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…

Short-term relationships between climate and grapevine trunk diseases in southern French vineyards

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.19.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

Delaying irrigation initiation linearly reduces yield with little impact on maturity in Pinot noir

When to initiate irrigation is a critical annual management decision that has cascading effects on grapevine productivity and wine quality in the context of climate change. A multi-site trial was begun in 2021 to optimize irrigation initiation timing using midday stem water potential (ψstem) thresholds characterized as departures from non-stressed baseline ψstemvalues (Δψstem). Plant material, vine and row spacing, and trellising systems were concomitant among sites, while vine age, soil type, and pruning systems varied. Five target Δψstem thresholds were arranged in an RCBD and replicated eight times at each site: 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, and 1.0 MPa (T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively). When thresholds were reached, plots were irrigated weekly at 70% ETc. Yield components and berry composition were quantified at harvest. To better generalize inferences across sites, data were analyzed by ANOVA using a mixed model including site as a random factor. Across sites, irrigation was initiated at Δψstem = 0.24, 0.50, 0.65, 0.93, and 0.98 MPa for T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively. Consistent significant negative linear trends were found for several key yield and berry composition variables. Yield decreased by 12.9, 15.9, 19.5, and 27.4% for T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively, compared to T1 (p < 0.0001) across sites that were driven by similarly linear reductions in berry weight (p < 0.0001). Comparatively, berry composition varied little among treatments. Juice total soluble solids decreased linearly from T1 to T5 – though only ranged 0.9 Brix (p = 0.012). Because producers are paid by the ton, and contracts simply stipulate a target maturity level, first-year results suggest that there is no economic incentive to induce moderate water deficits before irrigation initiation, regardless of vineyard site. Subsequent years will further elucidate the carryover effects of delaying irrigation initiation on productivity over the long term.

A predictive model of spatial Eca variability in the vineyard to support the monitoring of plant status

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.19.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

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.

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.