Aroma contribution of individual esters has been studied in complex mixtures mimicking red wine models. A mixture containing 14 ethyl esters at concentrations found in wine (V1) was prepared and kept as reference. Isointense and qualitatively similar aroma vectors with a reduced number of esters (V2-V7) were prepared. Those vectors were introduced in two reconstituted wines to assess whether simpler vectors could replace V1 without compromising wine quality. In the simpler young wine model, V1 could be replaced by a vector containing just 3 odorants (ethyl 2-methylbutyrate, ethyl butyrate and hexanoate). In the oaky model, a vector containing just ethyl 2-methylbutyrate (V7) could replace V1 without any discernible sensory change. Results also reveal that sub- or perithreshold odorants play outstanding roles on the overall odour intensity of the mixture and that aroma simplification concomitantly implies an increase in the amount of odorant required to keep the intensity of the aroma vector.

Although perceptual interactions are usually mentioned and blamed for the difficulties in understanding the relationship between odorant composition and aromatic sensory properties, they are poorly defined and categorised. Furthermore, old classifications refer mainly to effects on the odour intensity of the mixture of dissimilar non-blending odours and do not consider odour blending, which is one of the most relevant and influential perceptual interactions. Beginning with the results from classical studies about odour interaction, a new and simple systematic is proposed in which odour interactions are classified into four categories: competitive, cooperative, destructive and creative. The first categories are most frequent and display a mild level of interaction, being characterised mostly by analytical processing. The last two are less frequent and activate (or deactivate) configurational processes of object recognition with deep effects on the quality and intensity of the perception. These interactions can be systematically applied to interpret the formation of sensory descriptors from the odorant composition, suggesting that qualitatively the system works. However, there is a lack of quantitative data to work with odour intensities reliably, and a pressing need to systematise the effects of creative interactions.

This review discusses the different approaches developed by researchers in the last 40 years for the qualitative and semi-quantitative screening of odorants, with special emphasis in wine aroma profiling. In the first part, the aims and possibilities of Gas chromatography-olfactometry (GC-O) as odour-screening and aroma profiling technique are discussed. The critical difference between approaches is whether the ranking of odorants is carried out on an extract containing all the odorants present in the product, or on an extract representative of the odorants contained in the vapour phases that cause the odour and flavour. While the second alternative is more direct and can be more efficient, it requires a good understanding of the factors affecting orthonasal olfaction, handling volatiles (purging, trapping, eluting, and separating) and about the sensory assessment of GC effluents. The review also includes an updated list compiling all the odorants detected in wine by GC-O, including retention indexes and odour descriptions with a general guideline for the identification of odorants.

The use of non-Saccharomyces strains in aerated conditions has proven effective for alcohol content reduction in wine during lab-scale fermentation. The process has been scaled up to 20 L batches, in order to produce lower alcohol wines amenable to sensory analysis. Sequential instead of simultaneous inoculation was chosen to prevent oxygen exposure of Saccharomyces cerevisiae during fermentation, since previous results indicated that this would result in increased acetic acid production. In addition, an adaptation step was included to facilitate non-Saccharomyces implantation in natural must. Wines elaborated with Torulaspora delbrueckii or Metschnikowia pulcherrima in aerated conditions contained less alcohol than control wine (S. cerevisiae, non-aerated). Sensory and aroma analysis revealed that the quality of mixed fermentations was affected by the high levels of some yeast amino acid related byproducts, which suggests that further progress requires a careful selection of non-Saccharomyces strains and the use of specific N-nutrients.