Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Frost variability in the Champagne vineyard: probability calendar

Frost variability in the Champagne vineyard: probability calendar

Abstract

Dans le vignoble champenois, le risque thermique associé au gel des bourgeons au printemps et en hiver est très mal connu et ne peut être envisagé qu’à l’échelle locale, en raison d’une variabilité spatiale forte. L’objectif de l’étude est d’appréhender ce risque de façon fiable et pluri locale en utilisant le réseau de stations météos récemment implanté. Au démarrage de l’étude (1998), nous ne disposons de données thermiques que depuis 5 ans dans le meilleur des cas. Néanmoins, les données sont recueillies sur plus de 30 sites représentant une grande diversité de situations: bas de coteau, mi-coteau, plaine vallée, plateau etc. Nous disposons par ailleurs de plusieurs sites hors vignoble avec de longues séries (plus de 30 ans).
Dans un premier temps, la méthode consiste à élaborer, sur la période courte de 5 ans, une « Composante Thermique Régionale » ou «C.T.R. », composante principale de la variabilité thermique d’un ensemble de stations hors vignoble, disposant de longues séries (plus de 30 ans). Cette C.T.R. est établie de telle façon que les stations hors vignoble puissent reconstituer avec une très bonne fiabilité leurs propres séries longues à partir des données de la série courte.
Dans un second temps, à partir de la C.T.R. et des séries courtes (Sans), des séries longues « fictives » sont reconstituées pour chaque station vignoble. Des statistiques de fréquences de gel pour différents seuils de température sont ensuite établies.
Le résultat est un calendrier présentant pour chaque site, par décade et de janvier à mai, la probabilité de connaître chaque jour, une gelée en deçà d’un seuil de température choisi.
La méthodologie revêt plusieurs intérêts : une meilleure connaissance des terroirs, l’aide au choix économique d’un système de protection contre les gelées et la perspective d’étendre cette méthodologie à d’autres variables climatiques.

In the Champagne vineyard, the thermal risk corresponding to frost damage of buds in spring and winter is badly known and must be only study at thin scale because of its great spatial variability. The objective of this study is to describe this physical risk with a great reliability on several places of the vineyard, using the recently installed meteorological station network. In the beginning of the study, we have date only for five years in the best case. Nevertheless, these data are collected from more than 30 stations, representing a great number of topographie situations: bottom, middle of hills, plains, valleys, We also have out-of-vineyard stations with long thermal series.
At first, the method consist of establishing the C.R.T (Regional Thermal Component), which is the main component of the thermal variability of a set of several out-of-vineyard stations, having long thermal series (more than 30 years). This C.R.T. is elaborated so as to reconstitute with a good reliability out-of-vineyards stations long thermal series from short thermal series.
At last, virtual long thermal series of vineyard stations are reconstituted from both short thermal series and C.R.T. Then, frequency statistics of thermal risk are established for different temperature levels. This method is interesting for 3 reasons : a better knowledge of our vineyard, selecting easily the most cheaper frost protecting system in each situation and extending perhaps this method to other climate parameters.

 

 

 

DOI:

Publication date: February 15, 2022

Issue: Terroir 2002

Type: Article

Authors

F. LANGELLIER, L. PANIGAI, D. MONCOMBLE (1), M-F. de SAINTIGNON, S. DURANTON (2)

(1) COMITE INTERPROFESSIONNEL DU VIN DE CHAMPAGNE, 5 rue Henri Martin 51200 Epernay
(2) LABORATOIRE DE LA MONTAGNE ALPINE- CNRS – Espace Serge Martin- 2061, rue de la Piscine, Domaine universitaire BP 53- 38041 Grenoble Cedex

Keywords

Vignoble de champagne, gel de printemps, risque thermique, réseau météorologique
Champagne vineyard, spring frost; probability calendar, meteorological network

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2002

Citation

Related articles…

Soil, vine, climate change – what is observed – what is expected

To evaluate the current and future impact of climate change on Viticulture requires an integrated view on a complex interacting system within the soil-plant-atmospheric continuum under continuous change. Aside of the globally observed increase in temperature in basically all viticulture regions for at least four decades, we observe several clear trends at the regional level in the ratio of precipitation to potential evapotranspiration. Additionally the recently published 6th assessment report of the IPCC (The physical science basis) shows case-dependent further expected shifts in climate patterns which will have substantial impacts on the way we will conduct viticulture in the decades to come.
Looking beyond climate developments, we observe rising temperatures in the upper soil layers which will have an impact on the distribution of microbial populations, the decay rate of organic matter or the storage capacity for carbon, thus affecting the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and the viscosity of water in the soil-plant pathway, altering the transport of water. If the upper soil layers dry out faster due to less rainfall and/or increased evapotranspiration driven by higher temperatures, the spectral reflection properties of bare soil change and the transport of latent heat into the fruiting zone is increased putting a higher temperature load on the fruit. Interactions between micro-organisms in the rhizosphere and the grapevine root system are poorly understood but respond to environmental factors (such as increased soil temperatures) and the plant material (rootstock for instance), respectively the cultivation system (for example bio-organic versus conventional). This adds to an extremely complex system to manage in terms of increased resilience, adaptation to and even mitigation of climate change. Nevertheless, taken as a whole, effects on the individual expressions of wines with a given origin, seem highly likely to become more apparent.

Updating the Winkler index: An analysis of Cabernet sauvignon in Napa Valley’s varied and changing climate

This study aims to create an updated, agile viticultural climate index (similar to the Winkler Index) by performing in-depth analyses of current and historical data from industry partners in several major winegrowing regions. The Winkler Index was developed in the early twentieth century based on analysis of various grape-growing regions in California. The index uses heat accumulation (i.e. Growing Degree Days) throughout the growing season to determine which grape varieties are best suited to each region. As viticultural regions are increasingly subject to the complexity and uncertainty of a changing climate, a more rigorous, agile model is needed to aid grape growers in determining which cultivars to plant where. For the first phase of this study, 21 industry partners throughout Napa Valley shared historical phenology, harvest, viticultural practice, and weather data related to their Cabernet sauvignon vineyard blocks. To complement this data, berry samples were collected throughout the 2021 growing season from 50 vineyard blocks located throughout 16 American Viticultural Areas that were then analyzed for basic berry chemistry and phenolics. These blocks have been mapped using a Geographic Information System (GIS), enabling analysis of altitude, vineyard row orientation, slope, and remotely sensed climate data. Sampling sites were also chosen based on their proximity to a weather station. By analyzing historical data from industry partners and data specifically collected for this study, it is possible to identify key parameters for further analysis. Initial results indicate extreme variability at a high spatial resolution not currently accounted for in modern viticultural climate indices and suggest that viticultural practices play a major role. Using the structure of data collection and analyses developed for the first phase, this project will soon be expanded to other wine regions globally, while continuing data collection in Napa Valley.

Underpinning terroir with data: rethinking the zoning paradigm

Agriculture, natural resource management and the production and sale of products such as wine are increasingly data-driven activities. Thus, the use of remote and proximal crop and soil sensors to aid management decisions is becoming commonplace and ‘Agtech’ is proliferating commercially; mapping, underpinned by geographical information systems and complex methods of spatial analysis, is widely used. Likewise, the chemical and sensory analysis of wines draws on multivariate statistics; the efficient winery intake of grapes, subsequent production of wines and their delivery to markets relies on logistics; whilst the sales and marketing of wines is increasingly driven by artificial intelligence linked to the recorded purchasing behaviour of consumers. In brief, there is data everywhere!

Opinions will vary on whether these developments are a good thing. Those concerned with the ‘mystique’ of wine, or the historical aspects of terroir and its preservation, may find them confronting. In contrast, they offer an opportunity to those interested in the biophysical elements of terroir, and efforts aimed at better understanding how these impact on vineyard performance and the sensory attributes of resultant wines. At the previous Terroir Congress, we demonstrated the potential of analytical methods used at the within-vineyard scale in the development of Precision Viticulture, in contributing to a quantitative understanding of regional terroir. For this conference, we take this approach forward with examples from contrasting locations in both the northern and southern hemispheres. We show how, by focussing on the vineyards within winegrowing regions, as opposed to all of the land within those regions, we might move towards a more robust terroir zoning than one derived from a mixture of history, thematic mapping, heuristics and the whims of marketers. Aside from providing improved understanding by underpinning terroir with data, such methods should also promote improved management of the entire wine value chain.

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.

The impact of sustainable management regimes on amino acid profiles in grape juice, grape skin flavonoids, and hydroxycinnamic acids

One of the biggest challenges of agriculture today is maintaining food safety and food quality while providing ecosystem services such as biodiversity conservation, pest and disease control, ensuring water quality and supply, and climate regulation. Organic farming was shown to promote biodiversity and carbon sequestration, and is therefore seen as one possibility of environmentally friendly production. Consumers expect organically grown crops to be free from chemical pesticides and mineral fertilizers and often presume that the quality of organically grown crops is different or higher compared to conventionally grown crops. Integrated, organic, and biodynamic viticulture were compared in a replicated field trial in Geisenheim, Germany (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Riesling). Amino acid profiles in juice, grape skin flavonoids, and hydroxycinnamic acids were monitored over three consecutive seasons beginning 7 years after conversion to organic and biodynamic viticulture, respectively. In addition, parameters such as soil nutrient status, yield, vigor, canopy temperature, and water stress were monitored to draw conclusions on reasons for the observed changes. Results revealed that the different sustainable management regimes highly differed in their amino acid profiles in juice and also in their skin flavonol content, whereas differences in the flavanol and hydroxycinnamic acid content were less pronounced. It is very likely that differences in nutrient status and yield determined amino acid profiles in juice, although all three systems showed similar amounts of mineralized nitrogen in the soil. Canopy structure and temperature in the bunch zone did not differ among treatments and therefore cannot account for the observed differences in favonols. A different light exposure of the bunches in the respective systems due to differences in vigor together with differences in berry size and a different water status of the vines might rather be responsible for the increase in flavonol content under organic and biodynamic viticulture.