## 3 Results and Discussion
### Volatile Composition of Wines
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l l l} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Parameter**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Aroma**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**ODT, mg/L**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Pure Fermentation**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Sequential Fermentation**} \\ \cline{4-7}  & & & _Candidia_ & _Harsenispora_ & _Saccharomyces_ & _Candidia_ & _Harsenispora_ \\  & & & _famata_ & _WB-1_ & _narum_ S-2 & _cervesiug_ & _QA23_ & _famata_ & _Harsenispora_ \\  & & & & _famata_ & _WB-1_ & _narum_ S-2 \\ \hline Terpinolence & Piney & 0.041 V & 0.036 \(\pm\) 0.00 a & 0.012 \(\pm\) 0.00 b & 0.038 \(\pm\) 0.00 a & 0.046 \(\pm\) 0.00 c & 0.094 \(\pm\) 0.00 d \\ Linalool & Flower, laverned & 0.025* & tr & 0.12 \(\pm\) 0.00 a & rd & tr & 0.08 \(\pm\) 0.00 b \\ l,3,8-p-Menthatiene & Turpentine & tr & nd & nd & 0.70 \(\pm\) 0.04 d & nd \\ allo-Cidnence & - & 0.042 \(\pm\) 0.00 a & nd & 0.047 \(\pm\) 0.00 b & 0.167 \(\pm\) 0.02 c & tr \\ Nerol & Rose, flower & 0.3* & tr & nd & 0.01 \(\pm\) 0.00 & tr & nd \\ Citronello & Sweet, citrus-like & 0.10** & tr & nd & nd & 0.01 \(\pm\) 0.00 & nd \\ Total terpen & & & & 1.027 \(\pm\) 0.04 & 0.905 \(\pm\) 0.03 & 0.310 \(\pm\) 0.00 & 1.79 \(\pm\) 0.12 & 0.674 \(\pm\) 0.01 \\
**C13-norisopenoid** & & & & & & & \\ \(\beta\)-lonene & Balsamic, rose, violet & & & & & & \\ Other & & & & & & & \\ Dimethyl sulfate & - & & & & & & \\ Benzaldehyde & Almond & 0.35* & 0.07 \(\pm\) 0.000 a & 0.05 \(\pm\) 0.00 b & 0.15 \(\pm\) 0.01 c & 0.07 \(\pm\) 0.00 a & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.00 d \\ Levogluconeone & - & & nd & 0.01 \(\pm\) 0.00 & tr & nd & tr \\
4-Vinylguanicol & Spices, curry & 0.04 \(\ddagger\) & 0.01 \(\pm\) 0.00 & nd & nd & nd & nd \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} 
\begin{tabular}{l l} \hline \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{ODT—Odor detection threshold; nd  
other hand, phenylethyll alcohol was present only in the Tamjanika wine sample fermented with _H. warrant_ S-2, in both fermentation protocols. Concentrations of phenylethyll alcohol in both samples were higher than its OAV, contributing with fine flower (rose, lilac) and honey notes. Previous reports also indicated that _H. uvarum_ is characterized as a good producer of phenylethyll alcohol [13]. The ability to produce higher alcohols is a strain-dependent characteristic, although grape amino acid and fermentation conditions are, also, considered important for their occurrence and concentration in wine [53; 55]. Furthermore, in addition to the ability to contribute and modulate the aroma and complexity of wine, higher alcohols are also essential for the production of esters [23]. Therefore, a good strategy to increase the wine complexity and ester production through fermentation is to find and use yeast strains capable of higher alcohols overproduction. The fatty acid concentrations in all wine samples were below 4 mg/L, which is expected to contribute aroma complexity and enhance cheese and butter aroma notes [56]. Both native yeast strains produced octanoic acid in concentrations higher than in the control sample and above its ODT value, while oleic acid was present just in samples fermented by yeast isolate _H. uvarum_ S-2 and commercial _S. cerevisiae_ QA23. A higher level of oleic acid detected in wine samples fermented by commercial yeast compared to non-_Saccharomyces_ yeast isolates was consistent with a previous study that characterized _S. cerevisiae_ as a better producer of medium-chain fatty acids than non-_Saccharomyces_[50]. Additionally, these compounds are important for wine aroma formation as essential substrates for the production of fatty acid ethyl esters [3]. Esters are one of the most important aroma compounds in wines, typically responsible for the floral and fruity aroma. Their concentration in wine is strongly dependent on the yeast strains, fermentation, and storage conditions, as well as on the concentration of fatty acids, higher alcohols, and their precursors [55]. Referring to the analyzed Tamjanika wine samples, a total of 24 different esters were identified and quantified, while 11 of