English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

(Your abstract must use Normal style and must fit in this box. The abstract should be written in English and should be around 1000 words long, i.e., 2 pages excluding title, authors & affiliations, keywords and references. Authors are encouraged to show important figures/tables etc in the abstract so as to make a full presentation.) Proteins (from grapes and yeast) are present in wine. They are only present in low concentrations and add no nutritional value; however, their presence can adversely affect the clarity and stability of wines. An important step in wine production is the removal of proteins by “fining”. Generally conducted as part of a batch process, fining agents need to be handled with care in terms of concentration and processing time. “Over-fining” can strip a wine of flavour and colour and generate excess lees. Large scale fining of quality white wines is almost invariably conducted using sodium bentonite. This is added as a slurry which settles over time to create “lees”. The fined wine is then “racked” off the lees (run from the tank above the sediment). This incurs costs by creating a waste product (the lees) and resulting in losses of wine of up to 10%. Cost is also incurred by lower wine quality if wine is recovered from the lees. The process can be improved if the fining agent can be immobilised, accompanied with optimisation of the fining process to make it continuous. Therefore, there is potential to remove the haze forming proteins from wine in a continuous system by filtering with mixed matrix membranes (MMMs). MMM’s combine the principles of adsorption (and chromatography when in series) and membrane filtration in a single separation step that harness particles with an active surface on which the protein adsorbs as the wine is filtered. The ideal MMM must show specificity onto the encapsulated particles while maintaining an open matrix with well attached particles that have most of their active surface available for adsorption. This work quantifies and characterises MMMs fabricated using phase inversion by immersion precipitation. Ten weight percent (wt%) polyethersulfone (PES) and polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) were combined with 0, 15, 30 and 40 wt% montmorillonite (MMT – the active component of sodium bentonite) or zirconia (Zr). A Sterlitech HP4750 dead-end cell was used to filter a model wine solution consisting of 300mg L -1 Bovine Serum Albumin (BSA), 12% w/w ethanol with the remainder water through thirteen fabricated membranes. These membranes were also subjected to weight-loss analysis, different feed pHs and morphology characterisation via scanning electron microscopy (SEM, Philips XL30S Field Emission Gun). Results showed that there were differing membrane morphologies with increasing particle loading for MMT and Zr. Increased MMT loading increased porosity (and therefore flux) as shown in Figure 1. This is what is desired – a high immobilisation of

Towards Continuous Wine Making: The Optimization of Mixed Matrix Membranes for Wine Fining