Evaluation of phenolic compounds content and in vitro antioxidant activity of red wines produced from Vitis labrusca grapes

Wine production in the northern Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil, specifically the communes of Colombo and Almirante Tamandaré, is based mainly on the utilization of Vitis labrusca grapes var. Bordô (Ives). Total sugar content, pH, and total acidity were analyzed in red wine samples from 2007 and 2008 vintages following official methods of analysis. Moreover, total phenolic, flavonoid, and tannin contents were analyzed by colorimetric methodologies and the antioxidant activity was determined using the 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical methodology. Phenolic compounds were identified by high performance liquid chromatography. The total phenolic content of wine samples presented concentrations varying between 1582.35 and 2896.08 mg gallic acid.L-1 since the major part corresponds to flavonoid content. In these compounds' concentration range, a direct relationship between phenolic compounds content and levels of antioxidant activity was not observed. Among the identified phenolic compounds, chlorogenic, caffeic, and syringic acids were found to be the major components. Using three principal components, it was possible to explain 81.36% of total variance of the studied samples. Principal Components Analysis does not differentiate between vintages.

Ordered probit regression analysis of the effect of brand name on beer acceptance by consumers

Ordered probit regression was used to analyze data of sensory acceptance tests designed to study the effect of brand name on the acceptability of beer samples. Eight different brands of Pilsen beer were evaluated by 101 consumers in two sessions of acceptance tests: blind evaluation and brand information test. Ordered probit regression, although a relatively sophisticated technique compared to others used to analyze sensory data, was chosen to enable the observation of consumers' behavior using graphical interpretations of estimated probabilities plotted against hedonic scales. It can be concluded that brands B, C, and D had a positive effect on the sensory acceptance of the product, whereas brands A, F, G, and H had a negative influence on consumers' evaluation of the samples. On the other hand, brand E had little influence on consumers' assessment.