## 3 Results and Discussion
### Total Phenols (TP), Color Intensity (CI) and Color Components (%Ye and %Re)  
In white wine, the principal compounds responsible for coloration are catechins and hydroxycinnamates, which, initially, might present colorless characteristics but can form yellow or brown products when enzymatically (mainly during AF) or nonemzymatically oxidized [38; 54]. This process is denominated _browning_, and it is not desired in white wine production, with a few exceptions (sherries and sweet fortified wines, like Port and Madeira) [34]. Several authors use A\({}_{420}\) as an indicator of the browning rate, which naturally increases over time due to the oxidation and polymerization of phenolic compounds; however, it is important to mention that browning depends not only on the grape variety, maturity at the time of harvest and technological processes but also on temperature, pH, light and oxygen content, which affect the oxidation rate of wines as a whole [38; 39]. The increase in polyphenic extraction of red wines due to PEF pretreatment is already well-known, being a major advantage for the utilization of this technology [16; 55; 56]. In white wine, the increase in extraction might present a duality of advantages, such as the increase in juice yield and aromatic compounds, and disadvantages, such as higher bitterness and astringency, and accelerate aging; however, it is dependent on parameters such as grape variety and maceration time [8; 32; 57]. Ideally, the solution is equilibrating the PEF protocol and skin contact period, if used. To better understand the impact of PEF and assess differences in the dynamics of polyphenol content during AF, we measured total polyphenols (TP), color intensity (CI), %Ye, %Red and %Blue. We also compared these measurements between a control group and batches treated with extraction enzymes. The results are presented in Table 4 and resumed in Figure 4.  
Figure 4: Evolution of Total Phenols (TP) (**left**) and Color Intensity (**right**) over time (Stage 0: after pressing, Stage 1: after decantation, Stage 2: middle of AF, Stage 3: End of AF and Stage 4: after 3 months) (n = 9). Similar to the results observed in pH and TA, total phenols (TP) was also significantly affected by the wine treatment used. Based on the statistical results (F(2, 24) = 33.941, \(p\) < 0.001, \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.738), we can hypothesize that 73.8% of the variance in total phenols concentration can be attributed to differences related to the processing methods. To locate which groups presented statistical differences amongst them, [PERSON]'s test of multiple comparisons was performed. ARC and ARPEF presented the largest differences amongst the three subjects, with a mean difference (MD) of \(-\)2.220 (\(p\) < 0.001, 95% C.I. = \(-\)2.919, \(-\)1.521), followed by ARC and ARE, with MD = \(-\)1.647 (\(p\) < 0.001, 95% C.I. = \(-\)2.345, \(-\)0.948). However, when comparing the groups ARPEF with ARE, the results do not show statistically significant differences, with the MD = 0.573 (\(p\) = 0.122. C.I. = \(-\)0.125, 1.272). The type of treatment used during grape processing, control, enzymes and PEF, also presented significant differences in the color intensity (F(2, 24) = 308.008, \(p\) < 0.001). Post hoc [PERSON]'s test demonstrated that the highest mean difference was regarding ARC vs. ARE (MD= \(-\)0.445, \(p\) < 0.001. 95% C.I. = \(-\)0.492, \(-\)0.398). ARE vs. ARPEF posed a smaller difference that was still statistically significant (MD= 0.108, \(p\) < 0.001, 95% C.I. = 0.061, 0.155). However, when analyzing the color components %Ye, %Red and %Blue separately, we noticed significant differences between treatments (%Red: F(2, 24) = 19.128, \(p\) < 0.001, \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.614; %Ye: F(2, 24) = 85.665, \(p\) < 0.001, \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.877; and %Blue: F(2, 24) = 36.936, \(p\) < 0.001, \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.754). Post hoc tests revealed significant differences between ARC and both ARE and ARPEF for all color components, but no statistically significant differences were found between ARE and ARPEF.