Terroir 2004 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 “Zonation”: interpretation and estimation of “Great zonation” (GZ) following the base methodology of “GRANDE FILIERA” (GF) (Great chain)

“Zonation”: interpretation and estimation of “Great zonation” (GZ) following the base methodology of “GRANDE FILIERA” (GF) (Great chain)

Abstract

[English version below]

Dans des travaux précédents sur le zonage, on a traité de la « Grande Filière », du « terroir », du « territoire », de la «″Terra »″ (« Terre »”), des « Petits zonages ou sub-zonages », du « Grand Zonage », de la qualité (nous en avons classifié plus de quatre-vingt-dix), des « Grands Objectifs » (GO) de l’activité vitivinicole et des moyens utilisés pour les atteindre. Dans le « GRAND ZONAGE » (GZ) nous avons précisé que pour zoner, nous partons des aspects économiques, sociaux et existentiels que représentent du bas vers le haut en filière les « GRANDS OBJECTIFS » (GO) de l’activité vitinicole et donc du zonage et non pas des aspects « techniques » tels que par exemple le sol, le climat, le modèle de vignoble et sa gestion, etc., qui représentent les « MOYENS » pour atteindre les grands objectifs cités ci-dessus (Cargnello G. 1995, 1997, 1999a-b-c-d, 200a-b et 2003a-c-d). Il faut donc souligner que les « grands objectifs » ne doivent pas être confondus, comme c’est souvent le cas dans notre secteur, avec les moyens utilisés pour atteindre ces objectifs. « Zoner » (« Grand Zonage ») en incluant aussi la lecture et l’évaluation de ce zonage, objet de ce travail, en suivant la méthodologie de base de la « GRANDE FILIERE » (GF) signifie donc, entre autre, opérer aussi bien dans la « globalité », de façon équo soutenable solidaire au niveau temps, économique et social et réalistiquement « qualitatif », aussi bien en syntonie (au mieux) avec les 54 descripteurs d’ordre technique économique social existentiel prévus dans la « Grande Filière ».
On exposera dans ce travail la lecture et l’évaluation du zonage d’après ce qui a été exposé ci-dessus. Lecture et évaluation qui à la suite des recherches conduites à l’étranger aussi a suscité un vif intérêt et nous a encouragé à intensifier ces recherches.

In previous papers on zonation we investigated: so called “GRANDE FILIERA” (GF) (“Great chain”), “terroir”, “Terra”, “Small zonations or sub-zonations”, “Great zonation”, qualities (we have classified more than ninety), economy of qualities, as well as “GREAT OBJECTIVES” (GO) of vitivinicultural activity and means utilised for its achievement.
In “GREAT ZONATION” (GZ) we have specified that in order to zonate, it is necessary to start from economic, social and existential aspects which in filiera from below to above represent “GREAT OBJECTIVES” (GO) also of vitivinicultural activity and thus of zonation, and not from “technical” aspects such as soil, climate, vineyard model and its management, etc. which represent “MEANS” for achievements of “great objectives” above mentioned (Cargnello G., 1995, 1997, 1999a-b-c-d-, 2000a-b and 2003a-c-d).
Must be therefore said again that “great objectives” shouldn’t be messed-up, as frequently happens in our branch, with means utilised for achievement of such objectives.
Consequently “Zonating” (“Great Zonation”) comprised between interpretation and estimation of zonation, following the base methodology of “Great Chain” means, among other things, to operate in “globality” and in sustainable equal mode on tempistic, economic-social and realistically “qualitative” level, also in harmony (the best) with listed descriptors.
In the present paper, zonation interpretation and estimation will be treated as explained above. Type of interpretation and estimation that after researches conducted by foreign researches have risen in importance and have stimulated us to intensify our investigations in that sense.

DOI:

Publication date: January 12, 2022

Issue: Terroir 2004

Type: Article

Authors

Giovanni Cargnello (Collaboration de Luciano Pezza)

Directeur SOC Tecniche Colturali – Istituto Sperimentale per la Viticoltura – Via E. De Nicola, 41 – 31015 Conegliano (TV) Italy

Contact the author

Keywords

Zonage, grand zonage, petit zonage vitivinicole, terre, territoire, terroir, qualité, grande filière
zoning, great zonation, little zonation, interpretation, estimation, quality, land, great chain

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2004

Citation

Related articles…

Optimizing stomatal traits for future climates

Stomatal traits determine grapevine water use, carbon supply, and water stress, which directly impact yield and berry chemistry. Breeding for stomatal traits has the strong potential to improve grapevine performance under future, drier conditions, but the trait values that breeders should target are unknown. We used a functional-structural plant model developed for grapevine (HydroShoot) to determine how stomatal traits impact canopy gas exchange, water potential, and temperature under historical and future conditions in high-quality and hot-climate California wine regions (Napa and the Central Valley). Historical climate (1990-2010) was collected from weather stations and future climate (2079-99) was projected from 4 representative climate models for California, assuming medium- and high-emissions (RCP 4.5 and 8.5). Five trait parameterizations, representing mean and extreme values for the maximum stomatal conductance (gmax) and leaf water potential threshold for stomatal closure (Ψsc), were defined from meta-analyses. Compared to mean trait values, the water-spending extremes (highest gmax or most negative Ysc) had negligible benefits for carbon gain and canopy cooling, but exacerbated vine water use and stress, for both sites and climate scenarios. These traits increased cumulative transpiration by 8 – 17%, changed cumulative carbon gain by -4 – 3%, and reduced minimum water potentials by 10 – 18%. Conversely, the water-saving extremes (lowest gmax or least negative Ψsc) strongly reduced water use and stress, but potentially compromised the carbon supply for ripening. Under RCP 8.5 conditions, these traits reduced transpiration by 22 – 35% and carbon gain by 9 – 16% and increased minimum water potentials by 20 – 28%, compared to mean values. Overall, selecting for more water-saving stomatal traits could improve water-use efficiency and avoid the detrimental effects of highly negative canopy water potentials on yield and quality, but more work is needed to evaluate whether these benefits outweigh the consequences of minor declines in carbon gain for fruit production.

Inhibition of Oenococcus oeni during alcoholic fermentation by a selected Lactiplantibacillus plantarum strain

The use of selected cultures of the species Lactiplantibacillus plantarum in Oenology has grown in prominence in recent years. While initial applications of this species centred very much around malolactic fermentation (MLF), there is strong evidence to show that certain strains can be harnessed for their bio-protective effects. Unwanted spontaneous MLF during alcoholic fermentation (AF), driven by rogue Oenococcus oeni, is a winemaking deviation that is very difficult to manage when it occurs. This work set out to determine the efficacy of one particular strain of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum(Viniflora® NoVA™ Protect), against this problem in Cabernet Sauvignon must. The work was carried out at commercial scale and in a winery environment and compared the bio-protective culture with the more traditional approach of reducing must pH by the addition of tartaric acid. The combination of both was also investigated. The concentration of both Oenococcus oeni and Lactiplantibacillus plantarum was determined using qPCR. The adventitious Oenococcus oeni showed the most growth during AF in the control wine, whereas in the wines treated with Lactiplantibacillus plantarum a bacteriostatic effect against this species was observed. This effect was comparable to the wines treated with tartaric acid. This has particular commercial relevance for controlling the flora in musts with high pH, or when the addition of tartaric acid is either not permitted or is prohibitive for other reasons.

Local adaptation tools to ensure the viticultural sustainability in a changing climate

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.19.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

Under-vine management effects on grapevine production, soil properties and plant communities in South Australia

Under-vine (UV) management has traditionally consisted of synthetic herbicide use to limit competition between weeds and grapevines. With growing global interest towards non-synthetic chemical use, this study aimed to capture the effects of alternative UV management at two commercial Shiraz vineyards in South Australia, where the sole management variables were UV management since 2016. In adjacent treatment blocks, cultivation (CU) was compared to spontaneous vegetation (SV) in McLaren Vale (MV), and herbicide was compared to SV in Eden Valley (EV). Soil water infiltration rates were slower and grapevine stem water potential was lower in CU compared to SV in MV, with the latter having a plant community dominated by soursob (Oxalis pes-caprae) during winter; while in EV, there was little separation between the treatments. Yields were affected at both sites, with SV being higher in MV and HE being higher in EV. In MV, the only effect on grape must was a lower 13C:12C isotope ratio in CU, indicating greater grapevine water stress. In the grape must at EV, SV had higher total soluble solids, total phenolics, anthocyanins, and yeast available nitrogen; and lower pH and titratable acidity. Pruning weights were not affected by the treatments in MV, while they were higher in HE at EV. Assessments revealed that the differing soil types at the two sites were likely the main determinants of the opposing production outcomes associated with UV management. In the silty loam soil of MV, the higher yields in SV were likely due to more plant-available water, as a potential result of the continuous soil bio-pores formed by winter UV vegetation. Conversely, in the loamy sand soils of EV with a lower cation exchange capacity, the lower yields and pruning weights in SV suggest the UV vegetation competed significantly with the grapevines for available water and nutrients.

Effect of fertigation strategies to adapt PGI Côtes de Gascogne production to hot vintage

The development of fertigation could be a possible solution to adapt PGI Côtes de Gascogne (south-western France) wine production to climate change. The goal would be to limit the negative effects of water stress on yield performance expectation (around 15 tons per hectare) and to make the use of fertilizers more efficient. This study aimed to compare the effects of three strategies of water and minerals supply on grapes and wines qualities. Two fertigation practices were compared to a rainfed control which is the current standard of the local grape growing production. The fertilizers (nitrogen and potassium) were (i) fully brought by irrigation pipe during the season, (ii) partially brought by irrigation pipe and partially on the soil or (iii) fully brought on the soil at the beginning of the season for the non-irrigated control (local standard). The trial was run on cv. Colombard trained on spur pruned with vertical shoot positioning system on a sandy-silty-clay soil over the 2020 vintage which was particularly hot for the region. Moderate to strong water deficit appeared during the growing period of the berries and held on after veraison. Irrigation strategies allowed for maintaining grapevine without water deficit and being significantly different from the control water status. Grapevine with fully or partial fertigation strategies produced 25% more yield mainly due to the increase of the bunch weight. Also, the fully fertigation showed the best ratio between yield and maturity and brought 30% less of fertilizers (both nitrogen and potassium) than the two other strategies. Finally, the analysis of aromatic compounds in Colombard wines, varietal thiols family, showed the same level of concentrations for the 3 treatments, confirming that the yield performance did not impact the aromatic potential in this trial.