New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Smoke Taint: Wildfires Pose a Growing Threat to Winegrowers

Wildfires can contaminate grapes and ruin the beverage's flavor

Rob White Getty Images

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Some wines, like those aged in toasted oak barrels, taste great with a hint of smoke. But too much can spoil the flavor. As the climate warms and wildfires grow more frequent and intense, pollution from them can drift into vineyards and get absorbed by the plants—imparting a foul, ashy taste known in the industry as “smoke taint.” Bushfires between 2006 and 2007 ruined around $60 million to $70 million worth of wine in the Australian state of Victoria alone. This year late summer wildfires damaged grapes in Oregon and Washington State and, in a tragedy that killed dozens, devastated parts of northern California.

Little is known about the biochemistry of how smoke contaminates wine. Adding to the mystery is that smoky notes cannot always be tasted in the grapes themselves—but they still sometimes find their way into the finished product. Recent research, however, helps explain what is going on. In a study published in July in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, Wilfried Schwab, a food chemist at the Technical University of Munich, and his colleagues identified a type of grapevine enzyme called glycosyltransferases, which bind smoke molecules to sugars in the grapes. This creates chemicals called glucosides that are difficult to taste but can be broken down by yeast during fermentation, freeing the ashy notes and ruining the wine.

The discovery points to some possible fixes for the pungent problem. One option is to breed or isolate strains of yeast that leave the glucosides intact. Another strategy is to develop a chemical that deactivates glycosyltransferases and could be sprayed on vines. This would prevent sugars from binding to and locking up the acrid flavors within the plant, says Markus Herderich, a scientist at the Australian Wine Research Institute, who was not involved in the Munich work. Scientists might also be able to find grape strains with low natural levels of glycosyltransferases—or even to genetically engineer plants that lack such chemicals. The search for solutions, Schwab says, is on.

Douglas Main is an independent journalist who covers environmental issues, the natural world and a range of other scientific topics. His writing has appeared in the New York Times, the Atlantic, MIT Technology Review, Hakai Magazine and other publications. Until recently, he was a senior writer and editor at National Geographic. Follow him on X (formerly Twitter) at @douglas_main.

More by Douglas Main
Scientific American Magazine Vol 317 Issue 6This article was published with the title “Smoky Wine” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 317 No. 6 (), p. 17
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1217-17

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe