Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Application of the simplified quality bioclimatical index of Fregoni: suggestion of using its evolution curve

Application of the simplified quality bioclimatical index of Fregoni: suggestion of using its evolution curve

Abstract

Les indices bioclimatiques constituent un bon outil pour piloter le développement vitivinicole dans une région précise. Plusieurs indices bioclimatiques ont été proposés par la littérature mondiale (WINKLER 1970; HIDALGO, 1980; HUGLIN, 1986, TONIETO et CARBONEAU, 2000), mais pour des raisons physiologiques ces indices n’incluent pas dans leurs formules les températures journalières inférieures à 10 °C, à l’exception de l’indice de FREGONI (FREGONI et PEZZUTTO, 2000). Cet auteur établit une relation entre les variations thermiques, les températures inférieures à 10 °C et la qualité des vins, en particulier pour les 30 jours précédant les vendanges. Parmi les indices appliqués au Chili, celui de WINKLER et AMERINE (WINKLER, 1970) est probablement le plus utilisé, cependant il présente quelques liplites (Mc INTYRE et al. 1987; JACKSON et CHERRY, 1988) et des résultats incongrus ont été signalés pour le Chili. En effet, il classe dans le même groupe des zones littorales avec d’autres proches à la cordillère des Andes, présentant des températures moyennes similaires mais avec des variations thermiques sensiblement différentes (SANTIBANEZ et al. (1984).
FREGONI et PEZZUTTO (2000) affirment que le Chili présente les plus hautes variations thermiques journalières pendant le mois précédant la récolte, ce qui justifierait l’utilisation de l’indice de FREGONI pour la vitiviniculture de ce pays.
On a utilisé la formule simplifiée de l’indice de FREGONI (IFss), en multipliant l’amplitude thermique par le nombre de jours au-dessous de 10 °C pour le mois précédant la récolte, sans, prendre en compte le nombre d’heures pendant lesquelles ces températures au-dessous de 10 °C se maintiennent : IFss = Σ (T maxima – T minima)*Σ (N° jours < 10° C). L’indice de FREGONI est calculé pour le mois précédant la récolte, en l’occurrence, le mois de mars pour l’hémisphère sud.
Le calcul de l’indice de FREGONI pour différents lieux de la région du Maule au Chili permet de différencier 4 zones agroclimatiques. Ces valeurs obtenues ne correspondent pas .aux niveaux les plus élevés possibles pour ces zones, qui se produisent généralement pendant le mois d’avril.
Par ailleurs, au Chili et plus particulièrement dans les zones de la région du Maule, les vendanges s’étalent, en fonction du cépage, du mois de février à mai. Par conséquent, le calcul de l’indice uniquement pour le mois de mars se révèle inapproprié.
Afin de mieux caractériser chaque lieu, on propose donc l’utilisation de la courbe d’évolution de IFss, caractérisée par 4 périodes. Cette courbe d’évolution de l’indice peut avoir différentes applications pratiques.

Bioclimatic indices are good tools to orientate the development of viticultural areas. Several bioclimatic indices have been proposed in international literature (WINKLER 1970; HIDALGO, 1980; HUGLIN, 1986, TONIETO et CARBONEAU, 2000) but, for physiological reasons, daily temperatures under 10°C are not included, excepted in FREGONl’s index (FREGONI and PEZZUTTO, 2000). These authors establishes a relationship between daily temperature variations, temperatures under 10°C and wine quality, for the 30 days before harvest.
WINKLER and AMERINE’s index (WINKLER, 1970) is certainly the most frequently used, among different climatic indices used in Chile. However, it has some limitations (Mc INTYRE et al. 1987; JACKSON and CHERRY, 1988) and some wrong results have been reported for Chile. In fact, this index classifies in the same class coastal zones and closed to the Andes mountains areas. For these two areas, average temperatures are similar but daily variations oftemperature are quite different (SANTIBANEZ et al. 1984).
FREGONI and PEZZUTTO (2000) observed that Chile presents the highest daily variations of temperature during the month before harvest and suggested that it could justify the use of FREGONI’ s index for Chilean viticultural areas.
Simplified FREGONI’ s indice (lfss) was used by multiplying daily temperature amplitude and the number of days under 10°C, for the month before harvest, but not regarding duration of temperature under 10°C period: Ifss = S (T maxima – T minima)*S (N° days < 10° C). FREGONI’ s index is calculated for the month before harvest, March for the southern hemisphere.
FREGONI’ s index was applied to different areas of Chilean Maule region and 4 agroclimatic zones were distinguished. Results don’t correspond to the highest potential levels for these areas, generally found in April. In Chile, and more particularly in the Maule region, the harvest period spread from February to May, according to the cultivar. Consequently, FREGONl’s index application only for March is quite inexact. The lfss curve evolution, characterized by 4 periods, is proposed to characterize viticultural areas. This curve presents different practical applications.

 

 

 

DOI:

Publication date: February 15, 2022

Issue:Terroir 2002

Type: Article

Authors

Ph. PSZCZOLKOWSKJ (1), E. ALEMP ARTE (1) and M. I. CARDENAS (2)

(1) Departamento de Fruticultura y Enología
Facultad de Agronomia e Ingenieria Forestal
Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile
Casilla 306-22, Santiago, Chile
(2) CIREN-CORFO
Manuel Montt 1164; Santiago, Chile

Contact the author

Keywords

Chili, zonage vitivinicole, indice bioclimatique
Chile, viti-vinicultural zoning, bio-climatic index

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2002

Citation

Related articles…

Differential responses of red and white grape cultivars trained to a single trellis system – the VSP

Commercial grape production relies on training grapevine cultivars onto a variety of trellis systems. Training allows for well-lit leaves and clusters, maximizing fruit quality in addition to facilitating cultivation, harvesting, and diseases control. Although grapevines can be trained onto an infinite variety of trellis systems, most red and white cultivars are trained to the standard VSP (Vertical Shoot Positioning) system. However, red and white cultivars respond differently to VSP in fruit composition and growth characteristics, which are yet to be fully understood. Therefore, the objective of this study was to examine the influence of the VSP trellis system on fruit composition of three red, Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot and Syrah, and three white, Chardonnay, Riesling, and Gewurztraminer cultivars grown under uniform growing conditions in the same vineyard. All cultivars were monitored for maturity and harvested at their physiologically maximum possible sugar concentration to compare various fruit quality attributes such as Brix, pH, TA, malic and tartaric acids, glucose and fructose, potassium, YAN, and phenolic compounds including total anthocyanins, anthocyanin profile, and tannins. A distinct pattern in fruit composition was observed in each cultivar. In regards to growth characteristics, Syrah grew vigorously with the highest cluster weight. Although all cultivars developed pyriform seeds, the seed size and weight varied among all cultivars. Also varied were mesocarp cell viability, brush morphology, and cane structure. This knowledge of the canopy architectural characteristics assessed by the widely employed fruit compositional attributes and growth characteristics will aid the growers in better management of the vines in varied situations.

δ13C : A still underused indicator in precision viticulture  

The first demonstration of the interest of carbon isotope composition of sugars in grapevine, as an integrated indicator of vineyard water status, dates back to 2000 (Gaudillère et al., 1999; Van Leeuwen et al., 2001). Thanks to the isotopic discrimination of Carbon that takes place during plant photosynthesis, under hydric stress conditions, it is possible to accurately estimate the photosynthetic activity. Ever since, δ13C has been widely applied with success to zonation, terroir studies and vine physiology research, but is still not widely used by viticulturists. This is quite astonishing by considering the impact of global warming on viticulture and the need to improve water management, that would justify a widespread use of δ13C.
The lack of private laboratories proposing the analysis, the cost of the technology, as well as the long analytical delays, have been detrimental to its development. Some laboratories tried to overcome the analytical difficulties of isotopic analysis by using fourier transformed infrared spectroscopy, as a fast and cheap alternative to the official OIV method (IRMS). These claimed FTIR models have never been published or peer reviewed and cannot be considered robust. In this work, thanks to the recent acquisition of IRMS technology, new modern and robust applications of δ13C for viticulture are proposed. This includes the use of the analysis to make parcel separations at harvesting, the possibility to increase the precision of hydric stress cartography and the potential cost reduction when compared with Scholander pressure bomb analysis.

Pruned vine biomass exclusion from a clay loam vineyard soil – examining the impact on physical/chemical properties

The wine industry worldwide faces increasing challenges to achieve sustainable levels of carbon emission mitigation. This project seeks to establish the feasibility of harvesting winter pruned vineyard biomass (PVB) for potential use in carbon footprint reduction, through its use as a renewable biofuel for energy production. In order to make this recommendation, technical issues such as the potential environmental impact, chemical composition and fuel suitability, and logistical challenges of harvesting biomass needs to be understood to compare with the results from similar studies. Of particular interest is the role PVB plays as a carbon source in vineyard soils and what effect annual removal might have on soil carbon sequestration. A preliminary trial was established in the Waite Campus vineyard (University of Adelaide) to test current management strategies. Vines are grown in a Eutrophic, Red Dermosol clay loam soil with well managed midrow swards. A comparison was undertaken of mid-row treatments in two 0.25 Ha blocks (Shiraz and Semillon), including annual cultivation for seed bed preparation, the deliberate exclusion of PVB (25 years) and incorporation of PVB (13 years) at an average of 3.4 and 5.5 Mg/Ha-1 for Shiraz and Semillon respectively. In both 0-10cm and 10-30cm soil core sample depths, combined soil carbon % measures in the desired range of 1.80 to 3.50, were not significantly different between treatments or cultivars and yielded an estimated 42 Mg/ha-1 of sequestered soil carbon. Other key physical and chemical measures were likewise not significantly different between treatments. Preliminary results suggest that in a temperate zone vineyard, managed such as the one used in this study, there is no long term negative impact on soil carbon sequestration through removing PVB. This implies that growers could confidently harvest PVB for use in several end fates including as a bio fuel.

What are the optimal ranges and thresholds for berry solar radiation for flavonoid biosynthesis?

In wine grape production, canopy management practices are applied to control the source-sink balance and improve the cluster microclimate to enhance berry composition. The aim of this study was to identify the optimal ranges of berry solar radiation exposure (exposure) for upregulation of flavonoid biosynthesis and thresholds for their degradation, to evaluate how canopy management practices such as leaf removal, shoot thinning, and a combination of both affect the grapevine (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Cabernet Sauvignon) yield components, berry composition, and flavonoid profile under context of climate change. First experiment assessed changes in the grape flavonoid content driven by four degrees of exposure. In the second experiment, individual grape berries subjected to different exposures were collected from two cultivars (Cabernet Sauvignon and Petit Verdot). The third experiment consisted of an experiment with three canopy management treatments (i) LR (removal of 5 to 6 basal leaves), (ii) ST (thinned to 24 shoots per vine), and (iii) LRST (a combination of LR and ST) and an untreated control (UNT). Berry composition, flavonoid content and profiles, and 3-isobutyl 2-methoxypyrazine were monitored during berry ripening. Although increasing canopy porosity through canopy management practices can be helpful for other purposes, this may not be the case of flavonoid compounds when a certain proportion of kaempferol was achieved. Our results revealed different sensitivities to degradation within the flavonoid groups, flavonols being the only monitored group that was upregulated by solar radiation. Within different canopy management practices, the main effects were due to the ST. Under environmental conditions given in this trial, ST and LRST hastened fruit maturity; however, a clear improvement of the flavonoid compounds (i.e., greater anthocyanin) was not observed at harvest. Methoxypyrazine berry content decreased with canopy management practices studied. Although some berry traits were improved (i.e. 2.5° Brix increase in berry total soluble solids) due to canopy management practices (ST), this resulted in a four-fold increase in labor operations cost, two-fold decrease in yield with a 10-fold increase in anthocyanin production cost per hectare that should be assessed together as the climate continues to get hot.

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.