# New Isolated Autochthonous Strains of _S. cerevisiae_ for
## 3 Results and Discussion
### Determination of Selected Polyphenolic Compounds and Total Polyphenol Content  
The contents of selected phenolic acids (gallic, chlorogenic, caffeic, vanillic) and the sum of total polyphenols in the tested wines were determined. Table 3 shows the results of the analysis of the polyphenols in white wines. In comparison with grape must, total polyphenol content was significantly reduced (\(p\leq\) 0.05) during the fermentation process. Gallic acid was present in wines at the highest concentration among all tested phenolic acids. Table 4 shows the results of the analysis of polyphenols in red wines. During the alcoholic fermentation, the content of total polyphenols in relation to the control sample (grape pulp) increased significantly (\(p\leq\) 0.05). The greatest abundance of those compounds was found in red wine produced with the use of 4_CS yeast (3028.96 \(\pm\) 4.85 mg/L). The amount of polyphenols in wines changed without clear trends when considering the use of NCS or CS strains. Among the tested acids, gallic acid was the most abundant (as in the case of white wines). Caffeic and vanillic acids were present only in a few red wines produced with the use of NCS strains. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Strain Symbol** & **Gallic Acid** & **Chlorogenic Acid** & **Caffeic Acid** & **Vanillic Acid** & **Total Polyphenols** \\  & **[mg/L]** & **[mg/L]** & **[mg/L]** & **[mg/L]** & **at 726 nm [mg/L]** \\ \hline Grape must & - & - & - & - & 331.04 \(\pm\) 0.21 \({}^{\text{j}}\) \\ \hline
1\_NCS & 21.19 \(\pm\) 2.10 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 7.01 \(\pm\) 0.28 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.68 \(\pm\) 0.18 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 3.63 \(\pm\) 1.18 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 264.94 \(\pm\) 0.16 \({}^{\text{bcd}}\) \\ \hline
2\_NCS & 24.35 \(\pm\) 0.77 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 6.84 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 2.48 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 2.87 \(\pm\) 0.05 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 278.45 \(\pm\) 0.07 \({}^{\text{b}}\) \\ \hline
3\_NCS & 26.25 \(\pm\) 8.69 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 6.45 \(\pm\) 0.13 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.51 \(\pm\) 0.08 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 2.97 \(\pm\) 0.74 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 299.92 \(\pm\) 1.65 \({}^{\text{i}}\) \\ \hline
4\_NCS & 20.82 \(\pm\) 0.43 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 6.62 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.94 \(\pm\) 0.44 \({}^{\text{abc}}\) & 2.60 \(\pm\) 0.33 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 261.04 \(\pm\) 0.53 \({}^{\text{abc}}\) \\ \hline
5\_NCS & 22.53 \(\pm\) 1.59 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 39.85 \(\pm\) 8.55 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.67 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 2.90 \(\pm\) 0.83 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 271.65 \(\pm\) 0.69 \({}^{\text{ef}}\) \\ \hline
6\_NCS & 23.15 \(\pm\) 1.02 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 20.28 \(\pm\) 18.80 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & 1.87 \(\pm\) 0.29 \({}^{\text{bcd}}\) & 1.07 \(\pm\) 0.00 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 267.41 \(\pm\) 1.69 \({}^{\text{cde}}\) \\ \hline
7\_NCS & 20.97 \(\pm\) 0.10 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 6.64 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.36 \(\pm\) 0.41 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 2.27 \(\pm\) 0.94 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 277.73 \(\pm\) 0.70 \({}^{\text{b}}\) \\ \hline
8\_NCS & 22.84 \(\pm\) 0.19 \({}  
Out of a wide variety of polyphenols, gallic acid is the most commonly identified in wines [73]. Among the tested phenolic acids, this compound dominated our experiments. It is an important phenolic compound in wines since it constitutes a precursor of all hydrolyzable tannins [24]. In the studies of [PERSON] et al. [73], it was confirmed that gallic acid influences the formation of terpen-aromatic compounds responsible for the fruity and floral aromas in young wines [74]. There are several studies on phenolic acids content in wines produced with fruits grown in cool climate countries, as well as those fermented only with _S. cerevisiae_, without MLF. According to [PERSON] et al. [75], red wines from South Africa (Syrah) prepared without MLF had significantly lower content of chlorogenic and caffe acids. Values obtained in the research were totally different from our results. The content of gallic acid (in wine prepared without MLF) was almost 25-fold lower than the lowest concentration obtained in our experiment.