## 4 Conclusions  
The purpose of this study was to identify the key flavor compounds in Marselan dry red wine and compare them with Cabernet Sauvignon dry red wine, using HPLC-QqQ-MS/MS, GC-MS, combined color parameters, and QDA methods to analyze samples from five different wine regions in China. In conclusion, the paired \(t\)-test was carried out to identify the volatile compounds that terpenids, higher alcohols, and aliphatic lactones were significantly different according to the grape variety. Among these compounds, terpenids could be considered marker aroma compounds to distinguish Marselan wines from Cabernet Sauvignon, which could explain the distinct floral note in young Marselan wines. The mean concentrations of the mv-vsol, mv-vgol, mv-vcol, mvC-vgol, mv-v(e)cat, mvC-v(e)cat, mv-di(e)cat, and cafA were higher in Marselan wines than Cabernet Sauvignon wines, and these compounds might confer Marselan wines with a deeper color, more red hue, and higher tannin quality. Marselan and Cabernet Sauvignon wines from the same winery shared a similar polyphenol profile because the individual winemaking practice could have a great impact on the phenolic profile of wines of two varieties and mitigate the differences between them. Aroma compounds were more reflective of varietal differences, and polyphenols were mainly affected by the winemaking practices. The compounds of \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Attributes**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Cabernet Sauvignon**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Marselan**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\)**-Value**} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{4-7}  & **Minimum** & **Maximum** & **Mean** & **Minimum** & **Maximum** & **Mean** & \\ \hline \(L^{*}\) & 37.450 & 66.160 & 55.880 & 25.910 & 62.980 & 47.036 & **<0.001 *** \\ \(a^{*}\) & 29.790 & 53.960 & 39.134 & 36.580 & 61.760 & 45.918 & **<0.001 *** \\ \(b^{*}\) & 5.240 & 22.010 & 14.540 & 1.410 & 20.400 & 13.055 & 0.168 \\ Red fruit & 4.923 & 6.583 & 5.673 & 5.349 & 6.547 & 5.713 & 0.824 \\ Black fruit & 5.384 & 6.111 & 5.718 & 5.050 & 6.540 & 5.745 & 0.839 \\ Fresh fruit & 2.910 & 4.738 & 3.491 & 3.081 & 4.500 & 3.708 & 0.171 \\ Floral & 2.456 & 4.052 & 2.796 & 2.361 & 4.167 & 3.048 & 0.166 \\ Dried fruit & 2.057 & 3.771 & 2.847 & 1.589 & 4.343 & 3.020 & 0.099 \\ HERaceous & 2.278 & 4.842 & 3.197 & 2.194 & 3.334 & 2.689 & **0.013 \({}^{*}\)** \\ Sweet & 1.383 & 2.623 & 1.756 & 1.403 & 3.118 & 2.089 & 0.076 \\ Oak & 2.291 & 5.041 & 3.233 & 1.972 & 4.174 & 2.939 & **0.020 \({}^{*}\)** \\ Astringency & 3.188 & 7.009 & 4.311 & 2.906 & 5.484 & 4.068 & 0.309 \\ Tannin quality & 4.268 & 6.673 & 5.725 & 5.238 & 6.574 & 5.936 & 0.275 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* *, ***: Significant at \(p\leq\) 0.05 and 0.001, respectively.  
\end{table} 
Table 4: The paired \(t\)-test results of CIELAB chromatic parameters and sensory profiles in Cabernet Sauvignon and Marselan dry red wines from five regions in China. the two varieties were different, which was also reflected in the sensory characteristics. Meanwhile, the intensities of herbaceous and oak of Cabernet Sauvignon were higher than Marselan, and Cabernet Sauvignon wines had a greater intensity of astringency in China's various producing areas. Moreover, Marselan wines' dark color and red color were higher than Cabernet Sauvignon. The results obtained in this research could provide information to study how to modulate and express the sensory characteristics of Chinese Marselan dry red wine through the application of various winemaking practices. The following supporting information can be downloaded at: [[https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/foods12051110/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/foods12051110/s1)]([https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/foods12051110/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/foods12051110/s1)).