied wines: She y, po and Madei a. In Fe men ed Be e age P oduc ion, 1s ed.; Lea, A.G.H.,
Piggo , J.R., Eds.; Sp inge : Bos on, MA, USA, 1995; pp. 159–207. [C ossRe ]
79.
Robichaud, J.L.; Noble, A.C. As ingency and bi e ness o selec ed phenolics in wine. J. Sci. Food Ag ic.
1990
,53, 343–353.
[C ossRe ]
80.
Vidal, S.; Cou coux, P.; F ancis, L.; Kwia kowski, M.; Gawel, R.; Williams, P.; Cheynie , V. Use o an expe imen al design app oach
o e alua ion o key wine componen s on mou h- eel pe cep ion. Food Qual. P e e . 2004,15, 209–217. [C ossRe ]
81.
Vidal, S.; F ancis, L.; Williams, P.; Kwia kowski, M.; Gawel, R.; Cheynie , W.; Wa e s, E. The mou h- eel p ope ies o polysaccha-
ides and an hocyanins in a wine like medium. Food Chem. 2004,85, 519–525. [C ossRe ]
82.
Hu nagel, J.C.; Ho mann, T. O osenso y-di ec ed iden i ica ion o as ingen mou h eel and bi e - as ing compounds in ed wine.
J. Ag ic. Food Chem. 2008,56, 1376–1386. [C ossRe ]
83. Gawel, R. Red wine as ingency: A e iew. Aus . J. G ape Wine Res. 1998,4, 74–95. [C ossRe ]
84.
Gawel, R.; Smi h, P.A.; Cice ale, S.; Keas , R. The mou h eel o whi e wine. C i . Re . Food Sci. Nu .
2017
,58, 2939–2956. [C ossRe ]
[PubMed]
85.
Guise, R.; Filipe-Ribei o, L.; Nascimen o, D.; Bessa, O.; Nunes, F.M.; Cosme, F. Compa ison be ween di e en ypes o ca -
boxylme hylcellulose and o he oenological addi i es used o whi e wine a a ic s abiliza ion. Food Chem.
2014
,156, 250–257.
[C ossRe ]
86.
King, E.S.; Heymann, H. The E ec o Reduced Alcohol on he Senso y P o iles and Consume P e e ences o Whi e Wine. J. Sens.
S ud. 2014,29, 33–42. [C ossRe ]
87.
Soa es, S.; B andão, E.; Ma eus, N.; de F ei as, V. Senso ial p ope ies o ed wine polyphenols: As ingency and bi e ness. C i .
Re . Food Sci. Nu . 2015,57, 937–948. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
88.
De Lo yn, L.C.; Pe ie, P.R.; Has ed, A.M.; Johnson, T.E.; Collins, C.; Bas ian, S.E.P. E alua ion o senso y h esholds and
pe cep ion o sodium chlo ide in g ape juice and wine. Am. J. Enol. Vi ic. 2014,65, 124–133. [C ossRe ]
89.
Jo dão, A.M.; Vilela, A.; Cosme, F. F om Suga o G ape o Alcohol o Wine: Senso ial Impac o Alcohol in Wine. Be e ages
2015
,
1, 292–310. [C ossRe ]
90.
McMahon, K.M.; Cul e , C.; Cas u a, J.C.; Ross, C.F. Pe cep ion o ca bona ion in spa kling wines using desc ip i e analysis (DA)
and empo al check-all- ha -apply (TCATA). Food Qual. P e e . 2017,59, 14–26. [C ossRe ]
91.
McMahon, K.M.; Cul e , C.; Ross, C.F. The p oduc ion and consume pe cep ion o spa kling wines o di e en ca bona ion
le els. J. Wine Res. 2017,28, 123–134. [C ossRe ]
92.
Descoins, C.; Ma hlou hi, M.; Le Moual, M.; Hennequin, J. Ca bona ion moni o ing o be e age in a labo a o y scale uni wi h
on-line measu emen o dissol ed CO2.Food Chem. 2006,95, 541–553. [C ossRe ]
93.
Lige -Belai , G. The Physics and Chemis y behind he Bubbling P ope ies o Champagne and Spa kling Wines: A S a e-o - he-A
Re iew. J. Ag ic. Food Chem. 2005,53, 2788–2802. [C ossRe ]
