Buttery ML Sensation

Winemaking Talk - Winemaking Forum

Help Support Winemaking Talk - Winemaking Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

StimVino

Home Winemaker
Supporting Member
Joined
May 27, 2022
Messages
52
Reaction score
59
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Already thinking about wine plans for next year and looking for ml bacteria with high Diacetyl Production to get buttery sensory effect in some red blends that Im considering. My research has pointed to Enoferm Beta ml bacteria. Ive seen Beta mentioned in a few threads with some success. Want to confirm with anyone that has used Beta that Im on the right track and will produce the buttery sensation that Im after. Or, perhaps another suggestion for ml bacteria. Thanks.
 
I looked into this a while back (though I was looking for strains that did not have big diacetyl production!) From my notes, Enoferm alpha, Enoferm beta, Lalvin MBR31, Enartis MCW and Viniflora CH35 were notable for diacetyl production. (I have no experience with any of these, though I've used Viniflora CH16 successfully)
 
I looked into this a while back (though I was looking for strains that did not have big diacetyl production!) From my notes, Enoferm alpha, Enoferm beta, Lalvin MBR31, Enartis MCW and Viniflora CH35 were notable for diacetyl production. (I have no experience with any of these, though I've used Viniflora CH16 successfully)
Thanks for the list. These all look like good options. The CH35 literature says it can overcome difficult conditions. I know Beta has high nutrient needs and requires warmer temperatures, so I may try CH35. My basement gets cold in winter and I typically have to move around space heaters to get ML to finish. My carboys are usually around 66 F in winter without supplemental heat.
 
An important point here is that the ML has to be carefully tracked and sulfite has to be added as soon as the ML is complete, otherwise the diacetyl will be consumed and lost.
 
An important point here is that the ML has to be carefully tracked and sulfite has to be added as soon as the ML is complete, otherwise the diacetyl will be consumed and lost.
Can you elaborate on the chemistry behind why the diacetyl will be consumed? Is the concern that the ML bacteria that produced the diacetyl will become stressed or something else? In general, I leave my sulfate levels way down for MLF and test after 8 weeks to confirm its complete. Once ML is complete, ill add the typical dose of sulfites. But, sounds like I should be testing more frequently. Thanks-
 
There is plenty of literature on the subject, but the chemistry is rather complicated indicated below. The main point is that diacetyl is an intermediate product, so once formed, additional contact with lees, including yeast and bacteria, will allow enzymatic degradation.

Diacetyl.jpg

Several years ago, I unintentionally captured diacetyl in a red wine by adding so2 right after ML completion, it's often considered a flaw in a red wine, but in this case it was a low level and turned out to be pleasant.

Scott Lab has a good paper on managing diacetyl, I've attached what I have, but they may have an updated version on their site.
 

Attachments

  • Managing Diacetyl.pdf
    1.3 MB · Views: 0
Good information stickman. If I understand correctly, the diacetyl will peak as malolactic is complete. So, if I sulfite as malic acid tests around 0.1g/L, then that should kill the remaining ml bacteria and minimize degradation of the diacetyl.

I can see how the presence of diacetyl in some styles of wine would be considered a flaw. Especially, when the style of wine is to emphasize varietal or terroir. In that case, it would be a distraction. However, in a generic red blend the buildup of diacetyl ‘butter flavor’ can be a positive stylistic expression. Ive had a few blends that utilized this method and were very flavorful and memorable wines.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top