Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research

Research Article

The Effect of Pre-Veraison Smoke Exposure of Grapes on Phenolic Compounds and Smoky Flavour in Wine

Table 2

Phenolic analytes concentration (μg/kg) in grapes sampled at pre-veraison.


Cultivar	Vineyard†	Bwt (g)	SyGG	MSyGG	PhRG	GuRG	CrRG	MGuRG	Gu	o-cresol	m-cresol

Chardonnay	A	0.47 ± 0.03	1.9 ± 0.30	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	1.3 ± 0.20	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ
	B‡	0.39 ± 0.01	2.3 ± 0.10	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	1.1 ± 0.10	<LoQ	<LoQ	1.0 ± 1.0	<LoQ
	C	0.43 ± 0.02	75 ± 2.7	11 ± 1.5	1.7 ± 0.7	2.9 ± 0.10	3.4 ± 0.20	5.2 ± 1.3	<LoQ	2.0 ± 2.0	<LoQ
	D	0.45 ± 0.13	2.3 ± 0.30	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	1.6 ± 0.60	<LoQ	<LoQ	1.0 ± 1.0	<LoQ
	E	0.55 ± 0.02	13 ± 2.5	1.2 ± 0.10	<LoQ	1.0 ± 0.20	1.5 ± 0.50	1.4 ± 0.6	<LoQ	1.0 ± 1.0	<LoQ
	G	0.40 ± 0.01	120 ± 43	15 ± 3.7	4.4 ± 3.6	7.3 ± 2.8	6.4 ± 3.3	11 ± 3.8	1.7 ± 1.5	3.0 ± 2.6	1.7 ± 1.5
	J	0.41 ± 0.01	160 ± 43	14 ± 4.2	3.5 ± 1.4	5.2 ± 1.4	6.9 ± 0.80	7.4 ± 1.6	2.0 ± 1.0	4.0 ± 2.0	2.0 ± 1.0
	K	0.48 ± 0.01	21 ± 5.0	1.9 ± 0.20	1.3 ± 0.6	1.6 ± 0.20	2.1 ± 0.20	1.8 ± 0.2	<LoQ	1.3 ± 1.2	<LoQ

Pinot noir	A	0.41 ± 0.02	1.3 ± 0.20	<LoQ	<LoQ	1.2 ± 0.10	1.7 ± 0.20	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ
	B‡	0.39 ± 0.02	1.0 ± 0.10	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	1.1 ± 0.20	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ
	C	0.39 ± 0.05	29 ± 6.0	2.4 ± 0.60	3.0 ± 2.0	5.0 ± 1.4	4.0 ± 1.0	3.4 ± 1.5	<LoQ	1.3 ± 1.2	<LoQ
	D	0.37 ± 0.02	1.9 ± 0.10	<LoQ	1.1 ± 0.6	<LoQ	1.6 ± 0.20	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ
	E	0.55 ± 0.04	12 ± 4.2	<LoQ	1.5 ± 0.9	1.8 ± 0.60	2.6 ± 0.70	1.3 ± 0.6	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ
	G	0.38 ± 0.04	96 ± 22	6.9 ± 1.3	13 ± 5.2	22 ± 3.0	19 ± 2.1	16 ± 1.8	1.0 ± 1.0	2.3 ± 1.5	1.0 ± 1.0
	H	0.45 ± 0.04	81 ± 18	4.8 ± 0.90	14 ± 10	14 ± 1.4	19 ± 4.7	11 ± 5.0	1.3 ± 1.2	3.7 ± 2.3	1.3 ± 1.2
	L	0.43 ± 0.04	55 ± 4.7	5.1 ± 1.4	10 ± 6.6	13 ± 1.0	13 ± 2.1	8.0 ± 3.4	1.0 ± 1.0	2.7 ± 1.5	<LoQ

Shiraz	A‡	0.43 ± 0.04	1.8 ± 0.05	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ
	B	0.38 ± 0.02	1.8 ± 0.28	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ
	C	0.41 ± 0.00	51 ± 6.1	8.7 ± 0.98	1.0 ± 0.30	2.6 ± 0.10	2.4 ± 0.40	4.4 ± 0.90	2.0 ± 2.0	1.7 ± 1.5	<LoQ
	D	0.44 ± 0.05	2.9 ± 0.44	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ	<LoQ
	F	0.48 ± 0.04	37 ± 7.1	5.8 ± 1.9	<LoQ	2.1 ± 0.2	1.6 ± 0.50	3.0 ± 1.4	1.7 ± 1.5	1.0 ± 1.0	<LoQ
	G	0.36 ± 0.07	120 ± 53	21 ± 8.6	2.5 ± 1.6	7.5 ± 5.1	5.9 ± 3.7	14 ± 8.1	2.0 ± 1.0	1.7 ± 1.5	<LoQ
	I	0.33 ± 0.05	94 ± 11	16 ± 2.2	2.0 ± 0.70	4.8 ± 0.30	4.6 ± 0.4	7.6 ± 2.0	2.7 ± 0.58	1.3 ± 1.2	<LoQ
	K	0.35 ± 0.04	51 ± 3.1	9.6 ± 1.3	1.2 ± 0.40	3.5 ± 0.40	3.0 ± 0.50	5.0 ± 1.6	2.3 ± 0.60	1.7 ± 1.2	<LoQ

Mean values ± standard deviation (n = 3). All phenolic glycoside values are expressed as syringol gentiobioside equivalents. Bwt, berry weight; Ph, phenol; Gu, guaiacol; Cr, cresol; Sy, syringol; MGu, 4-methylguaiacol; MSy, 4-methylsyringol; GG, gentiobiosides; RG, rutinoside; LoQ, limit of quantitation = 1 μg/kg. Values for the analytes, 4-methylguaiacol, p-cresol, syringol and 4-methylsyringol were below LoQ for all samples. †: for details of vineyard code, see Table 1. ‡: control block selected for comparison; : significantly higher than selected control using Dunnett’s means comparison test ().