1H-NMR Analysis of Wine Metabolites: Method Development and Validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wine, as a high-value product, is vulnerable to counterfeiting. To tackle increasingly sophisticated fraud, innovative analytical approaches are required. However, they must undergo rigorous validation. Proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-NMR) is intrinsically quantitative, reproducible, and fast, making it a promising tool for official control. This study presents the development and validation of a standardised and fully automated workflow for the quantification of 20 oenologically relevant compounds, including organic acids, sugars, alcohols, esters, phenolics, and an alkaloid. The method combines optimised sample preparation, external quantification standards, spectrometer calibration, and a dedicated R package (RnmrQuant1D) for fully automated spectral processing, enabling high-throughput and operator-independent analysis. Validation was performed under intermediate precision according to OIV metrological standards, evaluating accuracy, precision, robustness, limits of quantification, and measurement uncertainty. The results demonstrated excellent linearity, trueness, and reproducibility, matching the targeted analytical performance. Measurement uncertainties were estimated both by conventional linear modelling and by a dynamic approach better suited to detection limits. The workflow is easy to implement, requires minimal sample consumption, and substantially reduces operator bias. Beyond validating a robust method, this study provides a framework for harmonised, transferable 1H-NMR workflows that could support large-scale databases, integration with chemometric models, and ultimately, 1H-NMR’s recognition as a relevant method for wine authentication and quality control. This work fills a crucial gap in wine analysis by uniting practical application and rigorous methods, enabling broader adoption in control laboratories worldwide.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.032 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".