Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Analyse of« terroirs» zoning on cooperative wineries (Côtes du Rhône area, France). Influence on vine agronomic response and on grape quality

Analyse of« terroirs» zoning on cooperative wineries (Côtes du Rhône area, France). Influence on vine agronomic response and on grape quality

Abstract

Plusieurs caves coopératives de l’AOC Côtes du Rhône se servent des informations du zonage pour la sélection des vendanges en fonction du terroir d’origine, afin d’élaborer des «cuvées terroir» et d’exploiter ainsi le potentiel qualitatif de leurs secteurs. Cependant, les caractéristiques de la matière première provenant de parcelles issues d’une même unité cartographique ne sont pas toujours homogènes.
Cette étude s’oriente donc vers une meilleure connaissance du fonctionnement des terroirs. Elle cherche à définir, à travers la validation des zonages, l’incidence du terroir sur la réponse agronomique de la vigne et sur le potentiel qualitatif du raisin et du vin. On recherche un outil d’aide à la décision pour les caves permettant d’optimiser la sélection des apports.
Sur la base des zonages existants dans la région (cartes des sols, cartographies des pédopaysages et des terroirs, …), des réseaux de parcelles sont suivis depuis l’année 2000 au sein des aires de production de plusieurs caves coopératives pendant plusieurs millésimes.
Les parcelles, plantées avec Vitis vinifera L. cv. Grenache noir (cépage principal de l’AOC), se placent sur les principaux types de sols de chaque cave, avec des répétitions par type de sol. Une caractérisation détaillée des parcelles est effectuée ( description terroir, itinéraires techniques, …. ) Un suivi agronomique et physiologique du comportement de la vigne, ainsi que de la sensibilité des vignes aux contraintes hydriques ont été réalisés. Enfin, on y caractérise le raisin pendant la maturation.
Les résultats présentés s’appuient sur les 2 premiers millésimes d’expérimentation. Ils devraient permettre de : 1. Evaluer la sensibilité au stress hydrique des terroirs. 2. Appréhender la variabilité des terroirs en fonction du millésime : stabilité des terroirs dans le temps (intérêt de sélectionner certains terroirs lors des millésimes favorables). 3. Quantifier l’impact de ces aspects sur la qualité du raisin. 4. Evaluer l’interférence terroir – pratiques culturales « effet vigneron» (fertilisation, rendement, …).

Several cooperative wineries of Côtes du Rhône AOC use zoning information for harvest’s selection according to type of “terroir” in order to work out “cuvees terroir” and thus to exploit the qualitative potential of their areas. However, the characteristics of grapes from the same cartographie unity of “terroir” are not always homogeneous.
This work is then oriented to enhance the knowledge of functioning of “terroirs”. We should to know the influence of the “terroir” on the agronomic reaction of the vine and the potential quality of the grape and the wine, by validation of zoning. We look for a tool to aid wineries decisions, allowing the optimisation of harvest selections.
Vine networks, located on production area of different cooperative wineries and chosen according to zoning maps (soils maps, “terroirs” maps, soil landscape maps, … ), are controlled from 2000 and for several vintages.
Plots, each one planted with Vitis vinifera L. cv. Grenache noir (the first cultivar of Côtes du Rhône Appellation), were located on the most representative soils of each winery, with repetitions plots by soil. Vine plots characteristics were in detail described (“terroir”, viticultural practices, … ). Physiological and agronomic controls of vine behaviour and vine sensibility to water deficit were determined. Berries composition during ripening was also analysed.
Results of the 2 first vintages of experimentation are presented. They should us to allow to : 1. Evaluate the vine sensibility to water deficit of different “terroirs”. 2. Estimate the “terroirs” ,variability by vintage : “terroirs” stability on time ( define the advantages of some harvest selections for the favourable vintages). 3. Valuate the incidence of these parameters on grape quality. 4. Evaluate the “terroir” and viticultural practices interferences (“vine grower effect”: fertilisation, training management, production,

DOI:

Publication date: February 15, 2022

Issue: Terroir 2002

Type: Article

Authors

B. RODRIGUEZ LOVELLE and C. SIPP

Syndicat des Vignerons des Côtes du Rhône – Service Technique – Institut Rhodanien, 2260 Route du Grès, 84100 Orange (France)

Keywords

sol, qualité du raisin, stress hydrique, cave coopérative, sélection des vendanges
soil, grape quality, water stress, cooperative winery, harvest selection

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2002

Citation

Related articles…

Grapevine yield estimation in a context of climate change: the GraY model

Grapevine yield is a key indicator to assess the impacts of climate change and the relevance of adaptation strategies in a vineyard landscape. At this scale, a yield model should use a number of parameters and input data in relation to the information available and be able to reproduce vineyard management decisions (e.g. soil and canopy management, irrigation). In this study, we used data from six experimental sites in Southern France (cv. Syrah) to calibrate a model of grapevine yield limited by water constraint (GraY). Each yield component (bud fertility, number of berries per bunch, berry weight) was calculated as a function of the soil water availability simulated by the WaLIS water balance model at critical phenological phases. The model was then evaluated in 10 grapegrowers’ plots, covering a diversity of biophysical and technical contexts (soil type, canopy size, irrigation, cover crop). We identified three critical periods for yield formation: after flowering on the previous year for the number of bunches and berries, around pre-veraison and post-veraison of the same year for mean berry weight. Yields were simulated with a model efficiency (EF) of 0.62 (NRMSE = 0.28). Bud fertility and number of berries per bunch were more accurately simulated (EF = 0.90 and 0.77, NRMSE = 0.06 and 0.10, respectively) than berry weight (EF = -0.31, NRMSE = 0.17). Model efficiency on the on-farm plots reached 0.71 (NRMSE = 0.37) simulating yields from 1 to 8 kg/plant. The GraY model is an original model estimating grapevine yield evolution on the basis of water availability under future climatic conditions.  It allows to evaluate the effects of various adaptation levers such as planting density, cover crop management, fruit/leaf ratio, shading and irrigation, in various production contexts.

Analysis of Cabernet Sauvignon and Aglianico winegrape (V. vinifera L.) responses to different pedo-climatic environments in southern Italy

Water deficit is one of the most important effects of climate change able to affect agricultural sectors. In general, it determines a reduction in biomass production, and for some plants, as in the case of grapevine, it can endorse fruit quality. The monitoring and management of plant water stress in the vineyard

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.

The concept of terroir: what place for microbiota?

Microbes play key roles on crop nutrient availability via biogeochemical cycles, rhizosphere interactions with roots as well as on plant growth and health. Recent advances in technologies, such as High Throughput Sequencing Techniques, allowed to gain deeper insight on the structure of bacterial and fungal communities associated with soil, rhizosphere and plant phyllosphere. Over the past 10 years, numerous scientific studies have been carried out on the microbial component of the vineyard. Whether the soil or grape compartments have been taken into account, many studies agree on the evidence of regional delineations of microbial communities, that may contribute to regional wine characteristics and typicity. Some authors proposed the term “microbial terroir” including “yeast terroir” for grapes to describe the connection between microbial biogeography and regional wine characteristics. Many factors are involved in terroir including climate, soil, cultivar and human practices as well as their interactions. Studies considering “microbial terroir” greatly contributed to improve our knowledge on factors that shape the vineyard microbial structure and diversity. However, the potential impact of “microbial terroir” on wine composition has yet not received strong scientific evidence and many questions remain to be addressed, related to the functional characterization of the microbial community and its impact on plant physiology and grape composition, the origins and interannual stability of vineyard microbiota, as well as their impact on wine sensorial attributes. The presentation will give an overview on the role of microbiota as a terroir component and will highlight future perspectives and challenges on this key subject for the wine industry.

Postveraison shoot trimming in Tannat and Merlot: preliminary results on yield components, plant balance and berry composition

There is currently a trend towards the production of wines with low alcohol content. To achieve this, grapes with low sugar content must be used. There are techniques at the vineyard level that can delay ripening and avoid excessive sugar accumulation without, a priori, affecting the final polyphenol content. Postveraison shoot trimming (PVST) is experimentally evaluated for these purposes, but its impact under Uruguayan climatic conditions with high interannual variability is not known. The aim of this work is to assess the PVST in Tannat and Merlot cultivars and their impact on yield components, plant balance and berry primary composition. In this study, two commercial vineyards of 10 years old Tannat and Merlot (grafted on SO4) at Canelones Department were selected. During the 2020-201 growing season, grapevines were submitted to PVST when grapes reached 15º Brix. In a randomized block, trimmed (T) and control (C) plants were evaluated with three repetitions each cultivar. Evaluation of the evolution of primary berry composition during ripening, measurement of yield components and plant balance were performed. For both cultivars, PVST did not affect yield components. Merlot reached 5.4 kg per plant and Tannat 7.1 kg, with not statistical significance between treatments. However, statistical differences were observed in terms of plant balance. In Merlot Ravaz Index reached a difference of 5.3 (12.0 in T and 6.7 in C) meanwhile Tannat reached 3.5 of statistical difference (13.7 in T and 10.2 in C). The tendency to imbalance for the treated plants had an impact on the final grape composition. Merlot grapes showed statistical difference in final total acidity (0.3 g of difference between treatments) while treatments impact final sugar content on Tannat grapes (10.0 g of difference between treatments). Further studies are needed to assess the impact of different canopy management techniques in our conditions.