Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Natural variability and vine-growers behaviour

Natural variability and vine-growers behaviour

Abstract

[English version below]

Le vigneron est confronté à une variabilité naturelle omniprésente, liée au millésime et aux facteurs pédoclimatiques. Depuis 10 ans, en Champagne, la relation qu’entretient le vigneron avec l’espace a évolué. Les exemples d’entreprises collectives à vocation territoriale se sont multipliés : gestion de l’hydraulique viticole, maillages de groupements de conseil viticole (Magister), sites en confusion sexuelle, réseau maturation, analyses de sols par secteur, … Parallèlement, au niveau technique, des travaux de caractérisation du milieu naturel ont été initiés début 1990 en Champagne. Un réseau de stations climatiques a été mis en place, des cartographies de sols ont été dressées, et un réseau de parcelles expérimentales long terme est en cours d’implantation, pour mettre en relation les données du milieu naturel avec les caractéristiques des raisins et du vin. Des cartes conseil à 1/25 000 ont été établies : aléas de glissements de terrain, d’érosion, carte d’adaptation des porte-greffes ou d’aptitude à l’enherbement.

Par le biais du suivi de vignerons sur des sites pilotes, et des autodiagnostics de l’exploitation, réalisés dans le cadre de la viticulture raisonnée, on peut considérer les travaux de cartographie comme de réels supports de discussion et de progrès dans le choix des itinéraires culturaux. Reste désormais à valoriser les bases de données caractérisant le milieu naturel et les observations viticoles pour optimiser le choix de sites d’études représentatifs, extrapoler les résultats obtenus auprès des viticulteurs, et affiner une aide à la décision régionalisée.

In relation with natural environment, the vine-grower faces omnipresent natural variability, linked with year and pedoclimatic conditions. Since 10 years, in Champagne, the relation of the winegrower facing space has changed. Examples of collective actions with territorial purpose have increased: viticultural hydraulic management, network of advice viticultural groups, sectors with mating disruption, soil analysis by areas. Concurrently, at a technical level, studies on characterization of the natural factors began in 1990 in the Champagne vineyard: a network of weather stations was installed, soils were mapped, and longtime experimental network of plots is established, to study the relation between natural factors, vine and wine.

Based on these data, advice maps at the scale of 1/25 000 were established. It results from the following up of vine-growers that they consider cartographic studies as real tools to discuss and to make their vine-growing practices progress. The valorization of the data base, coming from the characterization of natural factors and viticultural observations remains, to better choice where to put experimental plots, and to help the vine-growers in their local choices.

DOI:

Publication date: February 15, 2022

Issue: Terroir 2002

Type: Article

Authors

L. PANIGAI, A-F. DOLÉDEC, F. LANGELLIER, D. MONCOMBLE

Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne (CIVC)
5 rue Henri Martin, 51200 EPERNAY (France)

Keywords

vignoble champenois, terroir, gestion collective, cartographie
Champagne vineyard, terroir, collective actions, mapping

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2002

Citation

Related articles…

Climate, Viticulture, and Wine … my how things have changed!

The planet is warmer than at any time in our recorded past and increasing greenhouse emissions and persistence in the climate system means that continued warming is highly likely. Climate change has already altered the basic framework of growing grapes for wine production worldwide and will likely continue to do so for years to come. The wine sector can continue to play an important role in leading the agricultural sector in addressing climate change. From developing on…

Aromatic maturity is a cornerstone of terroir expression in red wine

Harvesting grapes at adequate maturity is key to the production of high-quality red wines. Enologists and wine makers define several types of maturity, including technical maturity, phenolic maturity and aromatic maturity. Technical maturity and phenolic maturity are relatively well documented in the scientific literature, while articles on aromatic maturity are scarcer. This is surprising, because aromatic maturity is, without a doubt, the most important of the three in determining wine quality and typicity (including terroir expression). Optimal terroir expression can be obtained when the different types of maturity are reached at the same time, or within a short time frame. This is more likely to occur when the ripening takes place under mild temperatures, neither too cool, nor too hot. Aromatic expression in wine can be driven, from low to high maturity, by green, herbal, fresh fruit, ripe fruit, jammy fruit, candied fruit or cooked fruit aromas. Green and cooked fruit aromas are not desirable in red wines, while the levels of other aromatic compounds contribute to the typicity of the wine in relation to its origin. Wines produced in cool climates, or on cool soils in temperate climates, are likely to express herbal or fresh fruit aromas; while wines produced under warm climates, or on warm soils in temperate climates, may express ripe fruit, jammy fruit or candied fruit aromas. Growers can optimize terroir expression through their choice of grapevine variety. Early ripening varieties perform better in cool climates and late ripening varieties in warm climates. Additionally, maturity can be advanced or delayed by different canopy management practices or training systems.

An analytical framework to site-specifically study climate influence on grapevine involving the functional and Bayesian exploration of farm data time series synchronized using an eGDD thermal index

Climate influence on grapevine physiology is prevalent and this influence is only expected to increase with climate change. Although governed by a general determinism, climate influence on grapevine physiology may present variations according to the terroir. In addition, these site-specific differences are likely to be enhanced when climate influence is studied using farm data. Indeed, farm data integrate additional sources of variation such as a varying representativity of the conditions actually experienced in the field. Nevertheless, there is a real challenge in valuing farm data to enable grape growers to understand their own terroir and consequently adapt their practices to the local conditions. In such a context, this article proposes a framework to site-specifically study climate influence on grapevine physiology using farm data. It focuses on improving the analysis of time series of weather data. The analytical framework includes the synchronization of time series using site-specific thermal indices computed with an original method called Extended Growing Degree Days (eGDD). Synchronized time series are then analyzed using a Bayesian functional Linear regression with Sparse Steps functions (BLiSS) in order to detect site-specific periods of strong climate influence on yield development. The article focuses on temperature and rain influence on grape yield development as a case study. It uses data from three commercial vineyards respectively situated in the Bordeaux region (France), California (USA) and Israel. For all vineyards, common periods of climate influence on yield development were found. They corresponded to already known periods, for example around veraison of the year before harvest. However, the periods differed in their precise timing (e.g. before, around or after veraison), duration and correlation direction with yield. Other periods were found for only one or two vineyards and/or were not referred to in literature, for example during the winter before harvest.

Climate and the evolving mix of grape varieties in Australia’s wine regions

The purpose of this study is to examine the changing mix of winegrape varieties in Australia so as to address the question: In the light of key climate indicators and predictions of further climate change, how appropriate are the grape varieties currently planted in Australia’s wine regions? To achieve this, regions are classified into zones according to each region’s climate variables, particularly average growing season temperature (GST), leaving aside within-region variations in climates. Five different climatic classifications are reported. Using projections of GSTs for the mid- and late 21st century, the extent to which each region is projected to move from its current zone classification to a warmer one is reported. Also shown is the changing proportion of each of 21 key varieties grown in a GST zone considered to be optimal for premium winegrape production. Together these indicators strengthen earlier suggestions that the mix of varieties may be currently less than ideal in many Australian wine regions, and would become even less so in coming decades if that mix was not altered in the anticipation of climate change. That is, grape varieties in many (especially the warmest) regions will have to keep changing, or wineries will have to seek fruit from higher latitudes or elevations if they wish to retain their current mix of varieties and wine styles.

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.