Index  

1. Introduction 

2. What is minerality? 

3. Geology vs. perception: Do wines really taste like soil? 

4. What science tells us 

5. Where is minerality found? 

6. Conclusion 

1. Introduction  

How is it possible for a wine to “taste like stone”?  

What does it mean when someone describes a Chardonnay as “chalky,” a Riesling as  “petrolly,” or a Champagne as “salty”? Are these real perceptions, sensory metaphors, or a  combination of both? 

Over the past few decades, the word minerality has earned a prominent place in the wine  vocabulary. Loved by many and questioned by others, this term has become one of the most  frequently used — and least understood — descriptors in the wine world. It doesn’t appear  in many classical sensory manuals, nor does it have a universally accepted definition in the  technical field. And yet, it echoes powerfully in tastings, labels, and professional reviews. 

Minerality seems to suggest a direct connection between wine and origin — the soil. It  implies purity, restraint, and a kind of natural elegance that is difficult to replicate. But do  minerals from the soil actually make their way into the wine? Or is this perception the result  of other factors: chemical, sensory, cultural, even psychological? 

This article was born from the desire to shed light on that mystery. What does science say  today about minerality in wine? Can it be measured? Can its perception be trained? Does it  depend on soil composition, fermentation, winemaking style — or is it simply shaped by the  language we use to describe complex sensations? 

To answer these questions, I will explore the journey from geology to the glass. Looking at  the chemistry of volatile compounds, the physiology of taste, the winemaking techniques  that influence mineral-like notes, and the many ways minerality has been interpreted by  tasters and researchers alike. I’ll also examine recent studies — from institutions like  UC Davis, the Catena Institute of Wine, and the Geisenheim Research Center — that seek  correlations between terroir, vinification, and sensory perception.

This is not an article of absolute answers, because minerality — like many aspects of wine  — resists rigid definitions. But it is an invitation to look closer, to question assumptions,  and to better understand how science, language, and experience combine to shape one of  the most evocative (and controversial) descriptors in modern wine discourse. 

2. What is minerality? 

The term minerality did not exist prior to the year 2000. In fact, according to Alex  Maltman, it is not a term used in geology but invented for wine, as a wine descriptor. 

(Alex Maltman is a geologist and professor of Earth Sciences at Aberystwyth University,  in Wales, U.K., with a long career in university teaching and research. He has advised on  the geological content of a number of wine books, including the Oxford Companion to  Wine and the forthcoming 8th edition of the World Atlas of Wine. Author of two books:  “Vineyards, Rocks and Soils, a Wine Lover’s Guide to Geology” (2018) and “Taste the  Limestone, Smell the Slate, A geologist wanders through the world of wine” (2025) which  are references for this article research). 

“Minerality” is a widely used term in wine tasting, yet also one of the most ambiguous.  Despite its frequent appearance in tasting notes, there is no universally accepted  definition—nor a direct correlation between soil minerals and mineral-like sensations on  the palate. 

Jancis Robinson says (in an article of the Financial Times) that the term was not included  in her book 'The Oxford Companion to Wine' 2006 edition, but had to be included when  the fourth edition came out, affirming that “the word minerality is too prevalent to ignore,  even if impossible to define”. 

So, is it a smell, a mouthfeel or a taste? 

Experts associate minerality with aromas or flavors like flint, wet stone, salinity, chalk, or  even a tactile impression such as freshness or astringency. For others, it’s more of a  conceptual impression, evoking terroir or a sense of purity. The truth is, “mineral” can  refer to aromatic, gustatory, and even textural aspects of wine, making interpretation  difficult. 

According to Maltman in his article in Decanter, in a recent study, minerality in Chablis  was perceived by 20% as a taste, 16% as a smell and 64% as both. An interesting fact is  that 66% of those who said smell, associated minerality with gunflint, reductive aromas  and lack of fruityness, while those who said taste, where more drawn to high acidity and  

bitterness. This difference has also been seen in tasters from different countries, as for  example French associate minerality more with smell. 

Over the past few decades, scientists, winemakers, and tasters have attempted to unravel  the origins and mechanisms behind this perception, but the answers remain as complex as  wine itself. 

3. Geology vs. Perception: Do Wines Really Taste Like Soil? 

So, where does minerality come from?  

The popular belief of its origins was that the taste is the result of trace elements from the  soil being absorbed by the plant’s roots, transported into the grapes through the trunk and  stems, and then persisting in the finished wine.  

It’s a simplistic notion, and it violates some fundamental facts of soil science. Because  rocks, such as limestone and schist (two examples frequently cited as sources of  minerality) are solids, their being taken up directly by a vine’s roots is a physical  impossibility. Though grapevines, like all plants, absorb mineral nutrients (in the form of  ions) from the water they draw from the soil, the minerals cannot be absorbed from solid  matter like soil, even in humid ones; they must be present and dissolved in water. 

The confusion might come from ambiguous terminology as Maltaman explains. To  undestand this, we must remember that geologic minerals are not the same as nutrient  minerals. 

A vine cannot simply absorb the granite, limestone or quartz it’s rooted in (geologic  minerals). And this is the huge misconception in the world of wine. Plants feed instead  on nutrient minerals; elements like Potassium or Calcium, but mostly as ions after  they’ve been dissolved into the groundwater. Also, the source of the mineral doesn't  matter to the plant; potassium is potassium no matter how it was derived, as was stated by  Master Sommelier, Jonathan Eicholz, in a webinar he did about Rioja on  GuildSomm.com. 

Other important facts stated by Eicholz, are that most geologic minerals are  odorless/tasteless. Aromas only come from volatile compounds, which rocks obviously  are not; they don’t vaporize under any vineyard conditions. 

All rocks are made of geologic minerals. In this sense, no vineyard is really blessed with  more or less than any others, although it could have a greater diversity. Land that’s “rich  in minerals” as marketers like to say would actually mean a more fertile soil that would  produce an inferior wine. 

These absorbed nutrients come from a range of sources (more organic material rather  than inorganic), including humus (the broken-down remnants of organic matter),  chemical additives and parent geological minerals that have dissolved through weathering (erosion). The right conditions need to be met for the organic material to be bioavailable  to the roots, i.e. soil pH, temperature and cation exchange capacity (the ability of a  material to make its ions available to the roots, mostly via clay and humus particles). 

Trace amounts of these nutrient minerals do ultimately make their way into wines, but  it’s not clear that they are present in sufficient quantities to be perceptible to the human  palate. The proportions of nutrient minerals in a finished wine bear only an indirect and  

distant relationship to the geologic minerals in the vineyard. The actual measurable  concentration of nutrient minerals in wine is negligible; altogether they make up < 0.2%. 

In fact, a detectable amount of inorganic minerality would likely not only taste bad but be  toxic. 

I quote Eicholz as he concludes his article: “As much as many of us might agree a certain  wine has strong minerality, the science says otherwise, which I find fascinating. We all  just blindly accept this romantic notion that “You can taste the limestone!” That’s like  saying you can taste the slope or aspect of the vineyard—it’s simply not possible. And  Yet!...many wines demonstrate aromas/flavors that conjure up images of “inorganic  minerality.” Like Sancerres that smell like a steel factory, and Etna Rossos reminiscent of  smoky ash and crushed gravel”. 

So, I agree with Maltman as he states that the problem here has been a confusion of  terminology: one thing are nutrient minerals (or nutrient elements) like phosporous or  potassium that are in fact essential to vine nutrition, and another thing are geologic  minerals contained in rocks such as quartz, which vines cannot take from.  

The vine contains 14 nutrient minerals that it needs for nutrition, but these are taken not  from the rocks but from the soil and humus on the surface, because it has been  demonstrated that less than 2% of the minerals in rocks are bioavailable. 

Plus, plants are selective, which means it only takes the minerals it needs, so the  composition of minerals in must vs soil are very different. 

Minerals in wine are found in traces, very small quantities, so it is unlikely that they can  be smelled or tasted! 

4. What science tells us: What causes minerality? 

As I stated, minerality in wine is a complex and debated concept—and I think that there’s  no single compound responsible, and definetively it doesn´t come literally from minerals  in the soil being absorbed into the wine. Recent scientific research suggests several  interrelated causes: 

1-Poor or stony soils have very low levels of geologic minerals, especially nitrogen.  The vine (and therefore the grape) must struggle to survive, and in its attempt to absorb  the necessary minerals, it encounters these deficiencies in the soil, in the form of nutrient  minerals. 

This lack of nitrogen in the grapes can cause difficulties during the alcoholic  fermentation process, since yeast requires nitrogen to convert sugar into alcohol. To  compensate for the lack of nitrogen in the must, yeasts begin to break down sulfur containing amino acids in order to access nitrogen. This process can lead to the formation  of volatile sulfur compounds that we may perceive as minerality in wine.

These compounds are also responsible for the wine fault known as reduction, so a  balance must be struck regarding the amount of sulfur compounds released. (There is  always an ongoing debate about when these aromas should be considered a flaw or rather  a sign of complexity in the wine). 

2-Succinic acid: More recently, however, minerality has also been associated with the  presence of succinic acid (one of the acids in wine formed during fermentation).  

On one hand, recent studies show that wines whose flavor and texture are described as  “mineral” tend to contain a higher percentage of succinic acid. On the other hand, those  whose aroma is described as “mineral” were found to have low pH, high total acidity, and  elevated levels of free sulfur dioxide.  

According to these findings, minerality is always closely linked to pronounced acidity  (organic acids) and a lack of fruity aromas (especially in white wines), which give the  wine a more “mineral” character, often perceived during tasting as a salty taste or  salinity. 

According to Decanter, succinic acid is a fermentation by-product that contributes a salty  taste, especially when acidity is marked and fruity/ester aromas are subdued—factors often  linked to minerality.  A vine-to-glass connection emerges from older but insightful studies:  under nutrient (especially nitrogen) stress, yeast produce more succinic acid, which  correlates with heightened perceived minerality. This correlates with what I wrote earlier  about minerality being associated with poor soils, especially linked to nitrogen lack. 

So, the Maltman & Decanter commentary (2020 “Minerality in Wine: Where are we  now?), emphasizes that minerality perception is often driven by acidity, cool climate  grapes, reductive winemaking, and absence of fruity or terpenic aromas—conditions  that favor perception of succinic acid’s sensory impact. 

Succinic acid may not be the "mineral" in minerality—but it is a consistent and  influential marker. It helps evoke a saline, crisp profile, particularly in wines shaped by  cool climates, high acidity, lean fruit expression, and reductive winemaking. All these  intersect to craft that elusive sense of minerality. 

3-Volatile Compounds Associated with Mineral Perception 

Certain aromatic compounds contribute to perception of “minerality”: Sulfur compounds: such as benzothiazole, methanethiol, and dimethyl sulfide (DMS),  can evoke stony, flinty, or smoky notes. 

Higher acidity and low fruitiness: enhance the impression of minerality, especially in  white wines like Chablis or Riesling. 

Alcohol level: Lower alcohol wines often appear more mineral due to their leaner  structure.

4-Indirect Soil Influence 

While soil minerals aren’t directly “tasted”or aborbed by wine roots, terroir is a vital  factor in shaping wine: Soils affect vine vigor, water retention, and root depth, which in  turn influence grape composition. 

Calcareous soils (limestone/chalk), schist, slate, and granite are often associated with  “mineral” wines, but the sensory link is mediated by vine stress, maturity, and  microclimate. 

5-Winemaking Factors 

Minerality can alsobe associated with these conditions that have been linked to it: 

• Reductive winemaking: lees contact and low oxygen exposure produce sulfide related aromas (e.g., flint, struck match). 

• Fermentation by wild yeasts: can increase complexity and earthy/mineral-like  notes. 

• Minimal oak influence: helps preserve freshness and purity, enhancing perceived  minerality 

5. Where is minerality found? 

There is a lot of debate and inconsistency in studies about minerality in red wines. So, I  must assume that minerality is found mostly in white wines. 

In a study of California’s UC Davis University, they found that Riesling, Pinot Blanc and  Sauvignon Blanc where more mineral than Chardonnay, although they did not make the  exclusion of Chablis. Other grapes associated with minerality are: Albariño, Assyrtiko,  Chenin Blanc (from Loire Valley), Txakolina grapes (País Vasco, Spain — Hondarrabi  Zuri & Beltza) and Etna Carricante (Sicily). 

What do all these grapes have in common? 

High acidity → enhances the perception of “freshness” and minerality. Low fruitiness → allows stony/saline notes to be more noticeable. 

Terroir transparency → grapes like Riesling and Chardonnay strongly reflect soil and  climate conditions. 

Volcanic or calcareous soils often correlate with minerality descriptors.

And speaking about terroir, minerality is most associated with calcareous, stony soils,  mainly with slate like those from the Mosel. 

Chablis is one of the most studied regions on minerality: One study showed that there  where differences between the left and the right banks of the Serein River, where the left  bank showed more minerality as assessed by smell; on soil testing, they found more  sulfur methanethiol, a compound that gives a shellfish aroma, and less copper. Could this  mean that on the right bank, these two compouds could react to produce a third odorless  compound? If this is the case, it would mean that the Grand Cru Chablis is less mineral. This leads us to the next chapter. 

1.Conclusion 

Minerality remains one of the most captivating and elusive concepts in the world of wine.  Despite decades of research and debate, science has yet to find a single compound,  mineral, or mechanism that can fully explain this perception. What we do know is that  “minerality” is not the literal taste of rocks or soil, but rather a complex interplay of chemistry, structure, and suggestion. 

Modern studies point toward the influence of volatile sulfur compounds, organic acids,  and salinity, as well as textural and gustatory cues that evoke sensations we describe  as “stony,” “saline,” or “chalky.” Yet beyond chemistry, language, memory, and culture  play a powerful role. When tasters speak of minerality, they are often expressing  something deeper: the sensation of origin, the energy of the terroir, or the emotional  resonance of purity and place. 

In the end, minerality may not reside in the wine itself, but in the dialogue between the  wine and the taster. It is both a scientific puzzle and a poetic truth—a reminder that  wine is not merely a liquid analyzed in a lab, but a sensory experience shaped by  perception, context, and imagination. 

Perhaps the enduring beauty of minerality lies precisely in its ambiguity: it bridges the  measurable and the mysterious, the physical and the emotional. And in that delicate  balance, it captures the very essence of what makes wine endlessly fascinating.

References 

1.Parr W, Maltman A, et al (Beverages, 2018) --Minerality in Wine: Towards the Reality  behind the Myths  

2.Rodríguez-Bencomo et al. (2023) — Compuestos volátiles asociados a la mineralidad 3.Heymann, H. (2022) — Cuestionamiento crítico del término mineralidad 4.Oxford Companion to Wine (2023) 

5.Jackson, R.S. (2020) — Fundamentos sensoriales y del suelo 

6.Gus Zhu, (2024) – Behind the Glass, The chemical & sensorial terroir of wine tasting 

7.Maltman, Alex (2018) - “Vineyards, Rocks and Soils, a Wine Lover’s Guide to  Geology” 

8.Maltman, Alex (2025) - Taste the Limestone, Smell the Slate, A geologist wanders  through the world of wine 

9.Wilson, James E. (1998) – Terroir, the role of geology, climate, and culture in the  making of french wine 

10.https://www.winescholarguild.com/studio/item/1934/minerality-in-wine-with-alex maltman 

11.https://wineindustryadvisor.com/2021/02/03/catena-institute-of-wine-terroir-study/ 12.https://catenainstitute.com/terroircongress/ 

13.https://www.newyorker.com/culture/annals-of-gastronomy/does-your-wine-really taste-like-rocks 

14.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259553287_An_Exploration_of_the_Percept ion_of_Minerality_in_White_Wines_by_Projective_Mapping_and_Descriptive_Analysis 

15.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0963996916302708 16.https://www.reddit.com/r/wine/comments/16jtlq7/the_case_against_minerality/ 

17.https://www.vilaviniteca.es/es/blog/percepcion-del-caracter-mineral-en-el-vino influencia-del-precio-y-de-la-informacion-contenida-en-la-etiqueta/

18.https://www.thewinesociety.com/discover/explore/regional-guides/the-meaning-of mineral-or-minerality-in-the-context-of-wine/?utm_source=chatgpt.com 

19.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37498437/ 

20.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323115992_Chasing_after_minerality_relati onship_to_yeasts_nutritional_stress_and_succinic_acid_production/download?_tp=eyJjb250 ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIiwicGFnZSI6Il9kaXJlY3QifX0 

21.https://www.decanter.com/wine-news/opinion/guest-blog/minerality-in-wine 429893/