## 3 Results and Discussion
### Volatile Compounds  
In this study, the integration of standard GC analysis techniques such as GC/FID and GC/MS with comprehensive GC\(\times\)GC-TOF-MS metabolomics analysis yielded the most detailed volatile compound profile of wine produced by _S. paradoxus_ to date. A total of 474 volatile compounds were identified, including 63 terpenoids, 16 norisoprenoids, 14 aldehydes, 18 ketones, 53 alcohols, 26 acids, 46 ethyl esters, 23 acetate esters, 54 other esters, 83 benzenoids, 32 furamoids and lactones, 17 sulfur-containing compounds, 12 volatile \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{8}{c}{**Differences in Concentration**} \\ \cline{2-9}
**Phenolic Compound** & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**One-Way ANOVA**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Two-Way ANOVA**} \\ \cline{2-9}  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**2021**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**2022**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Y**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**H**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Y**\(\times\)**H**} \\ \cline{2-9}  & **SCE** & **SPA** & **SCE** & **SPA** & & & \\ \hline
4-Aminobenzoic acid & **0.07 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & **0.04 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & 0.09 & 0.09 & n.s. & **22** & n.s. \\ \(p\)-Hydroxybenzoic acid & 0.44 & 0.36 & **0.04 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & **0.00 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & n.s. & **21** & n.s. \\ Vanillic acid & 0.11 & 0.11 & 0.13 & 0.15 & n.s. & **22** & n.s. \\
2,5-Dihydroxybenzoic acid & **0.72 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & **0.32 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & 0.31 & 0.38 & **SCE** & **21** & * \\ Protacetuchic acid & 0.57 & 0.61 & 0.30 & 0.24 & n.s. & **21** & n.s. \\ Syrnagic acid & 0.42 & 0.45 & 0.33 & 0.37 & n.s. & n.s. & n.s. \\ \(p\)-Coumaric acid & **1.27 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & **0.26 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & 0.12 & 0.08 & **SCE** & **21** & * \\ Caffeic acid & **2.24 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & **1.28 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & 0.58 & 0.49 & **SCE** & **21** & * \\ Ferulic acid & **0.50 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & **0.30 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & 0.11 & 0.15 & **SCE** & **21** & * \\ _trans_-Caftaric acid & **0.18 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & **0.47 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & 0.14 & 0.09 & **SPA** & **21** & * \\ _trans_-Fertaric acid & 2.45 & 2.97 & **2.15 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & **1.75 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & n.s. & **21** & * \\ _trans_-Coutaric acid & **0.49 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & **0.74 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & 0.55 & 0.47 & n.s. & **21** & * \\ _trans_-Resveratrol & **0.12 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & **0.08 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & **0.08 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & **0.00 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & **SCE** & **21** & * \\ _cis_-Resveratrol & 0.03 & 0.05 & 0.03 & 0.02 & **SPA** & **21** & * \\ Catechol & **0.68 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & **0.35 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & 0.29 & 0.36 & n.s. & **21** & n.s. \\ Phlorizin & 0.04 & 0.06 & 0.02 & 0.02 & n.s. & **21** & n.s. \\ Quercetin & 0.10 & 0.11 & n.d. & n.d. & - & - & - \\ Catechin & **1.41 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & **1.04 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & 0.12 & 0.09 & **SCE** & **21** & * \\ Epicatechin & 0.24 & 0.22 & n.d. & n.d. & - & - & - \\ Epigallocatechin & **0.02 \({}^{\text{a}}\)** & **0.00 \({}^{\text{b}}\)** & n.d. & n.d. & - & - & - \\ Gallocatechin & 0.19 & 0.16 & n.d. & n.d. & - & - & - \\ Procyanidin B1 & 1.33 & 1.54 & n.d. & n.d. & - & - & - \\ Procyanidin B2 + B4 & 0.16 & 0.21 & n.d. & n.d. & - & - & - \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Abbreviations: n.s.—not significant; n.d.—not detected. One-way ANOVA section: different superscript lowercase letters represent statistically significant differences between the two investigated wines determined by one-way ANOVA at \(p<0.05\) for each harvest year separately. Two-way ANOVA section: designations are reported representing yeast (SCE, SPA) and harvest year (21, 22) with higher concentration determined by two-way ANOVA at \(p<0.05\) with yeast (Y) and harvest year (H) as factors. An asterisk indicates a significant interaction between the two factors (Y \(\times\) H). Significant differences are highlighted in bold.  
\end{table}