{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.06070549630844955, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011484823625922888, 'mean_word_length': 5.192893401015229, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
An assessment of the role played by some oxidation-related aldehydes in wine aroma.

The levels of important oxidation-related aldehydes, such as methional, phenylacetaldehyde, (E)-2-hexenal, (E)-2-heptenal, (E)-2-octenal, (E)-2-nonenal, methylpropanal, 2-methylbutanal, and 3-methylbutanal, were determined in 41 different wines belonging to different types (young whites and reds, natural sparkling wines, oxidized young whites and reds, Sherry, aged red wines, Port wines). Except (E)-2-hexenal and (E)-2-heptenal, all of them could be found at levels above threshold. Different compositional patterns were identified: Sherry wines have large amounts of branched aldehydes but not of (E)-2-alkenals, wines exposed to oxygen can have large amounts of (E)-2-alkenals but not of branched aldehydes, while aged wine and Port have relatively large amounts of both classes of compounds. Different sensory tests confirmed the active sensory role of these compounds and revealed the existence of interactions (additive or synergic) between them and with other wine volatiles. (E)-2-Alkenals are related to flavor deterioration, while branched aldehydes enhance dried fruit notes and mask the negative role of (E)-2-alkenals.