Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
1 Introduction
Malolactic fermentation (MLF, or "malo") is an important winemaking process
conducted on most red grape wines and some white grape wines. It is also used
with some fruit wines. The following article gives information concerning the
conditions necessary for MLF, its affects, prevention, progress, suitable wine type
candidates for it and yeast compatibility.
Pediococcus
cerevisiae
Pediococcus
damnosus
Pediococcis
pentosaceus
Pediococcis parvulus
Lactobacillus casei
Lactobacillus
plantarum
Lactobacillus casei
Streptobacterium
Heterofermentant Leuconostoc gracile
Oenococcus oeni
Leuconostoc
mesenteroides
Lactobacillus hilgardii
Lactobacillus
fructivorans
Lactobacillus
desidiosus
Lactobacillus brevis
Lactobacillus hilgardi
Lactobacillus brevis
(Cell shape and grouping may depend on the medium in which the bacteria grow.)
3 Effects of MLF
3.1 General
The reaction of interest during MLF is the conversion of L(-) malic acid to
monocarboxilic (L-) or D(-) lactic acid and carbon dioxide. (Whether L- or D- lactic
acid is produced depends on the LAB strain and substrate attacked.) All LAB follow
this pathway for MLF. It is worth noting that some commercial malic acid is
racemate, a mixture of L(-) and D(+) malic acid. Only L(-) malic acid will be
converted by MLB.
Malic acid ---> Lactic acid + Carbon dioxide
COOH-H2OC-H2C-COOH ---> CH3-CHOH-COOH + CO2
For every 1 gram of malic acid metabolised, 0.67 grams of lactic acid and 0.33
grams (or 165 ml) of CO2 are produced.
Bacteria also use only 0.3-2 g/l of sugars yielding about 100 mg/l of D-lactic acid
[Krieger et al., 2000].
3.2 Acidity
3.2.1 TA, pH, acid species
MLF affects TA, pH and acid species through the following factors:
a chemical deacidification usually reducing titratable acidity by about 1-4.6 g/l
(as tartaric)
a pH increase of between 0.1 and 0.45 units (more typically 0.1-0.25)
the fact that the newly formed lactic acid (like that in milk) appears softer on
the palate than the converted malic acid (like that in apples).
These factors can give a wine a rounder, softer, mellower mouth-feel.
MLB also produce substances which give these sensations more directly, and/or
integrate with bitter and astringent substances in wine. This is predominantly seen
in red wines and appears to be dependant on MLB strain.
0.3 g/l. This increase is not usually perceptible, though the formation of acetic
acid esters does have an impact. [Riesen, 1999]. The increase is partly due to LAB
attacking trace sugar (usually 0.3-2 g/l of sugar [Krieger et al., 2000]) and citric,
pyruvic, and chetoglutaric acids, in addition to acetaldehyde. Acetic acid
production is higher during MLF at higher pHs [see Wibowo et al., 1985].
Acetic acid is produced during bacterial growth in must and wine (from sugar and
organic acid metabolisation), not during malic acid degradation. If the MLB grow
fast, more acetic acid is produced. Thus, when a high population MLB culture is
inoculated into a wine there is less growth, and therefore, a considerably lower
production of acetic acid.
3.7 Astringency
MLF can decrease astringency. Under the influence of MLF alone, total phenols
may decrease (gelatin index, measured at 280 nm). [Riesen, 1999]
3.9 Ethyl-lactate
Often exceeds the taste threshold of 60-110 mg/l giving a wider and fuller palate.
3.10 Diacetyl
3.10.1 What is diacetyl?
Diacetyl is a substance produced by many LAB which smells like warm/hot butter.
It is commonly used to flavour "movie" popcorn and gives the characteristic
buttery aroma to MLFed, lees-stirred Chardonnays that are so popular today.
Sauvignon. Krieger et al. [2000] claim a level of 2-7 mg/l can give a "butter or
cheese" note that makes the aroma heavy and unpleasant and Jackson [1994]
writes that 1-4 mg/l adds "a desirable complexity to the fragrance" but at
concentrations over 5-7 mg/l the buttery aromas becomes overt and undesirable.
However, Dharmadhikari [2002] reported that 2-3 mg/l and 4-5 mg/l of diacetyl
enhanced wine aroma in whites and reds respectively. It is clear from this
information that acceptable levels vary depending on wine style and, most likely,
personal preference for diacetyl aswell.
On testing wines from 20 different regions, 28 different producers and 8 vintages,
Bartowsky et al. [2002] found that Chardonnay (of 24 wines) showed levels of
diacetyl from 0.3 to 0.6 mg/l (mean value 0.4 mg/l) whilst reds (Cabernet
Sauvignon, Merlot and Shiraz) showed 0.3 to 2.5 mg/L (mean value 1.1 mg/l) for
43 wines.
The diagram shows the main metabolic pathway for citric acid metabolisation by
Leuconostoc oeni.
necessary nutrients for MLF have been removed due to the racking/clarifying
procedure. (0.13-0.15 g/l (0.5 g/U.S. Gal) is recommended.)
4 Living conditions
The limiting factors on MLF include total and free sulphur dioxide (SO2)
concentration, alcohol content, pH, and temperature. Each LAB has it's own limits
(and culture manufacturers usually provide these). The following limitations
provide general guidelines (these are based on Oenococcus oeni unless where
otherwise stated).
4.3 pH
MLB favour higher pH's. The optimum pH will depend on the strain and the
culturing environment. For most strains, minimal growth occurs at pH 3.0.
Generally, pH's above 3.2 are advised. Optimal growth for O. oeni occurs at pH
4.2-4.8. Optimal activity occurs between pH 3.0 and 4.0 and decreases as pH
rises - inhibition is experienced at pH 4.5.
4.4 Temperature
MLF will proceed faster at higher temperatures. When no SO2 is present in the
wine the optimum temperature range for MLF is 23-25C (73-77F). (Maximum
malic acid degradation will occur at 20-25C (68-77F) [Ribreau-Gayon et al.,
1975].) However, this decreases with increasing concentrations of SO2 causing
20C (68F) to be more suitable. The following table indicates MLF speed at given
temperatures.
Delay
Temperature
12-13C (54-55F)
begins to slow
15C (59F)
optimum
20-25C (68-77F)
MLB death
Most strains of Oenococcus oeni either cease to grow or grow very slowly below
15C (59F). However, cells remain viable at low temperatures. [Jackson, 1994].
4.4 Population
MLB require a certain population level to be reached before they can begin MLF. A
population of around 105 cells/ml is a good starting level. Due to the stress
inoculated MLB undergo in adapting to the wine environment, inoculations of MLB
are often increased to population loads of at least 108 cells/ml.
All these factors act in synergy and the tolerance limit for one factor can change if
the other factors have an inhibiting affect on MLF.
Inhibition of MLB does not necessarily mean the bacteria have died. A bacterial
population may simply be dormant and become active when conditions are more
favourable. This explains the often seen delay of MLF in bottled wines, as well as
the increase in MLF activity in cellared wines over the spring as cellar
temperatures rise.
5 LAB development
MLB require a certain population level to be reached before they can begin MLF.
This means that natural/indigenous MLFs (where LAB have not been inoculated
into the must or wine) can have a lag phase of weeks to several months before
they begin MLF.
This lag phase is prolonged the lower the pH. Additionally, the pH affects which
species of LAB will be dominant in the must or wine [Bousbouras and Kunkee,
1971]. At low pHs Oenococcus oeni is the primary MLB genus, different strains of
which will dominate throughout MLF. At higher pHs, however, Lactobacillus and
Pediococcus dominate over Leuconostoc [Costello et al., 1983].
During MLF, the population often reaches 1 million cells/ml. (Leuconostoc oeni in
particular requires a population of more than 106-107 CFU/ml to begin MLF.) Their
population is usually 103-104 CFU/ml following fermentation, and may rise to 106108 CFU/ml once growth initiates substantially.
After exponential growth, cell populations deline rapidly depending on the
conditions (e.g. elevated tempertures or SO2 will increase the rate). It is possible
that the population of strains of Lactobacillus and Pediococcus may increase at
this point.
6 Why inoculate
The MLF growth (lag) phase associated with spontaneous MLF (wild/uncultured
strains) presents a time of increased risk from spoilage organisms due to the nonSO2 environment and the potential production of volatile acidity. Inoculating with
a prepared MLB culture avoids the problems associated with the MLB growth lag
phase by immediately providing the population necessary to conduct MLF. It is
important that the MLB have enough nutrients to develop. Yeast (Saccharomyces
cerevisiae var. "bayanus" in particular) can reduce the nutrients available to MLB
considerably. Winemakers often add a MLB nutrient when inoculating with MLB to
assist their development.
Additionally, spontaneous MLB can cause unpleasant aromas and tastes, which
can include sweat, mould, sulphate, phenols, sauerkraut, or a bitter and oily
aftertaste. The source and chemical composition of these compounds is not
known, but it has been noted that they tend to occur in high pH and low SO2
environments, indicating Lactobacillus and Pediococcus or wild strains of
Leuconostoc. Inoculation of cultured MLB avoids these unpleasant flavours.
Cultured MLB strains are consistent. When relying on wild MLB, there can be no
certainty of consistent results in consecutive wines. Some winemakers feel,
however, that wild MLB tend to lend more complexity to their wines. Additionally,
some areas in the world which have been making wine in the same cellar (and
region) for centuries may have resident MLB which are relatively stable and
favourable for MLF, thus providing reliable wild MLB strains for MLF.
7 Mixed cultures
Some believe there are advantages in conducting MLF with mixed MLB cultures.
8.1 Sugars
Inoculation of MLB is usually conducted after all sugars (<2 g/l of reducing sugars
is a suitable level) have been fermented by yeast. This avoids the possibility of
MLB metabolising the sugar and producing unwanted products such as acetic acid.
Some research suggests that pre-fermentation inoculation results in higher VA
concentrations [Semon et al., 2001]. When considering the timing of inoculation,
the compatibility of yeast and LAB compatibility should also be considered.
(Competition for nutrients can occur with Saccharomyces cerevisiae var.
"bayanus" strains, for example.) Some winemakers, however, inoculate MLB a few
days into alcoholic fermentation in an attempt to minimise contamination through
the subsequent ability to add SO2 to the wine sooner.
If, alternatively, a wine has a weak malic acid concentration, there is little point in
conducting a MLF at all as it would have little affect on the wine.
The diagram of wine 4 is included to indicate what the paper looks like when citric
acid is present.
13 Preventing MLF
Factors to help in preventing MLF occurring include the following:
Use of lysozyme (a protein that destroys the cell walls of the bacteria by
catalyzing the hydrolysis of specific glucosidic links in the cell walls)
Keeping SO2 concentrations at MLF preventative levels - 0.8 mg/l molecular
SO2 (or less accurately, a free SO2 concentration of 50 mg/l)
Keeping pH low - below 3.2
Sterile filtration
Keeping wine lees contact to a minimum and racking immediately upon
completion of alcoholic fermentation
Use of a bayanus yeast strain for alcoholic fermentation (limits available
nutrients for bacteria)
Keeping wine below 10C (50F) can provide limited assistance
Ensuring alcohol content is greater than 13%
Keeping maceration on skins to a minimum
Pasteurisation
16 References
Asmundson, R.V. and Kelly, W.J. (1990). Temperature and ethanol effects on
growth of Leuconostoc oenos. In: Yu, P.-L. (ed.) Fermentation technologies:
Industrial applications, Elsevier, London, pp 128-131.
Axelsson, L.T. (1993). Lactic acid bacteria: classification and physiology. In:
Salminen S. and von Wright A. (eds.), Lactic acid bacteria, Marcel Dekker Inc.,
New York, pp 1-63.
Bartowsky, E.J., Francis, I.L., Bellon, J.R., and Henschke, P.A. (2002). Is
buttery aroma perception in wines predictable from the diacetyl concentration?,
AGJWR, Volume 8, Number 3.
Beelman, R.B., and Kunkee, R.E. (1985). Inducing simultaneous malolacticalcoholic fermentation in red table wines. In "Malolactic Fermentation" (T.H. Lee,
ed.), pp. 97-111. Aust. Wine Res. Inst., Urrbrae, South Australia.
Bousbouras, G.E., and Kunkee, R.E. (1971). Effect of pH on malolactic
fermentation in wine. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 22, 121-126.
Buckenhskes, H.J. (1993). Selection criteria for lactic acid bacteria to be used
as start cultures for various food comodities. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 12, 253-271.
Costello, P.J., Morrison, R.H., Lee, R.H., and Fleet, G.H. (1983). Numbers
and species of lactic acid bacteria in wines during vinification. Food Technol. Aust.
35, 14-18.
Davis, C.R., Wibowo, D., Eschenbruch, R., Lee, T.H., and Fleet, G.H.
(1985). Practical implications of malolactic fermentation in wine. J. Appl.
Bacteriol. 63, 513-521.
Davis, C.R., Wibowo, D.J., Lee, T.H. and Fleet, G.H. (1986). Growth and
metabolism of lactic acid bacteria during and after malolactic fermentation of
wines at different pH. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 51, 539-545.
De Revel, G., Bertrand, A., and Lonvaud-Funel, A. (1989). Conn. Vigne Vin,
1, 39-45.
Dharmadhikari, Murli. (2002). Some Issues in Malolactic Fermentation Acid
Reduction and Flavor Modification, Vineyard and Vintage View, Volume 17(4), p 46.
Dittrich, H.H. (1977). Handbuch der Getrnketechnologie: Mikrobiologie des
Weines, Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, pp 233-256. [In German]. Garvie, E.I.
(1986). Genus Leuconostoc. In: Sneath, P.H.A., Mair, N.S., Sharpe, E.J., Holt,
J.G. (eds.) Bergey's manual of systematic bacteriology vol 2, Williams and Wilkins,
Baltimore, pp 1071-1075.
Henick-Kling, T. (1993). Malolactic fermentation. In: Fleet, G.H. (eds.) Wine
microbiology and biotechnology, Harwood Academic Publishers, Chur, pp 289-326.
Henick-Kling, T. (1995). Control of malo-lactic fermentation in wine: Energetics,
flavour modification and methods of starter culture preparation. J. Appl. Bacteriol.
Symp. Suppl. 79, 29S-37S.
Henick-Kling, T., Sandine, W.E. and Heatherbell, D.A. (1989). Evaluation of
malolactic bacteria isolated from Oregon wines. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 55,
2010-2016.
Jackson, R.S. (1994). "Wine science: principles and applications," San Diego
Academic Press.
Krieger, S., Triolo, G., and Dulau, L. (2000). "Bacteria and Wine Quality State of the Art," www.lallemandwine.com
Liu, S.-Q. (2002). Malolactic fermentation in wine - beyond deacidification: A
review. J. Apll/ Microbiol. 92, 859-601.
Lonvaud-Funel, A. (1995). Microbiology of the malolactic fermentation:
molecular aspects. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 126, 209-214.
Lonvaud-Funel, A., Joyeux, A., Desens, C. (1988). Inhibition of malolactic
fermentation of wines by products of yeast metabolism. Journal of the Science of
Food and Agriculture, 44, 183-191.
Martineau, B. and Henick-Kling, T. (1995). Performance and diacetyl
production of commercial strains of malolactic bacteria in wine. J. Appl. Bacteriol.
78, 526-536.
Martineau, B., Acree, T.E. and Henick-Kling, T. (1995). Effect of wine type on
threshold for diacetyl. Food Research International 28(2).
McDaniel, M., Henderson, L.A., Watson, B.T., Jr., and Heatherbell, D.
(1987). Sensory panel training and screening for descriptive analysis of the
aroma of Pinot noir wine fermented by several strains of malolactic bacteria. J.
Sens. Stud. 2, 149-167.
Nielsen, J.C. and Prahl, C. (1995). Metabolism of citric acid by Leuconostoc
oenos in direct inoculation. Effect on wine flavour. Results presented at the 5th
International Symposium of Enology, Bordeuax, 15-17th June 1995.
Nielsen, J. C., and Marianne Richelieu. (1999). Control of flavor development
in wine during and after malolactic fermentation by Oenococcus oeni. Applied and
Environmental Microbiology 65(2): 740-745.
Radler, F., and Yannissis, C. (1972). Weinsureabbau bei Milchsurebakterien.
Arch. Mikrobiol. 82, 219-239.
Ramos, A. and Santos, H. (1996). Citrate and sugar cofermentation in
Leuconostoc oenos, a 13C nuclear magnetic resonance study. Appl. Environm. M
Riesen, R. (1999). Modification of Wine Characteristics by Malolactic
Fermentation. http://www.oardc.ohio-state.edu/grapeweb/vinevan/van0699.htm.
Ribreau-Gayon, J., Peynaud, E., Ribreau-Gayon, P., and Sudraud, P.
(eds.) (1975). "Trait d'Oenologie: Sciences et Techniques du Vin," Vol. 2.
Dunod, Paris.
Sandine, W.E. and Heatherbell, D.A. (1985). Wine preparation with new
strains of Leuconostoc oenos. US Pat. 4,547,373, application number 521,988.
Salou, P., Loubiere, P. and Pareilleux, A. (1994). Growth and energetics of
Leuconostoc oenos during cometabolism of glucose with citrate and fructose. Appl.
Environ. Microbiol. 60, 1459-1466.
Semon, J.M., Edwards, C.G., Forsyth, D., and Dinn, C. (2001). Inducing
malolactic fermentation in Chardonnay musts and wines using different strains of
Oenococcus oeni. AGJWR, Vol. 7, No. 1, p 52-59.
Sharpe, M.E. (1981). The genus Lactobacillus. In: Starr, M.P., Stolp, H., Trper,
H.G., Balows, A. and Schegel, H.G. (eds.). Prokaryotes, vol. 2, Springer-Verlag.
Berlin, pp 1653-1679.
Shimazu, Y., Uehara, M., and Watanbe, M. (1985). Transformation of citric
acid to acetic acid, acetoin and diacetyl by wine making lactic acid bacteria. Agric.
Biol. Chem. 49, 2147-2157.
Subramanian, S. and SivaRaman, C. (1984). Deacidification of musts from the
western United States by the calcium double-salt precipitation process. Am. J.
Enol. Vitic. 29, 153-160.
van Vuuren, H.J.J. and Dicks, L.M.T. (1993). Leuconostoc oenos: A review.
Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 44, 99-112.
Wibowo, D., Eschenbruch, R., Davis, C.R., Fleet, G.H., and Lee, T.H.
(1985). Occurrence and growth of lactic acid bacteria in wine: A review. Am. J.
Enol. Vitic. 36, 149-153 / 302-312.
www.brsquared.org/wine