ESC

Start typing to search across all content

sparkling winefermentationwinemaking

Sparkling Wine Production: Technical Challenges in Secondary Fermentation

Analysis of secondary fermentation management, pressure development, riddling, disgorgement, and dosage decisions in traditional method sparkling wines.

6 min read
Eno Codex Editorial

Sparkling Wine Production: Technical Challenges in Secondary Fermentation

Problem Definition

Sparkling wine production adds complexity to standard winemaking through secondary fermentation (prise de mousse), which occurs either in bottle (traditional method) or in tank (Charmat/tank method). Each method presents specific technical challenges: pressure management, yeast performance under stress, autolysis timing, and dosage calibration.

Key challenges vary by method:

  • Traditional method: Fermentation at high pressure in sealed bottles; riddling and disgorgement complexity
  • Charmat method: Large-volume tank fermentation; rapid processing requirements
  • Both: Achieving target pressure; carbonation quality; consistent dosage

Technical Context

Secondary Fermentation Chemistry

Sugar-to-CO₂ conversion: C₆H₁₂O₆ → 2C₂H₅OH + 2CO₂

For prise de mousse:

  • 4 g/L sugar → ~1 bar pressure (at 10°C)
  • Target 6 bar: ~24 g/L sugar in liqueur de tirage

Pressure development:

  • Pressure proportional to dissolved CO₂
  • Solubility decreases with temperature
  • 6 bar at 10°C; higher pressure at room temperature
  • Bottle strength rated for expected pressure plus margin

Yeast behavior under pressure:

  • CO₂ at high pressure inhibits yeast metabolism
  • Fermentation rate decreases as pressure increases
  • Complete conversion requires adapted strains
  • Cell death and autolysis follow fermentation completion

Autolysis

Post-fermentation, dead yeast cells undergo autolysis—enzymatic self-digestion releasing:

  • Mannoproteins: Improve mouthfeel and foam quality
  • Amino acids: Umami, complexity
  • Nucleotides: Savory character
  • Lipids: Influence bubble quality

Autolysis timeline:

  • Minimal impact <6 months
  • Noticeable at 12-18 months
  • Significant at 24-36 months
  • Diminishing returns beyond 60 months

Bubble Quality

Bubble size and persistence depend on:

  • Nucleation sites (glass surface)
  • Dissolved CO₂ concentration
  • Surfactants (proteins, mannoproteins from autolysis)
  • Serving temperature

Wines with longer lees contact produce finer, more persistent bubbles due to higher mannoprotein content.

Options and Interventions

Traditional Method (Méthode Champenoise)

Base wine requirements:

  • Low alcohol (10.5-11.5% v/v) to allow headroom for secondary fermentation
  • High acidity (TA 7-9 g/L) for aging potential
  • Stable (tartrate and protein stable; MLF completed or definitively blocked)
  • Clean (no faults that will concentrate during aging)

Tirage:

  1. Prepare liqueur de tirage: Sugar (saccharose) + base wine + yeast + nutrients
  2. Standard addition: 24 g/L sugar for ~6 bar
  3. Bottling: Fill to calculated level; crown cap or bidule + cap
  4. Store horizontally at 12-14°C

Prise de mousse:

  • Duration: 6-8 weeks typical
  • Temperature: 12-14°C (slow fermentation preserves finesse)
  • Monitoring: Random bottle sampling for completion

Sur lattes aging:

  • Champagne AOC minimum: 15 months total (non-vintage); 36 months (vintage)
  • Longer aging develops complexity through autolysis
  • Optimal temperature: 10-12°C

Riddling (remuage):

  • Manual: 6-8 weeks; pupitre turning
  • Mechanical (gyropalette): 3-7 days
  • Goal: Concentrate sediment in bottle neck

Disgorgement (dégorgement):

  • Freeze neck in brine (-25°C)
  • Remove crown cap; pressure expels ice plug with sediment
  • Volume loss: ~10-20 mL

Dosage:

  • Liqueur d’expédition: Wine + sugar (and sometimes SO₂, acid)
  • Sugar levels by style: Brut <12 g/L; Extra Brut <6 g/L; Brut Nature 0-3 g/L
  • Quality of liqueur wine affects final product

Charmat Method (Tank Method)

Process:

  1. Base wine into pressure tank
  2. Add sugar and yeast
  3. Ferment at controlled temperature (14-18°C)
  4. Duration: 2-6 weeks (faster than bottle)
  5. Filter under pressure
  6. Dosage and bottling under counterpressure

Advantages:

  • Cost-effective for large volumes
  • Preserves fresh fruit character (Glera for Prosecco)
  • Consistent product
  • Rapid turnaround

Limitations:

  • No autolysis (short lees contact)
  • Less complex bubble structure
  • Style constraints (best for fresh, aromatic styles)

Transfer Method

Hybrid approach:

  • Secondary fermentation in bottle (autolysis benefits)
  • Transfer to tank under pressure
  • Filter, dosage, rebottle
  • Avoids riddling/disgorgement labor

Trade-offs and Risks

Pressure failure:

  • Incomplete secondary fermentation → undercarbonated wine
  • Causes: Yeast stress, nutrient deficiency, temperature too low
  • Prevention: Use proven sparkling yeast; ensure adequate YAN; control temperature

Over-pressure:

  • Excess sugar → dangerous pressure
  • Bottle explosion risk
  • Calculate tirage sugar precisely; use pressure-rated bottles

Oxidation at disgorgement:

  • Brief oxygen exposure unavoidable
  • Minimize time; immediate corking
  • Jetting (CO₂ injection before final cork) displaces oxygen

Dosage balance:

  • Under-dosage: Lean, austere (acceptable for Brut Nature market)
  • Over-dosage: Masks wine character; cloying
  • Trial dosages before production

Tartrate stability:

  • Base wine must be cold stable
  • Tartrate crystals after tirage create disgorgement problems
  • Pre-stabilize rigorously

MLF management:

  • If blocked in base wine: Risk of in-bottle MLF under lees → turbidity
  • If completed: Loss of freshness; softer style
  • Producer decision based on house style

Practical Implications

Variety-specific considerations:

  • Chardonnay: Workhorse for Blanc de Blancs. High acidity clones selected for Champagne AOC. Malolactic often completed for richness. Ages well sur lattes.

  • Pinot Noir: Whole-cluster pressing minimizes color extraction. Provides structure and red fruit character. Champagne AOC blends; Blanc de Noirs for pure expression.

  • Glera: Primary variety for Prosecco. Charmat method preserves apple/pear aromatics. Short processing time essential; no extended aging.

Appellation-specific implications:

  • Champagne AOC: Traditional method mandatory. Minimum aging (15 months NV; 36 months vintage). Complex regulations on blending across years. Dosage labeling requirements.

  • Prosecco DOC: Charmat method standard. Minimum 30 days on lees for DOC; 60 days for Conegliano Valdobbiadene DOCG. Fresh, fruity style paramount.

  • Conegliano Valdobbiadene DOCG: Higher quality Prosecco designation. Longer Charmat contact (60+ days). Rive (single-vineyard) and Cartizze sub-zones.

References

  • Ribéreau-Gayon, P., Dubourdieu, D., Donèche, B., & Lonvaud, A. (2006). Handbook of Enology, Volume 1: The Microbiology of Wine and Vinifications (2nd ed.). Wiley. Publisher Link

  • Pozo-Bayón, M.A., Martínez-Rodríguez, A., Pueyo, E., & Moreno-Arribas, M.V. (2009). “Chemical and Biochemical Features Involved in Sparkling Wine Production: From a Traditional to an Improved Winemaking Technology.” Food Chemistry, 116, 599-608. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.03.011

  • Alexandre, H., & Guilloux-Benatier, M. (2006). “Yeast Autolysis in Sparkling Wine—A Review.” Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 12, 119-127. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-0238.2006.tb00051.x

  • Torresi, S., Frangipane, M.T., & Anelli, G. (2011). “Biotechnologies in Sparkling Wine Production: Interesting Approaches for Quality Improvement: A Review.” Food Chemistry, 129, 1232-1241. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.05.006