Wine Chemistry and Biochemistry

(Steven Felgate) #1

6C Proteins 221


depletion (across all protein fractions) observed in this study corresponded linearly


with the level of bentonite addition (percentage reduction in protein concentration


per g/L of bentonite added ranged from70% to 89%). These different conclusions


in the published literature might be attributed in part to the different methods used


to fractionate proteins and assess their levels.


Several authors have investigated the extent of adsorption of standard and model


proteins by bentonite. Gougeon et al. (2002, 2003) studied the absorption of two


homopolypeptide preparations with average MW around 20 kDa onto a synthetic


bentonite. Their data suggested that these polypeptides tended to unfold and take on


a more random coil structure upon absorption. Using a range of physical measures,


Gougeon et al. (2002, 2003) also hypothesized that the polypeptides were primarily


absorbed near the edges of the bentonite sheets rather than within the interlayer


spaces between the sheets. The adsorption of the standard protein, bovine serum


albumin (BSA) by bentonite in model wine solutions was studied by Blade and


Boulton (1988). Adsorption was shown to be independent of temperature, but varied


slightly with protein content, pH and ethanol content. In another study (Achaeran-


dio et al. 2001), bentonite adsorption was evaluated with three proteins (BSA,


ovalbumin, lysozyme) in a model wine solution. The effect of ethanol content and


protein molecular weight on the adsorption capacity of bentonite was also studied.


Adsorption capacity tended to increase with increasing ethanol concentrations with


regard to adsorption of BSA and lysozyme, however, no change was observed for


ovalbumin. Blade and Boulton (1988) showed that maximal absorption was reached


rapidly, and complete within 30 s of the addition. This is consistent with an earlier
study (Lee 1986), in which Gew ̈urztraminer wine fined with bentonite was rendered


stable one minute after bentonite addition and with later studies of in-line dosing


described below (Muhlack et al. 2006; Nordestgaard et al. 2006). In comparison,


bentonite fining in a winery setting typically takes one to two weeks, depending on


the tank size and rate of bentonite addition used.


Bentonite regeneration refers to the desorption of adsorbed wine protein from the


bentonite surface, and would permit bentonite to be reused. However, a commercial


process for bentonite regeneration does notcurrently exist, and thus bentonite is only


used once before being discarded. An early study (Armstrong and Chesters 1964)


investigated the effect of pH on the desorption of pepsin from bentonite. In this


study, 62.8% of the pepsin (pI 2.8), which had been adsorbed onto the bentonite at


pH 3.0, was desorbed by raising the pH to 5.2 using sodium hydroxide. In a more


recent study (Churchman 1999), the batch treatment of bentonite-protein complexes


with a range of bases at a variety of different concentrations, durations and agita-


tion methods was examined. The greatest degree of desorption was achieved with


sodium carbonate at a low solid: solution ratio and with agitation. Similar results


were obtained with sodium hydroxide at pH 12 and 13 (protein released per gram of


bentonite = 52 and 65 mg/g respectively). However, from the study it was concluded


that the use of alkaline pH and salts was ineffective for substantial removal of pro-


tein from bentonites. Instead, the study suggested protein degradation followed by


a treatment to displace the products of protein breakdown from the bentonite was
required. For example, a batchwise treatment that employed hydrogen peroxide,

Free download pdf