## 3 Results
### Sensory Characterization of the Wines
First of all, even if statistical differences in amarogentin and loganic acid concentrations were found in MC and J macerated wines (Table 2), and could have influenced the bitterness perception of the macerated wines, no difference was found in our experimentation surely attributed to the saturation of bitterness perception among wine tasters. Bitterness could have also been modulated by the mineral composition released in the macerated wines. Among them, cations like potassium and calcium are potential candidates, as previously proposed [12] but they were poorly extracted in the macerated wines. Their concentration factors range between 1 to 1.1 and between 1.5 and 2.1, respectively. In our study, barium increases by a factor comprised between 13 and 18 compared to unmacerated wine. This element has been described to suppress perceived intensities of sweetness, saltiness and bitterness  
Figure 4: Concentration factor of chemical markers of gentian macerated wine that could explain sensory differences between macerated and unmacerated wine for MC and J gentian roots. The break on the y-axis was done from 1.5 to 3.9, minimum concentration factor value considered arbitrarily to affect sensory properties in macerated wine compared to CW. For loganic acid and amarogentin and 2-methoxy-3-sec-butylpyrazine, totally absent in CW, we consider for the calculation of concentration factor the concentration detection limit concentration or minimum area threshold values. and reduce palatability in beverages [33]. It should undoubtedly affect the sensory properties and act as a gentian geographic origin marker in the gentian macerated wines. The other origin-differentiating elements Sr and Al in macerated wines were concentrated between 1.7 and 3.8 and between 5 and 13.5, respectively. These two elements contribute poorly to sensory properties of wines, except aluminum that have been related to oxidation mechanisms by oxygen consumption in wines [34]. This could have occurred during wine maceration process with gentian leading to the observed changes of Lab coordinates (Table 1) with a decrease of the lightness (L) and an increase of the redness and yellowness component (a and b). Among the volatile compounds, 2-methoxy-3-sec-butylpyrazine enables a geographic discrimination between Jura and Massif Central in both gentian roots and macerated wines. Its highest concentration in JW, compared to MCW, probably participates to the significantly higher medicinal notes conferred to the macerated wines. Unfortunately, our volatile data analysis in macerated wines did not bring forward robust statistical volatile markers of MC gentian that could be responsible of moldy/earthy notes in MCW. Nevertheless, compounds like trans-\(\beta\)-ocimene or 1,3,5,7-cycloocatetraene, associated with herbal and moldy character, discriminating origin in the roots and no more discriminating origin in macerated wines could reflect lack of maceration time of MC gentian in Chardonnay wines or unveil synergetic effects in sensory descriptions of MCW. Additionally, fruity/floral notes, generally attributed to wine esters, were less present in macerated wines compared to unmacerated wine. Such sensory difference was evidenced chemically by ethyl 9-decenoate less presence in JW (factor 0.4) and in MCW (factor 0.2) compared to CW. This difference behavior in ester adsorption by gentian powder could have been responsible in the reduction of fruity/floral notes in macerated wines compared to CW (Figure 3). As the other main wine esters were not statistically different between JW and MCW, other sensory interactions should also participate in the observed decrease of fruity/floral notes in macerated wines. Pyrazines, like 2-isobutyl-3-methoxypyrazine, have been described to mask fruity characteristics and passion fruits attributes in Sauvignon blanc wines [35; 36]. As any actual decrease of other wine esters was detected gentian pyrazines may mask fruity aromas perception in gentian macerated wines.