DRYING OF FOODSTUFFS

Abstract

An apparatus for drying foodstuffs involves a pallet supporting a stack of containers containing the foodstuffs. The pallet has a perimeter on which the stack of containers is sealingly supportable. The top of the pallet has at least one aperture to permit air flow therethrough, and the top, bottom and sides of the pallet define a ventilation duct for receiving air through the top of the pallet. A low pressure plenum in fluid communication and sealingly engaged with the ventilation duct draws air down vertically through the foodstuffs through the top of the pallet and out of the ventilation duct into the plenum. A drying installation involves the apparatus in a climate controlled room. A method of processing foodstuffs involves controlling temperature, relative humidity or both temperature and relative humidity of air in the room and drawing the air in the room vertically down past the foodstuffs until the foodstuffs are processed. The apparatus, installation and method are particularly useful for drying grapes by an Appassimento drying method.

Claims

1. A method of processing foodstuffs, the method comprising providing foodstuffs in a plurality of containers in a processing apparatus in a climate controlled room, the processing apparatus comprising: a pallet having sides, a bottom and a top, the top of the pallet configured to support a stack of the containers from a bottom of the stack, the pallet comprising elongated support members forming a perimeter on which the stack is sealingly supportable, the top of the pallet comprising at least one aperture to permit air flow therethrough, the top, bottom and sides of the pallet defining a ventilation duct for receiving air through the top of the pallet; and, a low pressure plenum in fluid communication and sealingly engaged with the ventilation duct, the low pressure plenum configured to draw air down vertically through the top of the pallet and out of the ventilation duct into the plenum, controlling temperature, relative humidity or both temperature and relative humidity of air in the room, and drawing the air in the room vertically down past the foodstuffs until the foodstuffs are processed.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the processing is drying and the foodstuffs are dried.

3. The method according to claim 2, wherein the temperature is in a range of from 2-20 C. and the relative humidity is in a range of from 40-90%.

4. The method according to claim 2, wherein the foodstuffs comprise berries.

5. The method according to claim 4, wherein the berries are dried until the berries have a Brix level of at least 25.

6. The method according to claim 2, wherein the foodstuffs comprise a fruit, vegetable or herb.

7. The method according to claim 1, wherein the foodstuff is cured, the temperature is about 29 C. and the relative humidity is in a range of from 85-95%.

8. The method according to claim 5, wherein the berries are dried for less than 120 days.

9. The method according to claim 1, wherein the foodstuffs comprise berries, the berries are dried until the berries have a Brix level of at least 25, the temperature in the room is in a range of from 5-10 C., the relative humidity in the room is in a range of from 65-75% and the air is drawn past the berries at a rate in a range 0.2-1 L/kg/s for a period of time in a range of 7-115 days.

10. The method according to claim 9, wherein the berries are grapes.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0032] For clearer understanding, preferred embodiments will now be described in detail by way of example, with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which:

[0033] FIG. 1A depicts a schematic of a side view of a drying apparatus comprising a vertical stack of reusable plastic grape holding baskets supported on a pallet in fluid communication with a low pressure plenum adjacent to the pallet;

[0034] FIG. 1B depicts FIG. 1A with sides of the stack sealed against air flow into the stack through the sides of the baskets;

[0035] FIG. 1C depicts a front view of FIG. 1A;

[0036] FIG. 1D depicts a top view of FIG. 1A;

[0037] FIG. 1E depicts a pallet used in the drying apparatus of FIG. 1A;

[0038] FIG. 1F depicts a front view of the low pressure plenum of FIG. 1A;

[0039] FIG. 2 depicts an installation comprising a plurality of rows of drying apparatuses, each row of apparatuses comprising a plurality of apparatuses in fluid communication with at least one neighboring apparatus, and each row of apparatuses in fluid communication with the same low pressure plenum;

[0040] FIG. 3 depicts another embodiment of an installation comprising a plurality of apparatuses in fluid communication with a low pressure plenum below the apparatuses so that air flows out the bottom of the apparatus;

[0041] FIG. 4A depicts a graph showing titratable acidity for different drying conditions for three grape varieties;

[0042] FIG. 4B depicts a graph of pH values for different drying conditions for three grape varieties;

[0043] FIG. 5A depicts a graph of malic acid values for different drying conditions for three grape varieties;

[0044] FIG. 5B depicts a graph of lactic acid values for different drying conditions for three grape varieties;

[0045] FIG. 6A depicts a graph of acetic acid values for different drying conditions for three grape varieties;

[0046] FIG. 6B depicts a graph of acetaldehyde values for different drying conditions for three grape varieties;

[0047] FIG. 7A depicts a graph of glucose values for different drying conditions for three grape varieties;

[0048] FIG. 7B depicts a graph of fructose values for different drying conditions for three grape varieties;

[0049] FIG. 8 depicts a graph of ethanol values for different drying conditions for three grape varieties;

[0050] FIG. 9 depicts a graph of glycerol values for different drying conditions for three grape varieties;

[0051] FIG. 10A depicts a graph of ammonia nitrogen values for different drying conditions for three grape varieties;

[0052] FIG. 10B depicts a graph of amino nitrogen values for different drying conditions for three grape varieties;

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Apparatus:

[0053] FIG. 1A, FIG. 1B, FIG. 1C, FIG. 1D, FIG. 1E and FIG. 1F depict one embodiment of a drying apparatus 1 comprising a vertical stack 5 of fifteen rows of grape holding baskets 10 (only one labeled). As best seen in FIG. 1D, there are five baskets 10 per row of baskets in the stack 5. The baskets 10 comprise a plurality of side wall apertures 11 (only one labeled) and bottom apertures 12. Each basket 10 has an open top. The baskets 10 are configured to nest on top of each other and sized to provide a rectangular cluster of five baskets when arranged as shown in FIG. 1D. The stack 5 is supported from beneath by a pallet 20. Details of the pallet are shown in FIG. 1E. A ventilation duct 21 defined by the pallet 20 is in fluid communication with a low pressure plenum 30 situated beside the pallet 20. The plenum 30 comprises a plenum aperture 31 (see FIG. 1F) and a foam sealing gasket 35 provides an air seal between the pallet 20 and the plenum 30 where the ventilation duct 21 and the plenum aperture 31 interface. The plenum 30 is provided with a variable speed fan 37 at one end, which draws air down the length of the plenum 30 past the plenum aperture 31 creating a drop in pressure in the plenum 30. Air flowing through the plenum 30 follows air flow path A as seen in FIG. 1C, FIG. 1D and FIG. 1F. It should be noted that the plenum 30 as depicted in FIG. 1C is behind the stack 5 since the plenum 30 runs alongside the pallet 20. It should also be noted that the plenum may be shorter and only as long as the side of the pallet if there is only one row of pallets in fluid communication with the plenum. As shown in FIG. 1B, the sides of the stack 5 are sealed against air flow by a blocking structure 7, which may be transparent to be able to view the baskets 10. Simply wrapping the sides of the entire stack 5 with a plastic film provides a suitable air seal.

[0054] As seen in FIG. 1E, the pallet 20 comprises two substantially parallel side boards 22a, 22b that form opposed sides of the pallet 20. Two substantially parallel top boards 23a, 23b connect the side boards 22a, 22b proximate ends of the side boards 22a, 22b. A cross-member board 24 parallel to and situated between the top boards 23a, 23b also connects the two side boards 22a, 22b to provide rigidity to the pallet 20. The cross-member board 24 is specifically located to align with an interface 14 (see FIG. 1D) between differently oriented baskets 10 in a row of the stack 5. A support board 25 parallel to the side boards 22a, 22b and beneath the top boards 23a, 23b and cross-member board 24 connect the top boards 23a, 23b to provide greater rigidity and stability to the pallet 20. The rectangular pallet 20 thus defines the ventilation duct 21 defined by the side boards 22a, 22b and top boards 23a, 23b, the ventilation duct 21 having an upper duct opening 27, two side duct openings 28a, 28b and an open bottom. The bottom may be sealingly closed by the floor, while one of the two side duct openings 28a, 28b may be sealingly closed by a blocking panel placed across the opening, or may be in fluid communication with a ventilation duct of a neighboring pallet. The other of the two side duct openings 28a, 28b is in fluid communication with the plenum aperture 31 of the low pressure plenum 30. The ends of the side boards 22a, 22b and the outside edges of the top boards 23a, 23b have foam sealing gaskets affixed thereto, one of the foam sealing gaskets being the sealing gasket 35 between the plenum 30 and the pallet 20, and the other providing a seal between the pallet 20 and a blocking panel or a neighbouring pallet. The top surfaces of the four boards 22a, 22b, 23a, 23b form a sealing support for the bottom of the stack 5 and define the upper duct opening 27, which is in fluid communication with the baskets 10 in the stack 5.

[0055] In operation, the fan 37 draws air through the plenum 30 along the air flow path A substantially parallel to the floor past the plenum aperture 31 thereby causing a pressure drop from the ventilation duct 21 to the plenum 30. Air thus moves out of the ventilation duct 21 into the plenum 30 along air flow path B substantially parallel to the floor and perpendicular to the height of the stack 5. Movement of air along path B in turn draws air down through the stack 5. Air from above the stack 5 is thus drawn down along air flow path C, through an open top of the stack 5, and through the bottom apertures 12 in the baskets 10. Air is permitted to diffuse between the baskets 10 due to the side wall apertures 11, but as shown in FIG. 1B, air is not permitted to be drawn in through the sides of the stack 5 due to the blocking structure 7 surrounding the sides of the stack 5. Sealing engagement of the bottom row of baskets 10 of the stack 5 with the top surfaces of the four boards 22a, 22b, 23a, 23b of the pallet 20 ensures that air is drawn vertically from the top of the stack 5 through the bottom of the stack 5 into the ventilation duct 21.

Installation:

[0056] FIG. 2 depicts one embodiment of an installation 100 comprising a room 110 and four rows 120a, 120b, 120c, 120d of drying apparatuses in the room 110. Each row 120a, 120b, 120c, 120d comprises four apparatuses 115a, 115b, 115c, 115d (only the apparatuses in row 120a labeled) of fifteen vertically stacked rows of five baskets for holding foodstuffs (e.g. grapes). The drying apparatuses 115a, 115b, 115c, 115d are in fluid communication with at least one neighboring apparatuses. Each row 120a, 120b, 120c, 120d of apparatuses is in fluid communication with the same low pressure plenum 130. Air flow through the plenum 130 is provided by a variable speed fan 137 that draws air along air flow path D past plenum apertures spaced along an inside wall 132 of the plenum in the room 110. Air is drawn vertically down through each apparatus 115a, 115b, 115c, 115d as previously described and air flows through the ventilation ducts of each apparatus along air flow path E (only one labeled for row 120a). Opposing wall 133 and end walls 134a, 134b of the plenum 130 are formed by the walls of the room 110. A roof for the plenum 130 seals the top and air drawn by the fan 137 along air flow path D is eventually expelled through the fan 137 of the plenum 130. Thus, the plenum 130 is built into the room 110 using the floor and three walls 133, 134a, 134b of the room 110 as the bottom and three sides of the plenum 130. The roof and the inside wall 132 of the plenum 130 are additional building materials to complete the plenum 130. An air conditioner 140 cools the room 110 when required, and heaters 145 heat the room when required, the air conditioner 140 and heaters 145 controlling temperature and humidity in the room. Corridors 160 are provided adjacent the rows 120a, 120b, 120c, 120d for inspection, sampling and servicing the apparatuses.

[0057] FIG. 3 depicts another embodiment of an installation 200 comprising a building 210, for example a tobacco kiln, retrofitted to house the installation. The building 210 comprises a subfloor 211 acting as a roof of a low pressure plenum 230. The subfloor 211 comprises a plurality of spaced-apart grates 213a, 213b, 213c, 213d, 213e, 213f over which a plurality of drying apparatuses 215a, 215b, 215c, 215d, 215e, 215f are situated. With reference to one of the drying apparatus 215f, each drying apparatus comprises a pallet 220 and a vertical stack 205 of baskets for holding foodstuffs (e.g. grapes). The bottom of the pallets 220 are in fluid communication with the low pressure plenum 230, the plenum 230 being defined by the subfloor 211, floor 212 and opposed walls 214a, 214b of the building 210. A fan 237 draws air along air flow path F underneath the grates 213a, 213b, 213c, 213d, 213e, 213f and out through the fan 237 in the wall 214a of the building 210. Air is drawn vertically down through the apparatuses 215a, 215b, 215c, 215d, 215e, 215f along air flow path G (only one labeled for apparatus 215f) directly through the grates 213a, 213b, 213c, 213d, 213e, 213f into the plenum 230. An air conditioner 240 cools the building 210 when required, and heaters 245 suspended from the ceiling of the building 210 heat the room when required, the air conditioner 240 and heaters 245 controlling temperature and humidity in the building. An air return conduit 250 located outside the building 210 permits air venting out from the fan 237 to be recirculated through the air conditioner 240 back into the building 210. Corridors 260 (only one labeled) are provided adjacent the apparatuses 215a, 215b, 215c, 215d, 215e, 215f for inspection, sampling and servicing the apparatuses. If there is sufficient room in the building, the apparatuses 215a, 215b, 215c, 215d, 215e, 215f may be replaced with rows of apparatuses.

Method:

[0058] The present method was applied to the drying of grapes, in particular for drying grapes to the standards of the wine industry. Specifically, the present method was adapted to the Appassimento drying method.

Experimental Design:

[0059] An installation comprising a cold room and an apparatus as described in connection with FIG. 1A-F was used to dry three varieties of grapesCabernet Franc, Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot. The cold room was used to control the air temperature and humidity. The temperature was regulated by adding heat when required using heated lamps connected to a thermostat. The humidity was removed by condensing air on an evaporator surface of a cooling system and a humidistat was used to control the level of relative humidity. A stack of 15 containers containing the grapes (three varieties x five repetitions) was placed on the apparatus. The apparatus was composed of a variable speed fan used to create a pressure drop in a plenum located adjacent to a pallet at the bottom of the stack of containers, thus producing a vertical airflow movement from the top to bottom of the apparatus. To account for the experimental design, eight apparatuses were built and placed in four different cold rooms. The grapes were dried until the total soluble solids reached approximately 29Brix.

[0060] The containers used to hold the grapes have an important role in the efficacy of the drying process. The container was a reusable plastic container (RPC), model IPL 6411, 600 mm long400 mm large120 mm high. These RPCs were designed to be easily folded, stacked, transported and sanitized. Their construction was ideal for the drying system as their openings were designed and optimized to allow air to circulate through and around a product when placed inside.

[0061] Grape varieties selected were Merlot, Cabernet Franc and Cabernet Sauvignon. These are the main varieties grown in the Niagara Peninsula region of Ontario, Canada, and the ones used most commonly for red wine production. These grapes were easily available and the varieties that would benefit most from an aroma improvement. The grapes were harvested in early September 2012 at a Brix level ranging from 21.7 to 22.6. The grapes were manually harvested and placed directly into the reusable plastic containers. The average mass of grapes in each container was 81.5 kg. After harvest the grapes were quickly placed in the drying installation with minimal handling, to begin the drying process.

[0062] Different drying parameters were tested using a full factorial design, with temperature, relative humidity, airflow rate and grape variety as factors, in order to determine the most favorable drying conditions with respect to the variety. The drying efficiency of each combination of factors was assessed by recording the grapes' total drying time, total weight loss and measuring the quality of the grapes through evaluating their chemical composition. The drying parameters were as follows: temperature of 10 C. and 5 C.; relative humidity (RH) of 75% and 65%; airflow rate of 0.4 L/kg/s and 0.25 L/kg/s; varieties were Cabernet Franc, Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot. In total, there were a total of 24 combinations, each repeated five times.

[0063] Temperature and RH were monitored during the drying process. Weight loss and total soluble solids (TSS) as Brix were measured every two weeks. Grape quality analysis was conducted initially (at harvest), at approximately 25Brix (mid-drying period) and at 29Brix (final drying period). Grape quality analysis was performed to determine if the drying process affected the biochemical composition of the grapes. The grape quality analysis comprised the following evaluations: visual observation of mold, total soluble solids, pH, titratable acidity, acetic acid, malic acid, lactic acid, glycerol, glucose, fructose, ammonia nitrogen, primary amino nitrogen, ethanol, and acetaldehyde. Experiments were performed according to a factorial design. Data were analyzed using 4-way ANOVA with interactions, and the means were compared by the Tukey test at a significance level of 0.05 using the XLSTAT software (Addinsoft, France).

[0064] Weight loss and TSS values for the grapes were used to determine the kinetic drying rate and the time at which the experiment was to be completed, the objective being to attain 29Brix. Weight loss was measured every two weeks for each of the 15 containers in each apparatus using a balance (OHAUStm, model Ranger v2 RC12LS, 12 kg capacity 0.0005 kg). TSS was also measured every two weeks using 15 berries randomly sampled from each of the 15 containers, in each apparatus. Berries were manually crushed in a plastic bag and the juice used to determine the TSS value by means of a refractometer (Atago, model PAL-1). Data are presented as weight loss per day (%/d), TSS per day (Brix/d) and ratio of Brix per weight loss (B/WL).

[0065] Ten berries from each plastic container were selected randomly and crushed manually in a plastic bag and the juice was transferred to 15 mL centrifuge tubes. The tubes with juice were centrifuged (Sorvall ST 16 centrifuge, Thermo Scientific) at 5000 rpm for 15-20 minutes and the supernatant was transferred into 2 mL microcentrifuge tubes and stored at 20 C. for further chemical analysis. The remaining juice was used to measure pH (accumet AB15 Basic pH meter, Fisher Scientific) and titratable acidity (Metrohem autotitrator, model 848 Titrino Plus) by titration of 2 mL of juice diluted with 50 mL of water using 0.1 N NaOH to an endpoint of pH 8.2. Two readings were taken from each sample for total soluble solids and titratable acidity, and one reading was taken for pH.

[0066] Concentration measurements of 10 quality parameters were performed according to the manufacturer's specifications, using Megazyme assay kits and an absorbance microplate reader (BioTek Elx808) for samples at approximately 25Brix (midpoint) and 29Brix (final point). For the initial samples taken at harvest, the concentration of the 10 quality parameters was measured using a spectrophotometer (Smart Spec PIus from BioRad) and Megazyme assay kits, and carried out according to the manufacturer's specifications, with the modification of scaling down the volumes by half. The 10 quality parameters measured and Megazyme assay kits used to analyze their concentrations are listed in Table 1. For kits where the microplate assay protocol was not available, the assay volumes were scaled down 10 times in order to use the microplate reader. For determination of ethanol, malic acid and lactic acid, the samples were concentrated five times (i.e., instead of using 10 L of sample, 50 L was used, and the volume of water to which the sample was added was decreased by 40 L to maintain the overall volume of solution). For determination of lactic acid the samples were concentrated 10 times using the same method. Triplicate analysis was performed on each sample and two data points were chosen for analysis for each sample.

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Kits utilized to determine concentration of 10 quality parameters Quality Parameter Kit Name Acetic Acid Megazyme K-ACET Malic Acid Megazyme K-LMALR Megazyme K-LMALL Lactic Acid Megazyme K-LATE Glycerol Megazyme K-GCROL Glucose Megazyme K-SUFRG Fructose Megazyme K-SUFRG Ammonia Nitrogen Megazyme K-AMIAR Primary Amino Nitrogen Megazyme K-PANOPA Ethanol Megazyme K-ETOH Acetaldehyde Megazyme K-ACHYD

[0067] For the quality analysis, samples were grouped together according to the drying temperature (i.e., 5 C. and 10 C.) and Brix measurement at the point of chemical analysis (i.e., at approximately 25Brix, mid-drying period (MP), and 29Brix, final drying period (FP)). For each group, the average and standard deviation was calculated and graphed along with the data from the initial harvest samples for each variety.

Results:

[0068] Drying was concluded when the grapes attained the targeted Brix level, which was 29. The Brix level was monitored every two weeks by randomly selecting 10 berries from each container in order to determine the total soluble solids level.

Drying Time

[0069] Depending on the drying conditions and grape varieties, the time required to dry the grapes varied from 42 to 114 days (Table 2) and weight loss varied from 23% to 40% (Table 3). It is generally though that the Appassimento process should last up to 120 days with a weight loss of up to 40% in order to fully allow the grapes to develop the necessary specificities that will produce a premium wine. From the three varieties evaluated, Cabernet Sauvignon meets most of the Appassimento requirements when dried at the lower temperature and the higher RH. In order to establish the ideal Appassimento drying combination, with respect to the individual grape variety, it is important to follow the grapes beyond the drying process through to wine making. By creating wines from the grapes after the Appassimento drying it would be possible to determine the real relationship between these results and the development of flavors and aromas that contribute to the creation of a premium wine.

TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Drying time in days (d) to reach the target Brix value Drying time to reach 29Brix (d) Cab. Cab. Condition Merlot Franc Sauv 10 C.-65% RH 47 42 65 10 C.-75% RH 65 57 96 5 C.-65% RH 60 58 110 5 C.-75% RH 78 92 114

TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Weight loss (%) over the total drying period Total Weight Loss (%) at 29Brix Cab. Cab. Condition Merlot Franc Sauv 10 C.-65% RH 29 23 32 10 C.-75% RH 33 25 40 5 C.-65% RH 28 24 42 5 C.-75% RH 28 31 35

[0070] Based on visual observation mold development was considered negligible.

Drying Parameters

[0071] The overall effects of temperature, relative humidity and airflow on the drying kinetic of the three grape varieties are presented in Table 4. The drying kinetic is presented as the percent (%) of weight loss (WL) per day (d) and the Brix increase per day, as well as the ratio of Brix/weight loss (B/WL).

[0072] Temperature had a significant effect on the dependent variables. As temperature increased, WL and TSS increased as well. This response was expected, as higher temperature allows for a higher respiration rate and also created an increase in the partial water vapor pressure of the grapes. Correspondingly, the effect of relative humidity is also significant, as higher relative humidity conditions resulted in less WL and lower TSS values.

[0073] The airflow by itself did not represent a significant factor in the drying process. This may be a result of too small of a difference between the two airflow values tested or due to the water evaporation rate from the grapes being very small as compared to the air's capacity to absorb moisture.

[0074] The grape varieties did not respond the same way to drying, all three varieties being significantly different from each other. Merlot (M), due to the thin skin of its berries, had the higher rate of weight loss, followed by Cabernet Franc (CF) and finally Cabernet Sauvignon (CS) (Table 5). TSS values were also significantly different, with CF having the highest rate of Brix increase, followed by M and CS. One of the most important factors to consider during the drying process is the ratio of Brix increase per percentage of weight loss (B/WL). A higher B/WL value means that the percentage of weight loss that the grapes must achieve during drying in order to reach the targeted Brix level will be lower. A higher B/WL ratio results in a higher yield for the winery since the target Brix can be achieved with less overall weight loss occurring in the grapes. Cabernet Franc had the highest B/WL ratio, followed by M and CS, which means that CF is concentrating more sugar during the drying process for the same amount of WL, as compared to M and CS.

TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Overall effects of temperature, RH and airflow rate on the drying kinetic Weight loss TSS Ratio (%/d) (Brix/d) (Brix/WL) Temperature ( C.) 10 0.504.sup.a 0.118.sup.a 0.236.sup.a 5 0.378.sup.b 0.085.sup.b 0.225.sup.a Relative Humidity (%) 65 0.487.sup.a 0.118.sup.a 0.242.sup.a 75 0.394.sup.b 0.086.sup.b 0.219.sup.b Airflow (L/min-kg) 0.25 0.445.sup.a 0.105.sup.a 0.234.sup.a 0.4 0.436.sup.a 0.098.sup.a 0.227.sup.a For every independent variable, means with the same letters are not significantly different at alpha = 0.05.

TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Effect of grape variety on the drying parameters Weight loss TSS Ratio Variety (%/d) (Brix/d) (Brix/WL) Cabernet Franc 0.434.sup.b 0.127.sup.a 0.293.sup.a Merlot 0.486.sup.a 0.106.sup.b 0.220.sup.b Cabernet Sauvignon 0.403.sup.c 0.072.sup.c 0.178.sup.c Means with the same letters are not significantly different at alpha = 0.05.

[0075] The interaction between temperature and weight loss and the resulting response from the different varieties was also significant (Table 6). At the higher temperature, Merlot was significantly more affected than the other varieties. At the lower temperature, the difference is less marked, however Merlot still has the higher rate, which is significantly different from Cabernet Sauvignon. As expected, the TSS increase rate was higher for Cabernet Franc at both temperatures but not significantly different from Merlot at low temperature. Cabernet Franc had the higher B/WL ratio at the higher temperature, significantly different than the other varieties but not different from what is observed for itself at low temperature. Correspondingly, similar results were observed for RH, with the exception that there was no significant difference between low and high RH for TSS development and B/WL values for CS, as well as B/WL values for M (Table 7). The two airflows were not significantly different in any of the cases but the response to airflow was significantly different between varieties, with M being the most affected through WL and CF for TSS and B/WL (Table 8).

TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Interaction between temperature and weight loss Temperature Cab. Cab. ( C.) Merlot Franc Sauv Weight loss (%/d) 10 0.561.sup.a 0491.sup.b 0.459.sup.b 5 0.410.sup.c 0.376.sup.cd 0.348.sup.d TSS (Brix/d) 10 0.118.sup.b 0.152.sup.a 0.085.sup.c 5 0.095.sup.c 0.102.sup.bc 0.059.sup.d Ratio (Brix/Weight loss) 10 0.209.sup.cd 0.315.sup.a 0.184.sup.d 5 0.231.sup.bc 0.270.sup.ab 0.173.sup.d Means with the same letters are not significantly different at alpha = 0.05.

TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Interaction between relative humidity and weight loss Relative Cab. Cab. Humidity (%) Merlot Franc Sauv Weight loss (%/d) 65 0.536.sup.a 0.484.sup.b .sup.0.442.sup.bc 75 0.435.sup.c 0.383.sup.d 0.365.sup.d TSS (Brix/d) 65 0.122.sup.b 0.150.sup.a .sup.0.081.sup.de 75 0.090.sup.cd .sup.0.104.sup.bc 0.063.sup.e Ratio (Brix/Weight loss) 65 0.230.sup.bc 0.316.sup.a 0.180.sup.d 75 0.210.sup.cd 0.269.sup.b 0.177.sup.d Means with the same letters are not significantly different at alpha = 0.05.

TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8 Interaction between airflow and weight loss Airflow Cab. Cab. (L/min-kg) Merlot Franc Sauv Weight loss (%/d) 0.25 0.491.sup.a 0.438.sup.b 0.408.sup.bc 0.4 0.481.sup.a .sup.0.430.sup.bc 0.399.sup.c TSS (Brix/d) 0.25 0.111.sup.b 0.129.sup.a 0.076.sup.c 0.4 0.101.sup.b 0.125.sup.a 0.068.sup.c Ratio (Brix/Weight loss) 0.25 0.228.sup.b 0.299.sup.a .sup.0.187.sup.cd 0.4 .sup.0.212.sup.bc 0.286.sup.a 0.169.sup.d Means with the same letters are not significantly different at alpha = 0.05.

Titratable Acidity and pH

[0076] The acidity level of juice or wine is a very important factor which will affect the composition, color, microbial stability, chemical reactions, structure, and above all the sensory perception and taste of the wine. Acids can be divided into two groups: the fixed acids (predominantly tartaric, malic, citric, and succinic), and the volatile acids (almost exclusively acetic acid).

[0077] The perception of acidity is also influenced by the type of acid present in the wine, with malic acid having the greatest perceived sourness of all the wine acids. Acid thresholds are increased by the presence of ethanol and also by sugar. The overall sensory perception of acidity is a function of a balance between all of these influences. Acidity in wine can come from those acids which are already present in the grape at harvest, or from those which are generated during winemaking or drying.

[0078] Acidity in wine is typically measured as titratable acidity (TA); chemically the acids influence total titratable acidity and pH.

[0079] Titratable acidity in grapes usually is in the range of 5 to 16 g/L. The pH of grape juice is ideally in the range of 3.0 to 3.8 at harvest. Both TA and pH could be higher or lower depending on the climate where the grapes are grown. Grapes which are grown in cooler regions tend to ripen later and at harvest they typically yield juice with a lower pH and higher TA than grapes grown in warmer climates. Typical harvest parameters for Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon and Cabernet Franc in the Niagara Peninsula are a pH between 3.3 to 3.5 and a TA between 5 to 7 g/L. In general, wines produced from a high Brix must, in the range of 23.0 to 26.0, are recommended to also have a must TA ranging from 5.0 to 7.5 g/L and a pH of 3.3 to 3.7.

[0080] In this study, the starting ranges of TA at harvest were consistent with the expected range of 5.0 to 16 g/L (FIG. 4A), with respect to the variety and typical values for the Niagara Peninsula region. Harvest values were on the higher end of the expected range, which is representative of a cool climate region, such as the Niagara Peninsula. The pH levels were lower than a typical harvest target value for the region but increased over the course of the drying process as TA declined (FIG. 4B). The results after drying were grapes with pH values very close to or within the ideal range for the region of 3.3 to 3.5. The decrease in TA and corresponding increase in pH during drying is likely a result of malic respiration, as malic acid is quickly consumed early in grape dehydration.

Malic Acid and Lactic Acid

[0081] At equal levels of each of the common wine acids, malic acid has the highest perceived sourness, followed by tartaric acid, citric acid and lactic acid. Malic acid is biologically fragile and is readily metabolized by numerous wine bacteria in the process of malolactic fermentation. During malolactic fermentation, bacteria in the wine convert malic acid to lactic acid. This malic acid decrease is greater in conditioned drying systems than what is seen in natural drying systems. For wines grown in a cool climate, the level of acidity may be too high at harvest, resulting in overly tart wines. In many wines, malolactic fermentation can function as an important deacidification process. The bacteria responsible for the malolactic conversion are also responsible for producing compounds which can contribute to complex aromas and cream and buttery characteristics in the wine. Malic acid is typically in the range of 2 to 4 g/L in grapes at harvest and may be as high as 6 g/L in grapes from a cold growing region. Lactic acid is usually found in concentrations of 0 to 2.5 g/L in wines.

[0082] The low values reported herein for the initial concentration of malic acid and the subsequent increase seen at the mid-drying point suggests that there might have been an error in the reporting of the initial values (FIG. 5A). The levels at the mid-drying point are in the range of normal values for malic acid in grapes and these levels decrease over time by the final drying point, which is expected as malolactic fermentation occurs. Lactic acid in wines is produced mainly as a result of malolactic fermentation; however, lactic acid can also be produced using other sources besides malic acid by the microorganisms present, and thus malolactic fermentation is measured by the disappearance of malic acid, rather than by the increase of lactic acid. An increase in lactic acid concentration was observed between the initial very low harvest values and the higher mid-drying point values (FIG. 5B). There was an overall decrease in concentration of lactic acid by the final drying point, however this drop was minor. The literature suggests that once lactic acid is formed, the levels should not undergo much change.

Acetic Acid and Acetaldehyde

[0083] Volatile acidity in wines is most often viewed as a spoilage characteristic and includes compounds such as acetic acid, acetaldehyde and ethyl acetate, which generate undesirable sensory characteristics (e.g. aromas of vinegar, oxidized, or nail polish remover) at high concentrations. In certain botrytized wines these acids can sometimes contribute positively to the aroma and flavor characteristics. Levels of volatile acidity are usually monitored closely throughout the wine making process, as concentrations can easily increase due to microbial activity. Volatile acidity can be veiled by high levels of sugar and alcohol and also increases the sensory perception of tannins and fixed acids.

[0084] Acetic acid is a by-product of microbial metabolism through the process of wine making and it eventually becomes the main volatile acid in the finished wine with a typical concentration range of 200-400 mg/L. The production of acetic acid during fermentation is not well understood. It has a distinct odor and like other volatiles it evaporates quickly. The production of acetic acid will result in the formation of other undesirable compounds, such as acetaldehyde and ethyl acetate. Acetaldehyde is a major component in the production of ethanol and it is normally reduced during fermentation. In some instances it is still present in wine at concentrations of 20 to 200 mg/L but the threshold ranges from about 100 to 125 mg/L. Both acetic acid and acetaldehyde can have negative effects on fermentation, as they are toxic to the Saccharomyces cerevisiae yeast.

[0085] Results for the present method show an initial increase in acetic acid levels as a result of microbial activity and metabolic processes (FIG. 6A). This is followed by a decrease in levels; acetic acid is a volatile and evaporates quickly which could explain some of the decrease in concentration, especially at the higher temperature. Production of acetic acid during wine making also slows down at pH levels over 3.2 and the pH in the grapes was increasing to this level or close to this level as the drying progressed. Acetaldehyde levels will increase as acetic acid concentration increases, since it is a by-product of acetic acid production, and an increase in acetaldehyde was visible by the final drying point in all varieties (FIG. 6B). The threshold for acetaldehyde ranges from 100 to 125 mg/L and the final levels in this study are far below this concentration.

Glucose and Fructose

[0086] Glucose and fructose are the two major sugars in grapes and comprise the majority of the soluble solids. These sugars are fermented into alcohol by the yeast. Determining the Brix does not accurately represent the sugar content in grapes and a measurement of the glucose and fructose levels can help to determine the fermentability of a wine. Both fructose and glucose are partially responsible to impart sweetness to grape juice, and also to the wine if still present after fermentation.

[0087] In unripe berries, glucose is the predominant sugar. In ripe berries, the sugar content is usually between 150 to 250 g/L with variability based on the variety and a ratio of glucose to fructose concentration that is close to one (1:1); however, climatic conditions could affect the 1:1 ratio. Glucose is metabolized slightly faster by the yeast during wine making and consequently the ratio declines gradually during fermentation.

[0088] Results showed that the glucose to fructose ratio was close to the expected 1:1 level in the grapes at harvest in all varieties. Glucose was a bit higher in concentration than fructose, which is typical of grapes that are not completely ripe or those grown in cooler regions, and corresponds to the high initial TA levels seen (FIG. 7A and FIG. 7B). The initial combined sugar content for each variety was within the typical range of 150 to 250 g/L. Overall there was a concentration effect of the sugars during drying, which created an increase in sugar levels. At the same time that sugar was being concentrated through the drying process, sugar was also being metabolized, and glucose at a slightly faster rate than fructose. Accordingly, the data shows that although both sugars increased in concentration as the grapes lost water, the fructose concentration increased at a faster rate.

Ethanol

[0089] Ethanol in wine is produced through alcoholic fermentation and it is the main by-product of this process. Ethanol affects the flavor of a wine and also the wine's body. Prior to fermentation, the level of ethanol is almost zero in grape juice. Ethanol content increases in both control and tunnel-dried grapes. The effect of ethanol concentration due to weight loss in dried grapes is partial. The increase in ethanol during the drying process is also due to metabolic processes. As expected, results show an increase in overall ethanol content due to metabolic processes (FIG. 8). In two of the three varieties, there is a slight drop in concentration at the final point for the higher temperature treatment. This could be due to the stress of the higher temperature and evaporative nature of ethanol.

Glycerol

[0090] Glycerol is an alcohol found in trace amounts in sound grapes, typically less than 1 g/L. It is produced as a by-product during sugar fermentation and is typically found in concentrations of 4 to 12 g/L in table wines, and can be as high as 15 to 25 g/L in late harvest wines. Glycerol is viscous and sweet, and the detectable sweetness level in wine is 5 g/L.

[0091] The general perception is that glycerol contributes positively to the quality of wine. It has been suggested to contribute specifically to the mouth-feel, body and texture properties of wine, although no positive relationship has been established between glycerol and mouth-feel. Glycerol content increases in tunnel-dried grapes by the end of the dehydration process to 1.5 g/L.

[0092] Results in the present method showed initial glycerol levels to be in the typical range expected for grapes, less than 1 g/L (FIG. 9). In Merlot and Cabernet Franc there was an overall increase in levels by the end of the drying process, which is consistent with the prior art. In all varieties there was an increase in glycerol concentration from mid-drying point to final drying point at the higher temperature, and also at the lower temperature for CF and CS.

Ammonia Nitrogen and Primary Amino Nitrogen

[0093] Nitrogen is a very important compound in wine production, as it is a nutrient used by yeast in the fermentation process. Ammonia Nitrogen and Primary Amino Nitrogen together represent the total Yeast Assimilable Nitrogen (YAN), which is the total nitrogen available for yeast to use. A good fermentation process will result in good alcohol production. If there is a deficiency of nitrogen in the must, then fermentation will not proceed without problems, including stuck fermentation and the potential production of hydrogen sulfide, which has a rotten egg odor. Additionally, if there is too much protein present then there could be clarification issues with the wine.

[0094] Ammonia nitrogen is the primary form available for yeast to metabolize and is usually present in a range of 24 to 209 mg/L in grapes. Generally yeast need at least 150 mg/L for YAN requirements and 200 to 250 mg/L is preferred. As stress variables increase, the YAN concentration needed in the must will also increase. Stress factors include temperature extremes and high Brix.

[0095] Results in the present method were highly variable between varieties. Overall there was likely a concentration effect occurring during the drying process, along with some metabolic activity (FIG. 10A and FIG. 10B). Initial levels were overall quite low in the grapes and the values at the end of the drying process were still low, however YAN requirements will vary depending on the winemaker and the specific wine being produced.

[0096] The most promising combination of drying parameters in terms of total Appassimento wine yield produced from the dried grapes, would be to use Cabernet Franc at a faster drying rate; in this case the best parameters were 10 C. and 65% RH. However, a faster drying time may be viewed as contrary to the spirit of the Italian Appassimento wine making process, since the hallmark flavors and aromas may not have adequate time to fully develop in a very fast drying process. A slower drying process would require a low temperature and a higher relative humidity; for this study the parameters to create a slower drying time were 5 C. and 75% relative humidity.

[0097] Results showed that the Appassimento drying principle is variety related. Cabernet Sauvignon was naturally a slower drying variety than Cabernet Franc and Merlot, for the particular harvest year.

[0098] The Appassimento process particularly benefits red wine made in cooler climates, however this method is not a miracle cure for bad quality grapes. The harvested grapes going into the Appassimento process must be of high quality and dried consistently to produce a premium wine.

[0099] The novel features will become apparent to those of skill in the art upon examination of the description. It should be understood, however, that the scope of the claims should not be limited by the embodiments, but should be given the broadest interpretation consistent with the wording of the claims and the specification as a whole.