Terroir 2004 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Contribution of soil and atmospheric conditions to leaf water potential in grapevines

Contribution of soil and atmospheric conditions to leaf water potential in grapevines

Abstract

[English version below]

Etant lié au sol et aux conditions atmosphériques, le statut hydrique influence la physiologie de la vigne d’une part, mais joue aussi un role important en ce qui concerne la qualité du raisin et donc du vin d’autre part. Nous avons mesuré, dans la région de Stellenbosch, le statut hydrique sur des pieds de Sauvignon Blanc non irrigués, implantés sur 2 terroirs différents, l’un froid, l’autre plus chaud. D’après ces mesures, il semble que le potentiel hydrique foliaire (Ψl ) soit lié par une fonction logarithmique au potentiel hydrique du sol (Ψm). De plus, l’augmentation du stress hydrique du cep semble être plus lente lorsque Ψm descend en dessous de -0.3 MPa. Sous certaines conditions, le déficit en pression de vapeur ne semble pas influencer le Ψl (mesuré à l’aube), cependant lorsque les valeurs obtenues pour ce dernier sont combinées avec celles obtenues pour Ψm, alors 85% de la variabilité de Ψl mesuré à 14:00 peut être expliqué. A partir de ces résultats, nous pouvons donc conclure sur l’existence d’une fonction entre le statut hydrique de la vigne et les conditions atmosphériques ainsi qu’entre le statut hydrique et la teneur en eau du sol. Les résultats non linéaires du potentiel foliaire, caractérisés par des augmentations momentanées obtenus à différents moments de la journée peuvent être expliqués par une fermeture partielle des stomates. Les valeurs du flux de sève, observées pour des vignes cultivées sur les sols secs (Ψm = -0.75 MPa) du terroir plus froid, montrent de fortes diminutions pendant la journée, comparé à celles obtenues sur le terroir plus chaud où Ψm = -0.12 MPa. Ceci confirme bien que le statut hydrique de la vigne, situé sur le terroir plus froid, est régulé grâce à la fermeture partielle des stomates et ce, malgré le faible déficit en pression de vapeur enregistré sur cette même localité.
La linéarité de la relation entre Ψl et Ψm, sur vignes irriguées où Ψm était supérieur à -0.08 MPa, peut expliquer l’absence de contrôle stomatique significatif. Cependant, en mesurant Ψl toutes les 15 minutes, on peut observer la fermeture stomatique sur des vignes irriguées en climat semi-aride, où le déficit en pression de vapeur passe de 1.0 kPa à l’aube à 4.6 kPa dans l’après-midi, malgré une teneur en eau dans le sol proche de la capacité au champ (Ψm = ca -0.01 MPa). Le contrôle stomatique, une fois encore est à l’origine de la non- linéarité de la relation entre le déficit en pression de vapeur et Ψl. Ce dernier était, dans ces mêmes conditions, de –1.6 MPa. Ces résultats nous indiquent que là où la teneur en eau du sol n’est pas un facteur limitant, de difficiles conditions climatiques peuvent provoquer la fermeture des stomates, réduisant ainsi une chute trop sévère du potentiel hydrique foliaire. Le potentiel hydrique du sol, ainsi que le déficit en pression de vapeur, devraient donc permettre, par la suite, de quantifier l’effet du terroir sur le stress hydrique de la vigne.

Since grapevine water status, which is a function of soil and atmospheric conditions, affects grapevine physiology it will also play an important role in grape and wine quality. Water status in dry-land Sauvignon blanc was measured simultaneously both at a warm and a cool locality in the Stellenbosch region at different phenological stages during the growing season. Leaf water potential (Ψl) appeared to be a logarithmic function of soil matric potential (Ψm). Grapevine water stress tended to increase at a slower rate when Ψm dropped below ca -0.3 MPa. Under the given conditions, vapour pressure deficit (VPD) did not seem to have an effect on pre-dawn Ψl, but in combination with Ψm could explain 85% of the variation in Ψl measured at 14:00. These results indicated that grapevine water status was a function of atmospheric conditions as well as soil water content. The non-linear response of Ψl appeared to be the result of partial stomatal closure that increased Ψl at certain stages during the day. Sap flow rates in grapevines cultivated on the drier soil (i.e. Ψm = -0.75 MPa) showed pronounced reductions during the day at the cooler locality compared to those at the warmer one where Ψm was ca -0.12 MPa. This confirmed that grapevine water status was regulated via partial stomatal closure at the cooler locality, despite the lower VPD that was recorded at this particular locality.
In studies with irrigated grapevines, where Ψm was higher than -0.08 MPa, absence of significant stomatal control was probably the reason for the reported linear response between Ψl and Ψm. However, measuring Ψl at 15 minute intervals revealed that stomatal closure occurred in irrigated grapevines under semi-arid conditions where VPD increased from 1.0 kPa pre-dawn to 4.6 kPa in the afternoon despite soil water content being near field capacity (i.e. Ψm = ca -0.01 MPa). Due to stomatal control, the relationship between Ψl and VPD was also non-linear. Under these specific conditions, minimum Ψl was ca -1.6 MPa. These results showed that even where soil water content was not a limiting factor, harsh meteorological conditions were able to cause partial stomatal closure, thus preventing the evolution of extremely low Ψl values in grapevines. From the foregoing, it is suggested that Ψm as well as VPD should be considered for the quantification of terroir effects on grapevine water stress.

DOI:

Publication date: January 12, 2022

Issue: Terroir 2004

Type: Article

Authors

P.A. Myburgh and M. Laker

ARC Infruitec-Nietvoorbij, Private Bag X5026, 7599 Stellenbosch, Republic of South Africa

Contact the author

Keywords

Grapevine, leaf water potential, soil water, vapour pressure deficit, locality

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2004

Citation

Related articles…

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.

Adapting the vineyard to climate change in warm climate regions with cultural practices

Since the 1980s global regime shift, grape growers have been steadily adapting to a changing climate. These adaptations have preserved the region-climate-cultivar rapports that have established the global trade of wine with lucrative economic benefits since the middle of 17th century. The advent of using fractions of crop and actual evapotranspiration replacement in vineyards with the use of supplemental irrigation has furthered the adaptation of wine grape cultivation. The shift in trellis systems, as well as pruning methods from positioned shoot systems to sprawling canopies, as well as adapting the bearing surface from head-trained, cane-pruned to cordon-trained, spur-pruned systems have also aided in the adaptation of grapevine to warmer temperatures. In warm climates, the use of shade cloth or over-head shade films not only have aided in arresting the damage of heat waves, but also identified opportunities to reduce the evapotranspiration from vineyards, reducing environmental footprint of vineyard. Our increase in knowledge on how best to understand the response of grapevine to climate change was aided with the identification of solar radiation exposure biomarker that is now used for phenotyping cultivars in their adaptability to harsh environments. Using fruit-based metrics such as sugar-flavonoid relationships were shown to be better indicators of losses in berry integrity associated with a warming climate, rather than solely focusing on region-climate-cultivar rapports. The resilience of wine grape was further enhanced by exploitation of rootstock × scion combinations that can resist untoward droughts and warm temperatures by making more resilient grapevine combinations. Our understanding of soil-plant-atmosphere continuum in the vineyard has increased within the last 50 years in such a manner that growers are able to use no-till systems with the aid of arbuscular mycorrhiza fungi inoculation with permanent cover cropping making the vineyard more resilient to droughts and heat waves. In premium wine grape regions viticulture has successfully adapted to a rapidly changing climate thus far, but berry based metrics are raising a concern that we may be approaching a tipping point.

Grapevine varietal diversity as mitigation tool for climate change: Agronomic and oenologic potential of 14 foreign varieties grown in Languedoc region (France)

Climate change effects in Languedoc include an expected rise in temperatures, increased evapotranspiration as well as more severe and frequent climatic hazards, such as frost, drought periods and heat waves. For winegrowers theses phenomena impact both yield and quality, resulting in more frequent unbalanced wines. Research on identified mitigation tools for vineyard management is necessary to improve resilience of grapevine agrosystems. Varietal assortment is one of them. This study focuses on agronomic and oenologic potential of 14 foreign varieties grown in Languedoc French region. Fourteen grapevine varieties were monitored during 2021 from June until harvest on eight different sites, some of which occurring on more than one site adding up to 21 different modalities: 7 white varieties Alvarinho B, Assyrtiko B (2), Malvasia Istriana B, Parellada B, Verdejo B, Verdelho B, Xarello B, and 7 black varieties Saperavi N (2), Touriga nacional N, Baga N, Aleatico N, Montepulciano N (2), Primitivo N (3), Calabrese N (3). Varietals were compared through the following parameters: phenology was assessed by using the information collected in the Database Network of French Vine Conservatories (INRAE-SupAgro-IFV, 2005-2015). The number of inflorescences for shoots from secondary buds and bourillons and suckers were observed to assess post-bud break frost tolerance potential. Grapevine water status was studied through stem water potential measurement, observation of foliage symptoms of drought, and 𝛿13C on must. Frequencies and intensities of downy mildew, powdery mildew, and black rot attacks were estimated before harvest on leaves and clusters and botrytis at harvest to assess disease susceptibilities. Berry composition was monitored from end of veraison until harvest. Yield and mean bunch weight were also calculated. Varieties were then ranked on a 1-4 scale for each parameter and compared through PCA. Forty two stations of the Mediterranean basin were compared by PCA with the Multicriteria Climatic Classification indicators in order to confront the collected information during 2021 campaign to the hypothesis that plants coming from dry and hot regions are genetically adapted to such climatic conditions.

Rootstock regulation of scion phenotypes: the relationship between rootstock parentage and petiole mineral concentration

Grapevine is grown as a graft since the end of the 19th century. Rootstocks not only provide tolerance to Phylloxera but also ensure the supply of water and mineral nutrients to the scion. Rootstocks are an important mean of adaptation to environmental conditions, because the scion controls the typical features of the grapes and wine. However, among the large diversity of rootstocks worldwide, few of them are commercially used in the vineyard. The aim of this study was to investigate the extent to which rootstocks modify the mineral composition of the petioles of the scion. Vitis vinifera cvs. Cabernet-Sauvignon, Pinot noir, Syrah and Ugni blanc were grafted onto 55 different rootstock genotypes and planted in a vineyard as three replicates of 5 vines. Petioles were collected in the cluster zone with 6 replicates per combination. Petiolar concentrations of 13 mineral elements (N, P, K, S, Mg, Ca, Na, B, Zn, Mn, Fe, Cu, Al) at veraison were determined. Scion, rootstock and the interaction explained the same proportion of the phenotypic variance for most mineral elements. Rootstock genotype showed a significant influence on the petiole mineral element composition. Rootstock effect explained from 7 % for Cu to 25 % for S of the variance. The difference of rootstock conferred mineral status is discussed in relation to vigor and fertility. Rootstocks were also genotyped with 23 microsatellite markers. Data were analysed according to genetic groups in order to determine whether the petiole mineral composition could be related to the genetic parentage of the rootstock. Thanks to a highly powerful design, it is the first time that such a large panel of rootstocks grafted with 4 scions has been studied. These results give the opportunity to better characterize the rootstocks and to enlarge the diversity used in the vineyard.

Climate projections over France wine-growing region and its potential impact on phenology

Climate change represents a major challenge for the French wine industry. Climatic conditions in French vineyards have already changed and will continue to evolve. One of the notable effects on grapevine is the advancing growing season. The aim of this study is to characterise the evolution of agroclimatic indicators (Huglin index, number of hot days, mean temperature, cumulative rainfall and number of rainy days during the growing season) at French wine-growing regions scale between 1980 and 2019 using gridded data (8 km resolution, SAFRAN) and for the middle of the 21th century (2046-2065) with 21 GCMs statistically debiased and downscaled at 8 km. A set of three phenological models were used to simulate the budburst (BRIN, Smoothed-Utah), flowering, veraison and theoretical maturity (GFV and GSR) stages for two grape varieties (Chardonnay and Cabernet-Sauvignon) over the whole period studied. All the French wine-growing regions show an increase in both temperatures during the growing season and Huglin index. This increase is accompanied by an advance in the simulated flowering (+3 to +9 days), veraison (+6 to +13 days) and theoretical maturity (+6 to +16 days) stages, which are more noticeable in the north-eastern part of France. The climate projections unanimously show, for all the GCMs considered, a clear increase in the Huglin index (+662 to 771 °C.days compared to the 1980-1999 period) and in the number of hot days (+5.6 to 22.6 days) in all the wine regions studied. Regarding rainfall, the expected evolution remains very uncertain due to the heterogeneity of the climates simulated by the 21 models. Only 4 regions out of 21 have a significant decrease in the number of rainy days during the growing season. The two budburst models show a strong divergence in the evolution of this stage with an average difference of 18 days between the two models on all grapevine regions. The theoretical maturity is the most impacted stage with a potential advance between 40 and 23 days according to wine-growing regions.