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…

Estimating bulk stomatal conductance of grapevine canopies

In response to changes in their environment, grapevines regulate transpiration using various physiological mechanisms that alter conductance of water through the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum. Expressed as bulk stomatal conductance at the canopy scale, it varies diurnally in response to changes in vapor pressure deficit and net radiation, and over the season to changes in soil water deficits and hydraulic conductivity of both soil and plant. It is necessary to characterize the response of conductance to these variables to better model how vine transpiration also responds to these variables. Furthermore, to be relevant for vineyard-scale modeling, conductance is best characterized using data collected in a vineyard setting. Applying a crop canopy energy flux model developed by Shuttleworth and Wallace, bulk stomatal conductance was estimated using measurements of individual vine sap flow, temperature and humidity within the vine canopy, and estimates of net radiation absorbed by the vine canopy. These measurements were taken on several vines in a non-irrigated vineyard in Bordeaux France, using equipment that did not interfere with ongoing vineyard operations. An inverted Penman-Monteith equation was then used to calculate bulk stomatal conductance on 15-minute intervals from July to mid-September 2020. Time-series plots show significant diurnal variation and seasonal decreases in conductance, with overall values similar to those in the literature. Global sensitivity analysis using non-parametric regression found transpiration flux and vapor pressure deficit to be the most important input variables to the calculation of bulk stomatal conductance, with absorbed net radiation and bulk boundary layer conductance being much less important. Conversely, bulk stomatal conductance was one of the most important inputs when calculating vine transpiration, further emphasizing the need for characterizing its response to environmental changes for use in vineyard water use modeling.

Impact of changes in pruning practices on vine growth and yield

A gradual decline in vineyards has been observed over the past twenty years worldwide. This might be explained by the climate change, practices change or the increase of dieback diseases. To increase the longevity of vines, we studied the impact of different pruning strategies in four adult and four young vineyards located in France and Spain. In France, vineyards were planted with Cabernet franc on 3309C while Spanish trials were planted with Tempranillo grafted on 110R. Vegetative expression, yield, quality of berries and wood vessels conductivity were measured. The distribution of vegetative expression, yield and berry composition between primary and secondary vegetation were quantified. Finally, tomography was used to evaluate the implication of the treatments on sap flows.
First results show that i) the respectful pruning leads to an increase of 30 to 50% more secondary shoots than the aggressive pruning in France and between 15 and 20% in Spain, ii) there is no major effect on the yield over the first two years following the implementation of the new pruning practices, although the proportion of clusters from suckers is higher on the respectful pruning method. On young vines, the development of the trunk according to a respectful pruning leads to a loss of harvest 2 years after planting. This is due to the removal, on the future trunk, of the green suckers which carrying bunches. This operation carried out in spring rather than during winter pruning, would promote a better leaf / fruit balance when the plant comes into production, and could lead to better hydraulic conduction in the vessels of the trunk. Maintaining these trials for several years will provide more robust data to assess the impact of these practices on the vines over the long term.

Terroir analysis and its complexity

Terroir is not only a geographical site, but it is a more complex concept able to express the “collective knowledge of the interactions” between the environment and the vines mediated through human action and “providing distinctive characteristics” to the final product (OIV 2010). It is often treated and accepted as a “black box”, in which the relationships between wine and its origin have not been clearly explained. Nevertheless, it is well known that terroir expression is strongly dependent on the physical environment, and in particular on the interaction between soil-plant and atmosphere system, which influences the grapevine responses, grapes composition and wine quality. The Terroir studying and mapping are based on viticultural zoning procedures, obtained with different levels of know-how, at different spatial and temporal scales, empiricism and complexity in the description of involved bio-physical processes, and integrating or not the multidisciplinary nature of the terroir. The scientific understanding of the mechanisms ruling both the vineyard variability and the quality of grapes is one of the most important scientific focuses of terroir research. In fact, this know-how is crucial for supporting the analysis of climate change impacts on terroir resilience, identifying new promised lands for viticulture, and driving vineyard management toward a target oenological goal. In this contribution, an overview of the last findings in terroir studies and approaches will be shown with special attention to the terroir resilience analysis to climate change, facing the use and abuse of terroir concept and new technology able to support it and identifying the terroir zones.

The use of rootstock as a lever in the face of climate change and dieback of vineyard

As viticulture faces challenges such as climate change or vineyard dieback, the choice of the variety and rootstock becomes more and more crucial. To study rootstock levers in the Bordeaux region, a parcel of Cabernet Sauvignon (CS) was planted with four rootstocks in 2014. Twenty repetitions of each of the following four rootstocks were set up: 101-14 MGt, Nemadex AB, 420A MGt and Gravesac. The number of bunches, yields and pruning weights of the vine shoots were measured individually on 240 vines from 2017 to 2021. Since 2020, nitrogen status assessed by assimilable nitrogen level, hydric status assessed by δ13C and berry maturity were measured on 80 samples taken from 20 repetitions of the four rootstocks. A lower yield was measured for CS grafted onto Nemadex AB due to the lower number of bunches and the lower weight of berries. The differences between the other three rootstocks are small, but CS grafted onto 420A MGt was the most productive. The CS grafted onto Nemadex AB had the lowest pruning weight while 101-14 MGt had the highest. In 2020, δ13C showed a more moderate water stress with 101-14 MGt and 420A MGt than with Nemadex AB. Surprisingly, the Gravesac was under more stress than the 101-14 MGt. The nitrogen status in the berries was better for Nemadex AB but this was perhaps due to the significantly lower weight of the berries.Rootstock 101-14 MGt attained the highest accumulation of sugars in the berries while 420A MGt allows to preserve higher acidity. The parcel is still young which may explain some of the results. These measures must therefore be continued over the next several years to fully assess the effects of these rootstocks on the development of the vines and the quality of the production under new climatic conditions.

Deconstructing the soil component of terroir: from controversy to consensus

Wine terroir describes the collectively recognized relation between a geographical area and the distinctive organoleptic characteristics of the wines produced in it. The overriding objective in terroir studies is therefore to provide scientific proof relating the properties of terroir components to wine quality and typicity. In scientific circles, the role of climate (macro-, meso- and micro-) on grape and wine characteristics is well documented and accepted as the most critical. Moreover, there has been increasing interest in recent years about new elements with possible importance in shaping wine terroir like berry/leaf/soil microbiology or even aromatic plants in proximity to the vineyard conferring flavors to the grapes. However, the actual effect of these factors is also dependent on complex interactions with plant material (variety/clone, rootstock, vine age) and with human factors.
The contribution of soil, although a fundamental component of terroir and extremely popular among wine enthusiasts, remains a much-debated issue among researchers. The role of geology is probably the one mostly associated by consumers with the notion of terroir with different parent rocks considered to give birth to different wine styles. However, the relationship between wine properties and the underlying parent material raises a lot of controversy especially regarding the actual existence of rock-derived flavors in the wine (e.g. minerality). As far as the actual soil properties are concerned, the effect of soil physical properties is generally regarded as the most significant (e.g sandy soils being associated with lighter wines while those on clay with colored and tannic ones) mostly through control of water availability which ultimately modifies berry ripening conditions either directly by triggering biosynthetic pathways, or indirectly by altering vigor and yield components. The role of soil chemistry seems to be weakly associated to wine sensory characteristic, although N, K, S and Ca, but also soil pH, are often considered important in the overall soil effect.
Recently, in the light of evidence provided by precision agriculture studies reporting a high variability of vineyard soils, the spatial scale should also be taken into consideration in the evaluation of the soil effects on wines. While it is accepted that soil effects become more significant than climate on a local level, it is not clear whether these micro-variations of vineyard soils are determining in the terroir effect. Moreover, as terroir is not a set of only natural factors, the magnitude of the contribution of human-related factors (irrigation, fertilization, soil management) to the soil effect still remains ambiguous. Lastly, a major shortcoming of the majority of works about soil effects on wine characteristics is the absence of connection with actual vine physiological processes since all soil effects on grape and wine chemistry and sensorial properties are ultimately mediated through vine responses.
This article attempts to breakdown the main soil attributes involved in the terroir effect to suggest an improved understanding about soil’s true contribution to wine sensory characteristics. It is proposed that soil parameters per se are not as significant determining factors in the terroir effect but rather their mutual interactions as well as with other natural and human factors included in the terroir concept. Consequently, similarly to bioclimatic indices, composite soil indices (i.e. soil depth, water holding capacity, fertility, temperature etc), incorporating multiple soil parameters, might provide a more accurate and quantifiable means to assess the relative weight of the soil component in the terroir effect.