Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35956842›Full record

ArticleMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Correlating Sensory Assessment of Smoke-Tainted Wines with Inter-Laboratory Study Consensus Values for Volatile Phenols.

James W Favell, Kerry L Wilkinson, Ieva Zigg, Sarah M Lyons, Renata Ristic, Carolyn J Puglisi, Eric Wilkes, Randell Taylor, Duane Kelly, Greg Howell and 17 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

27 authors.

James W FavellDepartment of Chemistry, The University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC V1V 1V7, Canada.
Kerry L WilkinsonDepartment of Wine Science, Waite Research Institute, The University of Adelaide, PMB 1, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6724-9837
Ieva ZiggDepartment of Chemistry, The University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC V1V 1V7, Canada.
Sarah M LyonsDepartment of Chemistry, The University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC V1V 1V7, Canada.
Renata RisticDepartment of Wine Science, Waite Research Institute, The University of Adelaide, PMB 1, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6056-9325
Carolyn J PuglisiDepartment of Wine Science, Waite Research Institute, The University of Adelaide, PMB 1, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1235-444X
Eric WilkesThe Australian Wine Research Institute, P.O. Box 197, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia.
Randell TaylorThe Australian Wine Research Institute, P.O. Box 197, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia.
Duane KellyVintessential Laboratories, Dromana, VIC 3936, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0191-239X
Greg HowellVintessential Laboratories, Dromana, VIC 3936, Australia.
Marianne McKayDepartment of Viticulture and Oenology/Central Analytical Facility, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch 7600, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-5224-2034
Lucky MokwenaDepartment of Viticulture and Oenology/Central Analytical Facility, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch 7600, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-1450-3093
Tim PlozzaAgriculture Victoria, Bundoora, VIC 3083, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6826-2689
Pei ZhangAgriculture Victoria, Bundoora, VIC 3083, Australia.
AnhDuyen BuiAgriculture Victoria, Bundoora, VIC 3083, Australia.
Ian PorterSchool of Life Sciences, LaTrobe University, Bundoora, VIC 3083, Australia.
Orrin FrederickEnartis Vinquiry, Windsor, CA 95492, USA.
Jasha KarasekEnartis Vinquiry, Windsor, CA 95492, USA.
Colleen SzetoDepartment of Wine Science, Waite Research Institute, The University of Adelaide, PMB 1, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3560-9399
Bruce S PanE. & J. Gallo Winery, Modesto, CA 95354, USA.
Steve TallmanE. & J. Gallo Winery, Modesto, CA 95354, USA.
Beth Anne McClureE. & J. Gallo Winery, Modesto, CA 95354, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1839-3116
Hui FengE. & J. Gallo Winery, Modesto, CA 95354, USA.
Eric HervéETS Laboratories, St Helena, CA 94574, USA.
Anita OberholsterDepartment of Viticulture and Enology, University of California Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3383-8235
Wesley F ZandbergDepartment of Chemistry, The University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC V1V 1V7, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5857-9006
Matthew NoesthedenDepartment of Chemistry, The University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC V1V 1V7, Canada.

Funding

Australian Research Council Training Centre for Innovative Wine Production IC170100008Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Undergraduate Student Research AwardThe University of British Columbia Eminence ProgramWine Australia NA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vineyard exposure to wildfire smoke can taint grapes and wine. To understand the impact of this taint, it is imperative that the analytical methods used are accurate and precise. This study compared the variance across nine commercial and research laboratories following quantitative analysis of the same set of smoke-tainted wines. In parallel, correlations between the interlaboratory consensus values for smoke-taint markers and sensory analyses of the same smoke-tainted wines were evaluated. For free guaiacol, the mean accuracy was 94 ± 11% in model wine, while the free cresols and 4-methylguaiacol showed a negative bias and/or decreased precision relative to guaiacol. Similar trends were observed in smoke-tainted wines, with the cresols and glycosidically bound markers demonstrating high variance. Collectively, the interlaboratory results show that data from a single laboratory can be used quantitatively to understand smoke-taint. Results from different laboratories, however, should not be directly compared due to the high variance between study participants. Correlations between consensus compositional data and sensory evaluations suggest the risk of perceivable smoke-taint can be predicted from free cresol concentrations, overcoming limitations associated with the occurrence of some volatile phenols, guaiacol in particular, as natural constituents of some grape cultivars and of the oak used for barrel maturation.

Indexed as

VitisVolatile Organic CompoundsWineConsensusCresolsGuaiacolHumansPhenolsSmokeCresolsGuaiacolPhenolsSmokeVolatile Organic Compoundsfiregas chromatography-mass spectrometrygrapesinter-laboratory studyrate-all-that-applysmokesmoke taintvolatile phenolswine

Identifiers

PMID35956842
PMCPMC9369848

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.