Wine Chemistry and Biochemistry

(Steven Felgate) #1

6C Proteins 215


6C.3 Characterization of Wine Proteins


6C.3.1 Size


In the 1960s, electrophoresis enabled separation of different sized wine proteins,


with researchers at UC Davis (Bayly and Berg 1967; Moretti and Berg 1965),


finding four different protein bands, varying in concentration within and among


wines from different cultivars ofV. vinifera. These researchers were the first to


raise the possibility that certain protein fractions, rather than total protein, might


be responsible for protein instability. Somers and Ziemelis (1973) used gel filtration


chromatography to separate wine proteins from other constituents and, by using the


exclusion limit of their gel, concluded that the wine protein size was between 10 and


50kDa. Hsu and Heatherbell (1987a) discovered many different protein fractions


with a range of 11.2–65kDa. In a subsequent study (Hsu and Heatherbell 1987b),


it was suggested that low molecular weight proteins (20–30kDa) were important to


heat instability of wines, rather than those with high molecular weights. This was


later confirmed (Waters et al. 1992). In an electrospray mass spectrometry study of


the proteins in the juice of 19 cultivars ofVitis vinifera(Hayasaka et al. 2001),


a range of masses (13–33kDa) was observed. The proteins were identified as


mainly thaumatin-like proteins (range of 21,239–21,272 Da) and chitinases (range


of 25,330–25,631 Da). Small variations in the masses of these protein due to small


variation in their polypeptide sequence form the basis of a robust method of varietal
identification based on mass spectrometry (Hayasaka et al. 2001).


6C.3.2 Isoelectric Point


Research into the isoelectric point of wine proteins has often been concurrent with


studies of wine protein size. Proteins with low isoelectric points (pI) were found


to be significant contributors to total wine protein (Moretti and Berg 1965) and


to wine haze (Bayly and Berg 1967). Hsu and Heatherbell (1987a) confirmed this


observation and suggested that the majority of wine proteins had a pI of 4.1–5.8,


whilst Lee (1986) suggested the major protein fractions of wine had a pI of 4.8–5.7.


Dawes et al. (1994) fractionated wine proteins on the basis of their pI and found


that the five different fractions all produced haze after heat treatment. Haze particle


formation was found to differ between the fractions however, leading to a statement


that other wine components, such as phenolic compounds, need to be considered to


understand fully protein haze.


6C.3.3 Stability


The unusual aspect of wine protein instability is that the proteins responsible for


protein haze in the long term are, paradoxically, very stable themselves in the

Free download pdf