Jump to Main Content
Carbon isotope compositions of whole wine, wine solid residue, and wine ethanol, determined by EA/IRMS and GC/C/IRMS, can record the vine water status—a comparative reappraisal
- Spangenberg, Jorge E., Zufferey, Vivian
- Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry 2019 v.411 no.10 pp. 2031-2043
- Vitis vinifera, carbon, combustion, ethanol, freeze drying, gas chromatography, grapes, leaf water potential, mass spectrometry, red wines, stable isotopes, sugars, vines, wine cultivars
- Recently, we reported that the carbon isotope composition of the solid residues obtained by freeze-drying white and red wines (δ¹³CWSR) could be used for tracing the water status of the vines whose grapes were used to produce them. Here, we compare different methods using δ¹³C values of other wine components, particularly those of whole wine (δ¹³CWW) obtained by elemental analysis and isotope ratio mass spectrometry (EA/IRMS) and of wine ethanol (δ¹³CWEₜOH) obtained by gas chromatography/combustion/IRMS (GC/C/IRMS), for their suitability to assess the vine water status. The studied wines were obtained from field-grown cultivars (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Chasselas, Petite Arvine, and Pinot noir) under different water treatments during the 2009–2014 seasons and were the same wines in which the δ¹³CWSR was measured previously. The EA/IRMS method for whole wine used two successive EA analytical cycles in each acquisition period to reduce the residence time of the sample capsules in the autosampler. The sample aliquots for the EA/IRMS and GC/C/IRMS analyses were optimized for peak-size differences less than 10% between the sample and reference gas. For all wine varieties, the δ¹³CWW and δ¹³CWEₜOH values were linearly correlated with the predawn leaf water potential (Ψₚd) and therefore serve as reliable indicators of vine water status, as do the δ¹³C values for must sugars and wine solid residues. The strongest negative correlations with Ψₚd were for δ¹³Cₛᵤgₐᵣₛ (r = −0.94, n = 54) and δ¹³CWEₜOH (r = −0.91) and were lower but still highly significant (p < 0.00001) for δ¹³CWW (r = −0.71) and δ¹³CWSR (r = −0.70). An evaluation of the advantages and drawbacks of the different methods is presented, showing that the δ¹³C analysis of wine ethanol by GC/C/IRMS is the most appropriate.