Determination of trace levels of organic fining agents in wines: Latest and relevant findings
David Bongiorno1 
Giuseppe Avellone1 
Anna Napoli2 
Fabio Mazzotti2 
Daniela Piazzese3 
Valentina Censi3 
Serena Indelicato1*- 1Dipartimento Scienze e Tecnologie Biologiche Chimiche e Farmaceutiche (STEBICEF)—Università degli Studi di Palermo—via Archirafi, Palermo, Italy
- 2Dipartimento di Chimica e Tecnologie Chimiche, Università della Calabria Arcavacata di Rende, Calabria, Italy
- 3Dipartmento di Scienze della Terra e del Mare—Università degli Studi di Palermo—via Archirafi, Palermo, Italy
The production of red wine plays a key role in the local and international economies of several nations. During the winemaking process, to clarify the final product, before bottling, and to remove undesired substances (proteins, phenols, and tannins), fining agents are commonly added to wines. These substances have different origins (animal and vegetable proteins or mineral compounds), and they show a potential risk for the health of allergic subjects. For these reasons, the residues of fining agents, constituted by exogenous proteins based on gluten, egg, and milk proteins, should not be present in the final product and their trace residues should be quantified with accuracy. In the last decade, several analytical approaches have been developed for their quantitative determination using different sample treatment protocols and analytical techniques. These methods are based on liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs). Recently, biosensors have been proposed as a potential alternative to immunoassay approaches, allowing rapid, cheap, and simple multi-residue detection. This short review aimed to report the most recent and relevant findings in the field.
Introduction
In winemaking, the term “fining” indicates a clarification step that implies the addition of substances (fining agents) deemed to reduce or remove some undesirable compounds that could give rise to unpleasing precipitates. The fining process also modifies the wines’ organoleptic characteristics, reduces astringency, and improves color and flavor. Fining agents are removed according to good manufacturing practices, but these substances are considered “processing aids” and should not be present in the final product. According to the FDA (2013), fining agents could not be reported on the wine label, if removed during the winemaking. But the permanence of “exogenous” compounds in the final products must be evaluated, taking into account their origin (animal or vegetable proteins, mineral compounds) and mostly their potential consequence on the health of the consumer. As aforesaid, the arsenal of fining agents at disposal of the winemaker is quite ample, but the best results often require the adoption of synergistic action of many clarifiers. Among the non-proteic organic compounds used in beverage fining, polyvinylpolypyrrolidone (PVPP), reported as generally recognized as safe (GRAS) and approved for many uses by the FDA, is particularly useful as it is capable of removing flavans and phenols (Ronnau et al., 2000; Adachi et al., 2003; Yoshida et al., 2008). PVPP, by removing phenols, also lowers the bitterness and prevents oxidative browning in white wines. As a collateral effect, PVPP depletes resveratrol (Threlfall et al., 1999) and quercetin (Laborde et al., 2006) commonly associated with the healthy effect of moderate wine consumption (Castellari et al., 1998). The adoption of proteic clarifiers, while preserving most of the healthy substances, can represent a risk for hypersensitive consumers, even if the literature seems to indicate the inconsistency of an allergological risk. Indeed, while proteinaceous fining agents are used to obtain the tannin precipitation, the formation of soluble complexes between tannins and proteins takes place. These complexes can remain in the solution even in correctly processed fined wines. According to Maury et al. (2019), in a study involving the preparation of a model wine, fined with radio-labeled proteins (gelatin or wheat gluten protein), their residue amounted from 24% to 58% of the initial fining proteins added. Finally, the use of animal proteins could also entail ethical or religious concerns, such as vegetarianism or veganism, or religious faith. For this reason, since 31 May 2009, the EU Directive 2007/68/EC established that all wines must declare on the label if proteic allergens have been used during wine production. Similar regulations on the use of eggs, milk, and fish derivatives (isinglass) as clarifiers of wines and stabilizers have also been enacted in other countries such as the United States, New Zealand, and Australia. However, showing these warnings on the label could reduce the attractiveness of the product and potentially damage the perception of its quality.
Classification of protein-based fining agents used in winemaking
Several fining agents are of proteic nature (Marangon et al., 2019), and we can find animal or plant proteins. The former are frequently obtained from collagen (i.e., bovine and porcine gelatin) (Hrazdina et al., 1969; Oberholster et al., 2013), fish gelatin and isinglass (Sanborn et al., 2010), milk (caseinates) (Weber et al., 2009), and white egg (ovalbumin). Among plant proteins, we consider those derived from cereals (Simonato et al., 2009; Iturmendi et al., 2010; Simonato et al., 2011; Simonato et al., 2013), legumes (Granato et al., 2018), grape seeds, potatoes (Gambuti et al., 2012; Gambuti et al., 2016), and seaweeds (Noriega-Domínguez et al., 2010).
Since 2000, several food production protocols have been modified due to the spread of bovine spongiform encephalopathy. Winemaking was no exception, and some of the fining agents of animal origin (bovine proteins) have been abandoned. Consequently, among clarifying agents, porcine gelatin remained the most commonly used protein (Sarni-Manchado et al., 1999; Maury et al., 2001; Smith et al., 2015).
The gelatin (from pig and fish) at low pH gives rise to colloidal particles that, being positively charged, interact with negatively charged particles, originating sediments. Among the fish gelatins, isinglass is very pure gelatin, prepared from the air bladders or, more recently, from other fish tissues (Rizzi et al., 2016).
On the other hand, caseins, which are phosphoproteins obtained from milk, contain sequences of hydrophilic and hydrophobic amino acids, which confer an amphiphilic nature to these fining agents. At the pH of the wine, caseins in association with sodium or potassium form insoluble micelles, which leads to coagulation and sedimentation of the interacting substances (Weber et al., 2007a). In addition, caseins lead to the formation of insoluble complexes with phenolic compounds from grapes and allow removing the excess tannin in over-oaked white wines (Weber et al., 2009; Cosme et al., 2012).
Egg proteins are largely used as clarifying agents due to their ability to bind and reduce tannin content (Cosme et al., 2007; Rizzi et al., 2016). As fish gelatins, they are positively charged and form aggregates with the negatively charged particles of wines. The lysozyme, another egg protein, shows antimicrobial activity against Gram-positive bacteria and, thus, is used as a stabilizer for better control of the fermentation process and against wine spoilage (Weber et al., 2007a). As an alternative to animal proteins, those derived from legumes (pea, lentils, and soy), wheat gluten, and oenological yeast protein extracts (Gaspar et al., 2019) can be used for fining purposes (Marangon et al., 2019).
This notwithstanding, some of them still represent a potential risk to the health of allergic subjects, and therefore have to be traced in the final product. Simonato et al. (2009; 2013) reported that Patatin P (Gambuti et al., 2012) and maize zeins could be used as fining agents. Patatin P, which belongs to glycoproteins, is obtained from a potato aqueous by-product, and it could represent a vegetable-based clarifying agent, with the same properties of animal protein used in winemaking. Maize zeins, extracted from the “corn gluten,” plays a good role as a processing aid in winemaking and has the advantage of not requiring a label declaration (European Commission. Directive 2003/89/EC; European Commission. Directive 2007/68/EC).
Cosme et al. (2012) and Kang et al. (2018) investigated a possible application of rice proteins as clarifying agents with properties similar to caseinates for white and rosè wines and gelatin for red wines.
More recently, grape seed proteins have been tested as clarifiers (Vincenzi et al., 2013; Gazzola et al., 2017). These substances overcome the allergological risk related to the use of exogenous proteins during winemaking because the grape seed proteins are considered endogenous components of wine. Finally, Pino Ramos et al. (2022) have studied the fining ability of quinoa proteins as an alternative to animal proteins (i.e., gelatin).
Analytical approaches for identifying exogenous protein in wines
The lack of stringent regulation related to the use of fining agents for the winemaking process and the possibility of adopting proteic clarifiers determines the possible persistence of exogenous proteins in the final product. Therefore, to evaluate their presence and to overcome allergological or food ethics problems, sensitive and accurate detection methods have been developed. Indeed, in the last decade, immunochemical assays, mass spectrometry (MS)-based analytical determinations, and biosensors have been applied to inform allergic consumers about the potential presence of allergens.
Immunochemical assays
The enzyme-linked immunosorbent test (ELISA) represents a useful tool for the detection of exogenous protein residues in wine. It is characterized by easy execution, low cost, rapidity, and good sensitivity. ELISA tests are capable of detecting contamination of egg white, casein, and gluten, and are also useful for identifying and quantifying gelatins. The drawbacks in ELISAs come from the complexity of matrix composition, which can inhibit the immuno-enzymatic reaction (Koestel et al., 2016).
In addition, due to the absorption on the membrane surfaces, and the low pH value of wine and the content of tannins, the ability to interact with proteins in some epitopes could change, causing alterations, impairing sensitivity, or leading to false negatives or to partial responses (Kaul et al., 2007).
Weber et al. (2007a) reported LOD values, in the order of 0.005 μg/ml for the fish gelatin and lysozyme assays, that were complying with the Organisation Internationale de la Vigne et du Vin (OIV, Paris, France requests (values ≤ 0.25 μg/ml)), but not satisfying for other clarifying agents. Deckwart et al. (2014), using an indirect ELISA approach for investigating wine samples, obtained LOD values of caseins in the order of 0.2 μg/ml for red wines, while for white wines, the values ranged from 0.01 μg/ml to 0.1 μg/ml. Different sample pretreatments, based on immunochemical assays, have been proposed to determine various types of exogenous proteins in several commercial wines. Weber et al. (2007b) analyzed four white wines made in Germany, and after a dilution in the ratio of 1:10 in phosphate-buffered saline solution, it was possible to detect lysozyme residues in all of them. Egg albumin was found in just one wine that was refined with a high dosage of dried egg white (20 g/hl). Rolland et al. (2008) tested 153 commercial Australian wines, using a different sample pretreatment for white or red wine. The former was dialyzed (3.5 kDa cutoff) in SnakeSkin pleated dialysis tubing; the latter was simply diluted 1:4 in ethanol; no residual milk or egg proteins were found. Restani et al. (2012) analyzed 63 commercial wines (all filtered through membranes having a pore size of 1 µm) and 16 experimental wines treated with milk proteins (filtered through membranes having a pore size of 3 µm) using both ELISA and immunoblotting techniques, incubating the membranes with specific anti-caseinate antibodies. The authors did not find any detectable protein residue in the wines. Uberti et al. (2014), adopting the same pretreatment approach as Restani et al. (2012), investigated 78 commercial red wines from Australia, New Zealand, and Europe, reporting the oenological practices adopted and the corresponding level of egg white protein residues. The authors did not find egg proteins (LOD 0.0564 μg/ml), despite the wide range of doses (3–10 g/hl) used for refining. Simonato et al. (2011) precipitated wine proteins by means of the KDS method, originally proposed by Vincenzi et al. (2005), which involves protein complexation with dodecyl sulfate, followed by a precipitation step of complexes as potassium salts. They reported that wheat protein residues were detectable only in wines treated with massive gluten amounts (>50 g/hl), far higher than those usually employed in winemaking protocols. Zeleňáková et al. (2021) reported the identification of cow milk allergen in 17 wine samples (vintage 2014–2017) originating from Slovenia. The LOD was 0.24 μg/ml and the LOQ was 1.30 μg/ml. The sample treatment was very quick and easy: the extraction buffer solution (10 ml) was added to 1.00 ml of wine; the sample, maintained under continuous shaking for 5 min, was centrifuged; and the supernatant was sampled for the ELISA test. The findings showed the casein concentrations ranged from 1.634 to 16.715 μg/ml for white wines and from 21.473 to 67.22 μg/ml for red ones.
MS-based methods
As reported elsewhere (Monaci et al., 2010; Maury et al., 2019), the drawbacks of immunochemical assays are mostly related to the formation of soluble protein–tannin complexes, which are not removed by filtration and potentially not recognized by ELISA antibodies. MS-based approaches are far less selective but extremely sensitive, and make it possible to determine an ample collection of molecules ranging from contaminants, antioxidants, polymers, surfactants, and proteins (Indelicato et al., 2016a; Di Donna et al., 2017; Aiello et al., 2020; Bongiorno et al., 2021). MS allows the detection at trace levels of fining agent residues while their identification is independent of the structure of allergens (Kaul et al., 2007; Kirsch et al., 2009; Picariello et al., 2011).
Tolin et al. (2012a), Tolin et al. (2012b), based on the same analytical approach as Simonato et al. (2011), scrutinized several commercial wines to ascertain the presence of animal protein residues. The nano-liquid chromatography (LC) tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) analytical strategy allowed the determination of ovalbumin and caseins at levels of about 100 ng/L and 60 ng/L of wine, respectively. Using this approach, the authors overcome the limitations of classical immunological methods, gaining sensitivity and eliminating the problems affecting immunoassays that rely on the labile tertiary structure of proteins (Kaul et al., 2007) for protein recognition and reactivity.
Monaci et al. (2013) developed an interesting approach based on isotopically labeled peptides of ovalbumin and α S1–casein to determine egg proteins and caseinates in white wine samples. This approach allowed to fairly estimate and take into account tryptic digestion yields in the analytical procedure. Good LODs were also achieved, ranging between 0.4 and 1.1 μg/ml (depending on the peptide considered as a marker of the fining agent). In order to reduce the analysis costs, Losito et al. (2013) proposed an approach for the determination of caseinate residues in refined white wines using LC coupled with a 3D ion trap mass spectrometer. The optimization of an appropriate wine volume and a protein extraction/digestion protocol, followed by MS/MS analysis performed on an ion trap instrument, provided a good sensitivity (LOD lower than 0.25 μg/ml) complying with the request of OIV, which represents the reference value in the current European legislation.
Another research aspect being pursued is the continuous refinement of the wine sample pretreatment. With this goal, Mattarozzi et al. (2014) proposed an LC-MS/MS method for the simultaneous determination of α-, β-casein, and ovalbumin in commercial red wine after a thorough evaluation of different sample treatments. According to the authors, among the most widely adopted strategies involving the use of denaturing agents, protein precipitation, cutoff filters, or size exclusion purification cartridges, the size exclusion-based procedure provided the best performance in terms of both accuracy (recovery) and precision. The validated LC-MS/MS method has proven sensitive enough to identify and quantify allergens in red wine protein extracts at trace levels, with LODs and LOQs values ranging from 0.01 to 0.8 μg/ml and from 0.03 to 2 μg/ml, respectively. De Angelis et al. (2017) succeeded in the upgrade of an analytical workflow based on the use of pre-enrichment columns. The sample clean-up was based on either size exclusion columns (SEC) or cut-off filters (UF), followed by selective peptide enrichment on a 1-cm-long C-18 trap column. It was found that the SEC-based procedure provided faster analyses, but the lengthier UF was the most sensitive approach, resulting in LODs and LOQs of 0.036 and 0.12 μg/ml for egg and 0.050 and 0.17 μg/ml for milk, respectively. Pilolli et al. (2014) evaluated two MS-based approaches: LC- high resolution (HR) MS and LC-MS/MS. These two approaches usually have different applications (Di Stefano et al., 2012; Indelicato et al., 2016b), but have proven to be equally well-suited for quantification and screening purposes. As can be foreseen, the main advantage of HR-MS lies in the open possibility of retrospective analysis. On the other hand, the MS/MS method was more sensitive to analytes and less sensitive to matrix. The same authors developed a new approach based on the integration of mass spectrometry and immunoassay (MSIA) (Pilolli et al., 2017) to detect egg allergens. Polyclonal antibodies raised against native ovalbumin were immobilized onto MSIA-customized disposable tips. The protocol implied a 1:4 dilution of the wine sample, an automated purification/enrichment step on MSIA, followed by tryptic digestion and LC-MS/MS determination. LOD and LOQ values obtained were 0.01 and 0.03 μg/ml, respectively.
The development of LC-MS/MS methods for the detection of caseins, albumin, and lysozyme in wines brought more refined approaches capable of increasing sensitivity and reducing analysis time, as reported by Rodrigues Spinelli et al. (2021). The authors claimed recovery values ranging from 90.7% to 108.6% introducing a pH adjustment, the use of cellulose ester membranes, precipitation with organic solvents, and a final concentration/clean-up. The LOQ values ranged from 0.01 to 0.25 μg/ml. Pig gelatin and egg white proteins have been determined in 5-year aged Nebbiolo-based red wine by Restani et al. (2014) and Dal Bello et al. (2021). Biomarker peptides were detected and quantified by a nano LC-HR-MS method.
Yang et al. (2021) have recently developed an LC-MS/MS method to quantify ovalbumin, ovotransferrin, β–lactoglobulin, and 4 caseins (α S1-, α S2-, β-, and κ–casein). The authors optimized the clean-up procedure for wine samples using an extraction treatment by a PVPP solution, trypsin digestion of proteins followed by peptide purification on HLB SPE cartridges to remove buffers, digest reagents, other matrix components, and interfering peptides. This article reported a standard addition strategy to quantify the wine allergens. The LODs for egg allergens were 0.1 μg/ml and for milk allergens 0.003–0.015 μg/ml, showing high sensitivity, simple clean-up procedure, and a reduction of costs for this approach.
Since MS approaches become increasingly customary, it has started to appear in literature articles dealing with the investigation of a large number of wine samples to detect and quantify exogenous protein residues. Jessy Pavón-Pérez et al. (2019) analyzed white and red wines from four different grape varieties produced by 14 Chilean wineries. This approach to determining casein and ovalbumin is based on ultrafiltration membranes, protein precipitation with organic solvents, followed by a fast (7 h) enzymatic digestion. The LOD and LOQ achieved using an LC-MS/MS approach ranged from 4.70 to 8.50 μg/L and 10 to 20 μg/L, respectively.
Biosensors
Since the ELISA approach is somewhat doubtful as far as it concerns false negatives or positives (Lacorn et al., 2011), and the MS approach requires pricey instrumentation and more specialized operators, it was reasonable to expect the development of simpler and still reliable approaches to determine protein residues in wines. Up to date, several electrochemical biosensors have been proposed for the detection of food allergens (lysozyme, ovalbumin, caseins, and lactoglobulin) (Vasilescu et al., 2016), but only a few of them have been tested on wines (Ocaña et al., 2015; Mihai et al., 2015; Pilolli et al., 2015; Wessels and Paschke-Kratzin, 2016; Titoiu et al., 2019). The recent availability of several aptamer sequences, specifically synthesized for lysozyme capture, prompted the development of several sensors for the detection of lysozyme in wines (Mihai et al., 2015; Ocaña et al., 2015; Titoiu et al., 2019). Aptamers are short oligonucleotide or peptide sequences that are more stable with respect to antibodies, with the further advantage of reduced production costs. The LOD values for such biosensors range from few ppt to ppm levels (Vasilescu et al., 2016). On the other hand, Pilolli et al. (2015) and Pilolli and Monaci (2016) worked on the development of a surface plasmon resonance (SPR)-based biosensor to detect egg-related fining allergens. The same group refined the approach (2016) in order to increase the sensitivity while still maintaining the speed and easy sample handling of the sensor-based instrumentation. Indeed, wine samples were subjected to a very short pretreatment by PVP/SEC purification steps that allowed reaching a LOD of up to 0.2 μg/ml. Recently, Baldo et al. (2021) and Rodrigues Spinelli et al. (2021) described the combination of a disposable electrochemical device with magnetic beads, delivering an ultrasensitive detection of the egg allergen ovalbumin in wines. The approach leads to a LOD of 0.2 fg/ml within a wide linear range of concentration from 0.01 to 10 pg/ml (European Commission, 2003; European Commission, 2007).
Conclusion
The determination of protein residues in wines remains a strong topic in the current research. While early applications relied on the more economical ELISA approach, in recent years, HPLC/MS has gained new ground due to a lower risk of false positives and substantial sensitivity improvements. These improvements, however, do not come cheap since the quantitative determination of protein residues in wines is complicated by several steps of sample treatment, analyte recoveries, and ionization efficiency of the peptides quantified. Thus, in order to reduce costs and improve determination time, recently, some sensor-based applications have started to appear. In wines, their application is actually limited to lysozyme and ovalbumin detection, but it is foreseeable that their wide-spread use will obtain reliable results at very reasonable costs since their development is rapidly gaining momentum.
Author contributions
SI and DB: topic choice, paper definition, literature selection, manuscript editing, and supervision. DP, AN, GA, FM and VC: literature selection and manuscript editing.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors, and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Adachi, A., Fukunaga, A., Hayashi, K., Kunisada, M., and Horikawa, T. (2003). Anaphylaxis to polyvinylpyrrolidone after vaginal application of povidone-iodine. Contact Dermat. 48, 133–136. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0536.2003.00050.x
Aiello, D., Siciliano, C., Mazzotti, F., Di Donna, L., Risoluti, R., Napoli, A., et al. (2020). Protein extraction, enrichment and MALDI MS and MS/MS analysis from bitter orange leaves (Citrus aurantium). Molecules 25, 1485. doi:10.3390/molecules25071485
Baldo, T. A., dos Anjos Proença, C., da Silva Felix, F., Freitas, T. A., Sakata, S. K., Angnes, L., et al. (2021). Disposable electrochemical microfluidic device for ultrasensitive detection of egg allergen in wine samples. Talanta 232, 122447. doi:10.1016/j.talanta.2021.122447
Bongiorno, D., Di Stefano, V., Indelicato, S., Avellone, G., and Ceraulo, L. (2021). Bio-phenols determination in olive oils: Recent mass spectrometry approaches. Mass Spectrom. Rev., e21744. doi:10.1002/mas.21744
Castellari, M., Spinabelli, U., Riponi, C., and Amati, A. (1998). Influence of some technological practices on the quantity of resveratrol in wine. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 206, 151–155. doi:10.1007/s002170050232
Cosme, F., Capao, I., Filipe-Ribeiro, L., Bennett, R. N., and Mendes-Faia, A. (2012). Evaluating potential alternatives to potassium caseinate for white wine fining: Effects on physicochemical and sensory characteristics. LWT - Food Sci. Technol. 46, 382–387. doi:10.1016/j.lwt.2011.12.016
Cosme, F., Ricardo-da-Silva, J. M., and Laureano, O. (2007). Protein fining agents: Characterization and red wine fining assays. Ital. J. Food Sci. 19, 39–56.
Dal Bello, F., Lamberti, C., Giribaldi, M., Garino, C., Locatelli, M., Gastaldi, D., et al. (2021). Multi-target detection of egg-white and pig gelatin fining agents in Nebbiolo-based aged red wine by means of nanoHPLC-HRMS. Food Chem. x. 345, 128822. doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.128822
De Angelis, E., Pilolli, R., and Monaci, L. (2017). Coupling SPE on-line pre-enrichment with HPLC and MS/MS for thesensitive detection of multiple allergens in wine. Food control.. 73, 814–820. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.09.031
Deckwart, M., Carstens, C., Webber-Witt, M., Schafer, V., Eichhorn, L., Kang, S., et al. (2014). Development of a sensitive ELISA for the detection of casein-containing fining agents in red and white wines. J. Agric. Food Chem. 62, 6803–6812. doi:10.1021/jf5006098
Di Donna, L., Taverna, D., Indelicato, S., Napoli, A., Sindona, G., Mazzotti, F., et al. (2017). Rapid assay of resveratrol in red wine by paper spray tandem mass spectrometry and isotope dilution. Food Chem. x. 229, 354–357. doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.02.098
Di Stefano, V., Avellone, G., Bongiorno, D., Cunsolo, V., Muccilli, V., Sforza, S., et al. (2012). Applications of liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry for food analysis. J. Chromatogr. A 12 (1259), 74–85. doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2012.04.023
European Commission, (2003). Directive 2003/89/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 November 2003 amending Directive 2000/13/EC as regards indication of the ingredients present in foodstuffs. Off. J. Eur. Union 308, 15–18.
European Commission, (20072007). Directive 2007/68/EC of 27 november 2007 amending annex IIIa of the directive2001/13/EC of the European parliament and of the council as regards certain food ingredients. Off. J. Eur. Union 310, 15–18.
Gambuti, A., Rinaldi, A., and Moio, L. (2012). Use of patatin, a protein extracted from potato, as alternative to animal proteins in fining of red wine. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 235, 753–765. doi:10.1007/s00217-012-1791-y
Gambuti, A., Rinaldi, A., Romano, R., Manzo, N., and Moio, L. (2016). Performance of a protein extracted from potatoes for fining of white mustsfining of white musts. Food Chem. x. 190, 237–243. doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.05.067
Gaspar, L. M., Machado, A., Coutinho, R., Sousa, S., Santos, R., Xavier, A., et al. (2019). Development of potential yeast protein extracts for red wine clarification and stabilization. Front. Microbiol. 10, 2310. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2019.02310
Gazzola, D., Vincenzi, S., Marangon, M., Pasini, G., and Curioni, A. (2017). Grape seed extract: The first protein-based fining agent endogenous to grapesfirst protein-based fining agent endogenous to grapes. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 23, 215–225. doi:10.1111/ajgw.12268
Granato, T. M., Ferranti, P., Iametti, S., and Bonomi, F. (2018). Affinity and selectivity of plant proteins for red wine components relevant to color and aroma traitsffinity and selectivity of plant proteins for red wine components relevant to color and aroma traits. Food Chem. x. 256, 235–243. doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.02.085
Hrazdina, G., Van Buren, J. P., and Robinson, W. B. (1969). Influence of molecular size of gelatin on reaction with tannic acid. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 20, 66–68.
Indelicato, S., Bongiorno, D., Ceraulo, L., Calabrese, V., Piazzese, D., Napoli, A., et al. (2016a). Electrospray ion mobility mass spectrometry of positively and negatively charged (1R, 2S)-dodecyl(2-hydroxy-1-methyl-2-phenylethyl)dimethylammonium bromide aggregates. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 30, 230–238. doi:10.1002/rcm.7422
Indelicato, S., Bongiorno, D., Turco Liveri, V., Calabrese, V., Indelicato, S., Piazzese, D., et al. (2016b). Collision induced fragmentations of multiply charged sodium bis(2-ethylhexyl)-sulfosuccinate aggregates in gas phase: Neutral loss versus charge separation. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 409, 29–37. doi:10.1016/j.ijms.2016.09.014
Iturmendi, N., Durán, D., and Marín-Arroyo, M. R. (2010). Fining of red wines with gluten or yeast extract protein. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 45, 200–207. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.2009.02121.x
Kang, W., Niimi, J., and Bastian, S. E. P. (2018). Reduction of red wine astringency perception using vegetable protein fining agentsfining agents. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 69, 22–31. doi:10.5344/ajev.2017.17054
Kaul, S., Luttkopf, D., Kastner, B., Vogel, L., Holtz, G., Vieths, S., et al. (2007). Mediator release assays based on human or murine immunoglobulin E in allergen standardization. Clin. Exp. Allergy 37, 141–150. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2006.02618.x
Kirsch, S., Fourdrilis, S., Dobson, R., Scippo, M. L., Maghuin-Rogister, G., De Pauw, E., et al. (2009). Quantitative methods for food allergens: A review. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 395, 57–67. doi:10.1007/s00216-009-2869-7
Koestel, C., Simonin, C., Belcher, S., and Rösti, J. (2016). Implementation of an Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay for the quantification of allergenic egg residues in red wines using commercially available antibodies. J. Food Sci. 81 (8), 2099–2106. doi:10.1111/1750-3841.13378
Laborde, B., Moine-Ledoux, V., Richard, T., Saucier, C., Dubourdieu, D., Monti, J. P., et al. (2006). PVPP-Polyphenol complexes: A molecular approach. J. Agric. Food Chem. 54, 4383–4389. doi:10.1021/jf060427a
Lacorn, M., Gossewein, C., and Immer, U. (2011). Determination of residual egg white proteins in red wines during and after fining. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 62, 382–385. doi:10.5344/ajev.2011.10037
Losito, I., Introna, B., Monaci, L., Minella, S., and Palmisano, F. (2013). Development of a method for the quantification of caseinate traces in italian commercial white wines based on liquid chromatography–electrospray ionization–ion trap–mass spectrometry. J. Agric. Food Chem. 61, 12436–12444. doi:10.1021/jf4034909
Marangon, M., Vincenzi, S., and Curioni, A. (2019). Wine fining with plant proteins. Molecules 24 (11), 2186. doi:10.3390/molecules24112186
Mattarozzi, M., Milioli, M., Bignardi, C., Elviri, L., Corradini, C., Careri, M., et al. (2014). Investigation of different sample pre-treatment routes for liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry detection of caseins and ovalbumin in fortified red winefied red wine. Food control.. 38, 82–87. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2013.10.015
Maury, C., Sarni-Manchado, P., and Cheynier, V. (2019). Highlighting protein fining residues in a model red wine. Food Chem. x. 279, 272–278. doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.11.141
Maury, C., Sarni-Manchado, P., Lefebvre, S., Cheynier, V., and Moutounet, M. (2001). Influence of fining with different molecular weight gelatins on proanthocyanidin composition and perception of wines. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 52, 140–145.
Mihai, I., Vezeanu, A., Polonschii, C., Albu, C., Radu, G. L., Vasilescu, A., et al. (2015). Label-free detection of lysozyme in wines using an aptamer based biosensor and SPR detection. Sensors Actuators B Chem. 206, 198–204. doi:10.1016/j.snb.2014.09.050
Monaci, L., Losito, I., De Angelis, E., Pilolli, R., and Visconti, A. (2013). Multi-allergen quantification of fining-related egg and milk proteins in white wines by high-resolution mass spectrometryfication of fining-related egg and milk proteins in white wines by high-resolution mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 27, 2009–2018. doi:10.1002/rcm.6662
Monaci, L., Losito, I., Palmisano, F., and Visconti, A. (2010). Identification of allergenic milk proteins markers in fined white wines by capillary liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization-tandem mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A 1217, 4300–4305. doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2010.04.035
Noriega-Domínguez, M. J., Durán, D. S., Vírseda, P., and Marín-Arroyo, M. R. (2010). Non-animal proteins as clarifying agents for red wines. OENO One 44, 179. doi:10.20870/oeno-one.2010.44.3.1472
Oberholster, A., Carstens, L. M., and du Toit, W. J. (2013). Investigation of the effect of gelatine, egg albumin and cross-flow microfiltration on the phenolic composition of Pinotage wineffect of gelatine, egg albumin and cross-flow microfiltration on the phenolic composition of Pinotage wine. Food Chem. x. 138, 1275–1281. doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2012.09.128
Ocaña, C., Hayat, A., Mishra, R., Vasilescu, A., del Valle, M., and Marty, J. L. (2015). A novel electrochemicalaptamer–antibody sandwich assay for lysozyme detection. Analyst 140, 4148–4153. doi:10.1039/C5AN00243E
Pavón-Pérez, J., Henriquez-Aedo, K., and Aranda, M. (2019). Mass spectrometry determination of fining-related allergen proteins in Chilean wines. Food Anal. Methods 12, 827–837. doi:10.1007/s12161-018-01416-0
Picariello, G., Mamone, G., Addeo, F., and Ferranti, P. (2011). The frontiers of mass spectrometry-based techniques in food allergenomics. J. Chromatogr. A 1218, 7386–7398. doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2011.06.033
Pilolli, R., Chaudhari, R., Palmisano, F., and Monaci, L. (2017). Development of a mass spectrometry immunoassay for unambiguous detection of egg allergen traces in wines. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 409, 1581–1589. doi:10.1007/s00216-016-0099-3
Pilolli, R., De Angelis, E., Godula, M., Visconti, A., and Monaci, L. (2014). Orbitrap™ monostage MS versus hybrid linear ion trap MS: Application to multi-allergen screening in wine. J. Mass Spectrom. 49, 1254–1263. doi:10.1002/jms.3453
Pilolli, R., and Monaci, L. (2016). Challenging the limit of detection for egg allergen detection in red wines by surface plasmon resonance biosensor. Food Anal. Methods 9, 2754–2761. doi:10.1007/s12161-016-0464-z
Pilolli, R., Visconti, A., and Monaci, L. (2015). Rapid and label-free detection of egg allergen traces in wines by surface plasmon resonance biosensor. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 407, 3787–3797. doi:10.1007/s00216-015-8607-4
PinoRamos, L. L., PeñaMartínez, P. A., and Laurie, V. F. (2022). Quinoa protein extract: An effective alternative for the fining of wine phenolics. J. Sci. Food Agric.. doi:10.1002/jsfa.11982
Restani, P., Uberti, F., Tarantino, C., Ballabio, C., Gombac, F., Bastiani, E., et al. (2014). Collaborative interlaboratory studies for the validation of ELISA methods for the detection of allergenic fining agents used in wine according to the criteria of OIV resolution 427 – 2010 modified by OIV – comex 502 – 2012. Food Anal. Methods 7, 706–712. doi:10.1007/s12161-013-9741-2
Restani, P., Uberti, F., Tarantino, C., Ballabio, C., Gombac, F., Bastiani, E., et al. (2012). Validation by a collaborative interlaboratory study of an ELISA method for the detection of caseinate used as a fining agent in wine. Food Anal. Methods 5, 480–486. doi:10.1007/s12161-011-9270-9
Rizzi, C., Mainente, F., Pasini, G., and Simonato, B. (2016). Hidden exogenous proteins in wine: Problems, methods of detection and related legislation – a review. Czech J. Food Sci. 34, 93–104. doi:10.17221/357/2015-CJFS
Rodrigues Spinelli, F., Drehmerab, A. P., Valentin, L., Nascimento, S., Baptistã, M., Vanderlinde, R., et al. (2021). Development of a sample preparation approach for the analysis of fining agents in wines by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. Food Chem. x. 350, 129198. doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2021.129198
Rolland, J. M., Apostolou, E., De Leon, M. P., Stockley, C. S., and O' Hehir, R. E. (2008). Specific and sensitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for analysis of residual allergenic food proteins in commercial bottled wine fined with egg white, milk, and nongrape-derived tannins. J. Agric. Food Chem. 56, 349–354. doi:10.1021/jf073330c
Ronnau, A. C., Wulferink, M., Gleichmann, E., Unver, E., Ruzicka, T., Krutmann, J., et al. (2000). Anaphylaxis to polyvinylpyrrolidone in an analgesic preparation. Br. J. Dermatol. 143, 1055–1058. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2133.2000.03843.x
Sanborn, M., Edwards, C. G., and Ross, C. F. (2010). Impact of fining on chemical and sensory properties of Washington State Chardonnay and Gewürztraminer wines. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 61, 31–41.
Sarni-Manchado, P., Deleris, A., Avallone, S., Cheynier, V., and Moutounet, M. (1999). Analysis and characterization of wine condensed tannins precipitated by proteins used as fining agent in enology. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 50, 81–86.
Simonato, B., Mainente, F., Selvatico, E., Violoni, M., and Pasini, G. (2013). Assessment of the fining efficiency of zeins extracted from commercial corn gluten and sensory analysis of the treated wine. LWT - Food Sci. Technol. 54, 549–556. doi:10.1016/j.lwt.2013.06.029
Simonato, B., Mainente, F., Suglia, I., Curioni, A., and Pasini, G. (2009). Evaluation of fining efficiency of corn zeins in red wine: A preliminary study. Ital. J. Food Sci. 21, 97–105.
Simonato, B., Mainente, F., Tolin, S., and Pasini, G. (2011). Immunochemical and mass spectrometry detection of residual proteins in gluten fined red wine. J. Agric. Food Chem. 59, 3101–3110. doi:10.1021/jf104490z
Smith, P. A., McRae, J. M., and Bindon, K. A. (2015). Impact of winemaking practices on the concentration and composition of tannins in red wine. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 21, 601–614. doi:10.1111/ajgw.12188
Threlfall, R. T., Morri, s. J. R., and Mauromoustakos, A. (1999). Effects of fining agents on trans-resveratrol concentration in wine. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 5, 22–26. doi:10.1111/j.1755-0238.1999.tb00147.x
Titoiu, A. M., Porumb, R., Fanjul-Bolado, P., Epure, P., Zamfir, M., and Vasilescu, A. (2019). Detection of allergenic lysozyme during winemaking with an electrochemical aptasensor. Electroanalysis 31, 2262–2273. doi:10.1002/elan.201900333
Tolin, S., Pasini, G., Curioni, A., Arrigoni, G., Masi, A., Mainente, F., et al. (2012b). Mass spectrometry detection of egg proteins in red wines treated with egg white. Food control.. 23, 87–94. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.06.016
Tolin, S., Pasini, G., Simonato, B., Mainente, F., and Arrigoni, G. (2012a). Analysis of commercial wines by LC-MS/MS reveals the presence of residual milk and egg white allergens. Food control.. 28, 321–326. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.05.015
Uberti, F., Danzi, R., Stockley, C., Peñas, E., Ballabio, C., Di Lorenzo, C., et al. (2014). Immunochemical investigation of allergenic residues in experimental and commercially-available wines fined with egg white proteinsfined with egg white proteins. Food Chem. x. 159, 343–352. doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.03.025
Vasilescu, A., Nunes, G., Hayat, A., Latif, U., and Marty, J. L. (2016). Electrochemical affinity biosensors based on disposable screen-printed electrodes for detection of food allergens. Sensors 16 (11), 1863. doi:10.3390/s16111863
Vincenzi, S., Dinnella, C., Recchia, A., Monteleone, E., Gazzola, D., Pasini, G., et al. (2013). Grape seed proteins: A new fining agent for astringency reduction in red wine. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 19, 153–160. doi:10.1111/ajgw.12030
Vincenzi, S., Mosconi, S., Zoccatelli, G., Dalla Pellegrina, C., Veneri, G., Chignola, R., et al. (2005). Development of a new procedure for protein recovery and quantification in wine. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 56, 182–187.
Weber, P., Steinhart, H., and Paschke, A. (2007b). Allergenic potential of fining agent residues in German wines related to their dosage and an ordinary bentonite treatment. Agro Food Ind. Hi Tech. 18, 22–24.
Weber, P., Steinhart, H., and Paschke, A. (2009). Determination of the bovine food allergen casein in white wines by quantitative indirect ELISA, SDS-PAGE, Western blot and immunostaining. J. Agric. Food Chem. 57, 8399–8405. doi:10.1021/jf9013982
Weber, P., Steinhart, H., and Paschke, A. (2007a). Investigation of the allergenic potential of wines fined with various proteinogenic fining agents by ELISA. J. Agric. Food Chem. 55, 3127–3133. doi:10.1021/jf063436s
Wessels, H., and Paschke-Kratzin, A. (2016). New SPR-based methods for analysis of allergenic agents used in wine treatment. in Proceedings of the BIO Web of Conferences, 39th World Congress of Vine and Wine, Brazil, Bento Gonçalves, 24-28 October 2016 EDP Sciences, 598
Yang, Y., Yang, Y., Zhang, J., Yao, K., Liu, J., Shao, B., et al. (2021). Combination of polyvinylpolypyrrolidone extraction and standard addition strategy for the accurate determination of multiple allergen residues in red wine by UPLC-MS/MS. J. Chromatogr. B 1179, 122849. doi:10.1016/j.jchromb.2021.122849
Yoshida, K., Sakurai, Y., Kawahara, S., Takeda, T., Ishikawa, T., Murakami, T., et al. (2008). Anaphylaxis to polyvinylpyrrolidone in povidone-iodine for impetigo contagiosum in a boy with atopic dermatitis. Int. Arch. Allergy Immunol. 146, 169–173. doi:10.1159/000113522
Keywords: fining agents, wine, mass spectrometry, ELISA: enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, biosensors, allergens
Citation: Bongiorno D, Avellone G, Napoli A, Mazzotti F, Piazzese D, Censi V and Indelicato S (2022) Determination of trace levels of organic fining agents in wines: Latest and relevant findings. Front. Chem. 10:944021. doi: 10.3389/fchem.2022.944021
Received: 14 May 2022; Accepted: 30 June 2022;
Published: 05 August 2022.
Edited by:
Cosima Damiana Calvano, University of Bari Aldo Moro, ItalyReviewed by:
Simone Vincenzi, University of Padua, ItalyCopyright © 2022 Bongiorno, Avellone, Napoli, Mazzotti, Piazzese, Censi and Indelicato. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Serena Indelicato, serena.indelicato@unipa.it