Flavor Chemistry — Chapter 12: Fermentation and Post-Fermentation Factors Affecting Odor-Active Sulfur Compounds during Wine Bottle Storage
Flavor Chemistry — Chapter 12: Fermentation and Post-Fermentation Factors Affecting Odor-Active Sulfur Compounds during Wine Bottle Storage

Flavor Chemistry — Chapter 12: Fermentation and Post-Fermentation Factors Affecting Odor-Active Sulfur Compounds during Wine Bottle Storage

Annotation

Sulfur compounds are not a single sensory category. Preserving one desirable compound may also preserve an unwanted one. Matrix and fermentation history limit transfer to whiskey; lead author affiliated with a closure producer. Fresh September28: PDF188 Figures2/3 show an unexplained roughly tenfold disagreement in low-glutathione six-month H2S controls. Do not select a definitive effect size; accelerated storage also does not reproduce the real-aging DMS magnitudes.

Challenges Claims
Context

Separate Shiraz and Sauvignon Blanc experiments, not one combined treatment. The highest nitrogen level differed from the intermediate level; the storage experiment used one closure type with differing oxygen exposure. Figures PDF187–188.

Excerpt ID
3133
Excerpt Text

Nitrogen treatment during Shiraz fermentation affected later dimethyl sulfide formation. In a Sauvignon Blanc storage experiment, low oxygen helped retain desirable 3-MH but also favored hydrogen sulfide and methanethiol; glutathione treatment increased hydrogen sulfide after six months.

Locator End

192

Locator Start

181

Locator Type
Page
Originating Working Notes
Page (text)
Source
No access
Source Section

Chapter 12; PDF-page numbering

Supports Claims
Verification Notes

September28: full chapter freshly read and relevant figures/tables inspected. Paraphrase remains a bounded source representation; new numerical/method qualifications added. PDF locators retained.

Verification Status
Verified

No access

Evidence

Nitrogen treatment during Shiraz fermentation affected later dimethyl sulfide formation. In a Sauvignon Blanc storage experiment, low oxygen helped retain desirable 3-MH but also favored hydrogen sulfide and methanethiol; glutathione treatment increased hydrogen sulfide after six months.

Location and context

Maurizio Ugliano, Paul A. Henschke, and Elizabeth J. Waters. Chapter 12: Fermentation and Post-Fermentation Factors Affecting Odor-Active Sulfur Compounds during Wine Bottle Storage. Supplied PDF 181–192.

Separate Shiraz and Sauvignon Blanc experiments, not one combined treatment. The highest nitrogen level differed from the intermediate level; the storage experiment used one closure type with differing oxygen exposure. Figures PDF187–188.

Annotation

Sulfur compounds are not a single sensory category. Preserving one desirable compound may also preserve an unwanted one. Matrix and fermentation history limit transfer to whiskey; lead author affiliated with a closure producer.

Fresh September 28 qualification: PDF188 Figures2/3 show an unexplained roughly tenfold disagreement in low-glutathione six-month H2S controls. Do not select a definitive effect size; accelerated storage also does not reproduce the real-aging DMS magnitudes.

Flavor Chemistry — Chapter 12 — PDF 181–192Flavor Chemistry — Chapter 12 — PDF 181–192

Verification checklist

Original paraphrase checked against the full chapter.
Canonical source and literature-note relations present.
PDF locator and study context recorded.
Limitations distinguished from findings.

Verified as an accurate representation of this source, not an independent replication of its results.