How do natural wines last so long once you open them?

Last night we got back to France and shared the remains of a bottle of Mas Coutelou’s Le Vin Des Amis 2011* we’d left in the fridge a week before. It was delicious - as good as the night we’d opened it.

It’s not the first experience I’ve had of that recently. Thierry Germain told us that the Terres Chaudes we tasted the other week had been open for 8 days. And some wines even taste better the second day than they do when they're first opened. So what’s going on?

In my experience that doesn’t happen with conventional wines - certainly not at this price. Often I’ve had some bottles hanging around from a tasting and tried them the following day with food and they’ve just fallen apart.

The most obvious explanation is that these are ‘living’ wines or vins vivants as the French put it. Because there is very little, if any, sulphur in them, because they’re not fined or filtered  bacteriological activity is still taking place (precisely what those opposed to natural wines disapprove of).

Wines that are clearly heat-treated (see previous post on soupy reds) by contrast or which are made with aromatic yeasts seem to fall apart very quickly. The producers and retailers who sell them probably assume - quite rightly - that most people will drink them in an evening well before they get to that stage but with the greater awareness of alcohol intake at the moment I’m not sure that’s necessarily the case - certainly in households of two like ours.

The yeast aspect is interesting. The wines I’m referring to - indeed almost all natural wines - are made with wild yeasts and therefore presumably don’t need the enzymes required to make commercial yeasts do their job. Sourdough bread also lasts a great deal longer than bread made with commercial yeast. So maybe that’s it?

Or is it the tannins - both the wines concerned were red? Or the fact our wine had been kept in the fridge which I imagine must have helped?

Winemakers, what do you think?

* a blend of Grenache, Syrah, Cinsault and Mourvèdre

Would you use GM wine yeast?

A question for the winemakers who follow this blog. Would you use a GM wine yeast?

There's a report today on decanter.com that the Canadian authorities have approved the use of a yeast called ML101 that is said to prevent headaches by producing fewer bioamines

It also enables the malolactic fermentation to take place at the same time as the alcoholic fermentation which is said to reduce the risk of wine spoilage*

Apparently the yeast has already been approved for use in the US and South Africa since 2006 so it's not new so I wonder how many other genetically modified yeasts there are around?

And surely winemakers could help to prevent headaches by reducing the amount of sulphur they use?

Just askin'.

* and somewhat alarmingly, according to this longer piece in The Vancouver Sun, the risk of 'toxic chemicals' forming as a result of adding malolactic bacteria. Is that genuinely a risk?

** and while on the subject of additives Jamie Goode has just uploaded this very interesting post on grape concentrate and Mega Purple

A beginner's guide to wine bacteria

No, not written by me you'll be glad to hear but by a 'microbial enologist' called Erika Szymanski in the online wine magazine Palate Press. And who has done such a good job of it that even a layman like me can follow it (just).

Well worth reading - although I can't resist one small dig - which is about the yeast and bacteria manufacturing company Lallemand referring to their product ProMalic® as 'naturally' lowering juice acidity. You can read more about their product range here and here. (I was particularly fascinated by the products Booster Rouge and OptiRed.)