Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Enological, economical, social and viticulture ”terroir” units as fundamental elements of mosaic of “big” zoning

Enological, economical, social and viticulture ”terroir” units as fundamental elements of mosaic of “big” zoning

Abstract

[English version below]

Nous savons tous très bien qu’on a assisté au cours de ces dix dernières années à une éclosion soudaine de recherches sur le zonage viti-vinicole qui, à partir par exemple du modèle du concept de “terroir”, se sont de plus en plus enrichies en passant aux “Unités ou Systèmes de Transformation” (UTTE) et “Valorisation” (UTCE) pour terminer avec les “Systèmes productifs globaux du Territoire” (UTB) comprenant en filière les aspects existentiels (UTBES), sociaux (UTBSO) et économiques (UTBEC) hypothisés dans le “GRANDE ZONAZIONE: Grand zonage” (MORLAT R., 1996, CARBONNEAU A., 1996, TOUZARD J.M. 1998, CARBONNEAU A., CARGNELLO G., 1996, 1998, CARGNELLO G., 1994, 1995, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2001, -MILOTIC A., CARGNELLO G., PERSURIC G., 1999, PERSURIC G., STAYER M., CARGNELLO G., 2000, MILOTIC A., OPLANIC M., CARGNELLO G., PERSURIC G., 2000).

Nous sommes donc arrivés à supposer que pour zoner en viticulture, et non pas seulement en viticulture, il faut partir des considérations : existentielles, sociales, économiques qui représentent les différents échelons des grands objectifs du zonage, en se servant pour les rejoindre des moyens placés en filière suivants : “terroir” vignoble (exemple : variété, clones, écartement, systèmes de conduite, gestion de la végétation, de la production et de la vendange, etc.), cave ( exemple : utilisation des appareillages, technologies et techniques d’innovation, etc.), communication, marketing, etc., comme on l’a prévu dans le “GRAND ZONAGE” (CARGNELLO G., 1996). Pour vérifier la validité de cette “nouvelle” organisation du zonage viti-vinicole, nous avons conduit en Istrie (Croatie) pour une durée de 5 ans des recherches pour établir si le zonage devait descendre uniquement des aspects concernant le “terroir” ou s’il devait descendre des aspects qui partent de considérations d’ordre social et économique et ensuite de celles “techniques” comprenant la cave, le vignoble, le terrain et le climat. Les recherches conduites en Istrie (Croatie) sur les objectifs et sur les moyens cités ci-dessus ont démontré ultérieurement la validité de ce moyen de procéder dans le zonage viti-vinicole. Elles ont démontré par ailleurs que l’incidence du “terroir” à un niveau décisionnel dans le zonage viti-vinicole peut s’amenuiser par rapport aux autres composantes et en être même dépassée, c’est-à-dire que l’on a justement décidé dans certains cas de faire un vignoble dans un terroir non adapté à la viticulture car les “Unités de Culture Viticole, de Transformation, de Valorisation” et les systèmes productifs globaux ont eu une importance fondamentale pour le zonage. Ces recherches seront exposées dans cette communication.

In the any last decade was the large number of research about viticulture zoning. The begin of zoning research was funded on the term and principle of “terroir”. Then, the term “terroir” was divided to “unite de terroir de base”, “unité de système de culture viticole”, “unite o sisteme de transformation e valorizazion” and as the last new segment “sistemi produtivi globali del territorio” (the global productive system of territory). All this new terms, with a respect to social and economical aspects has a unique name of ”.big” zoning (GRANDE ZONAZIONE) (MORLAT R. 1996, CARBONNEAU A., 1996, TOUZARD J.M., CARBONNEAU A., CARGNELLO G., 1998, CARGNELLO G., 1994, 1995, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2001, MILOTIC A., CARGNELLO G., PERSURIC G. 1999, PERSURIC G., STAVER M., CARGNELLO G., 2000, MILOTIC A, OPLANIC M., CARGNELLO G., PERSURIC G., 2000).

According quoted annotation for successfully process of viticulture zoning, and not only to viticulture, need to start of next items : existence, social aspects, economic aspects, which present the different stairs in the zoning process. The sequence of next terms, “terroir” – vineyards (for example: variety, clone, training form, canopy management, yield and other) – vine cellar (for example : technology of wine making) – communication – marketing make a important factors to process of “big” zoning.For confirm the quoted “new” hypothesis in the zoning process was done the research in the Istria (Croatia). For needs of research was taken all social and economical aspects and then the different techniques in vine growing and wine making, and the characteristics of soil am climate.The research made in Istria was confirmed the hypothesis of “big” zoning process. This research was confirmed also the importance of “terroir” and in the same moment the importance of lower units “unite de culture viticole de transformation de valorisation” for viticulture production.

DOI:

Publication date: February 15, 2022

Issue: Terroir 2002

Type: Article

Authors

PERSURIC G. (1), CARGNEILO G. (2), GLUIDC D. (1), STA VER M. (1), OPLANIC M. (1)

(1) Istitute for Agriculture and Tourism, C. Hugues 8, 52440 POREC, Croatia (HR)
(2) SOC Tecniche Colturali – lstituto Sperimentale per la Viticoltura, Viale XXVIII Aprile, 26 – 31015 Conegliano (Treviso) Italia

Contact the author

Keywords

Zonage viti-vinicole globale d’innovation Istrie
Viticulture zoning, “big” zoning, Istria, Viticulture

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2002

Citation

Related articles…

A multidisciplinary approach to evaluate the effects of the training system on the performance of “Aglianico del Vulture” vineyards

Vineyards are complex agro-ecosystems with high spatial and temporal variability. An efficient training system may counteract the adverse effects of this variability. Moreover, considering the climate change issues, choosing an efficient training system that enhances water use and protects the vines from radiative thermal stress has become a priority for the farmers. A multidisciplinary approach that assesses the soil-crop-yield-wine relationships of vineyards in a distributed and holistic way could bring added knowledge on the behavior of the different training systems. This ongoing research aimed to implement a multidisciplinary approach to study the behavior of “Aglianico del Vulture” grapevines trained with two different systems: a spurred cordon (SC) and an “Alberello in parete” (AL), grown in a high-quality wine production area of Basilicata region (Italy). The approach merged several methods and scales of soil, ecophysiology, must/wine quality, and spectral data collection to assess the influence of the training system. Homogeneous zones (HZs) in both training systems were defined through a procedure based on geomorphological classification, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) images analysis, and a traditional soil survey supported by geophysical scanning. During the 2021 season, TDR probes monitored soil water content, while grapevine health status was assessed using eco-physiological measurements (LWP, chlorophyll content, PSII photosynthetic efficiency, LAI, and point-based field spectroscopy). These grapevine in-vivo measurements validated the spectral vegetation indexes (NDVI, RENDVI, CVI, and TVI) derived from the UAV multispectral imagery, which monitored the grapevine status in a distributed and non-invasive way. Grape yield, quality of berries, must and wine were measured to assess the effects of the training systems. The first experimental year results showed the variability of the vineyards and revealed relationships among soil parameters, crop characteristics, and vegetation indices of the SC and AL training systems. This multidisciplinary study could bring new insights into the vineyard training system’s effects on grape yield and wine quality.

Impact on leaf morphology of Vitis vinifera L. cvs Riesling and Cabernet Sauvignon under Free Air Carbon dioxide Enrichment (FACE)

Atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration has continuously increased since pre-industrial times from 280 ppm in 1750, and is predicted to exceed 700 ppm by the end of 21st century. For most of C3 plant species elevated CO2 (eCO2) improve photosynthetic apparatus results in an increased plant biomass production. To investigate the effects of eCO2 on morphological leaf characteristics the two Vitis vinifera L. cultivars, Riesling and Cabernet Sauvignon, grown in the Geisenheim VineyardFACE (Free Air Carbon dioxide Enrichment) system were used. The FACE site is located at Geisenheim University (49° 59′ N, 7° 57′ E, 94 m above sea level), Germany and was implemented in 2014 comparing future atmospheric CO2-concentrations (eCO2, predicted for the mid-21st century) with current ambient CO2-conditions (aCO2). Experiments were conducted under rain-fed conditions for two consecutive years (2015 and 2016). Six leaves per repetition of the CO2 treatment were sampled in the field and immediately fixed in a FAA solution (ethanol, H2O, formaldehyde and glacial acetic acid). After 24 h leaf samples were transferred and stored in an ethanol solution. Subsequently, leaf tissue was dehydrated using ethanol series and embedded in paraffin. By using a rotary microtomesections of 5 µm were prepared and fixed on microscopic slides. Subsequent the samples were stained using consecutive staining and washing solutions. Afterwards pictures of the leaf cross-sections were taken using a light microscope and consecutive measurements were conducted with an open source image software. Differences found in leaf cross-sections of the two CO2 treatments were detected for the palisade parenchyma. Leaf thickness, upper and lower epidermis and spongy parenchyma remained less affected under eCO2 conditions. The observed results within grapevine leaf tissues can provide first insights to seasonal adaptation strategies of grapevines under future elevated CO2 concentrations.

Protected Designation of Origin (D.P.O.) Valdepeñas: classification and map of soils

The objective of the work described here is the elaboration of a map of the different types of vineyard soils that to guide the famers in the choice of the most productive vine rootstocks and varieties. 90 vineyard soils profiles were analysed in the entire territory of the Origen Denominations of Valdepeñas. The sampling was carried out in 2018 (June to October) by making a sampling grid, followed by photointerpretation and control in the field. The studied soils can be grouped into 9 different soil types (according to FAO 2006 classification): Leptosols, Regosols, Fluvisols, Gleysols, Cambisols, Calcisols, Luvisols and Anthrosols. A map showing the soil distribution with different type of soils has been made with the ArcGIS program. Regarding to the choice of rootstock, Calcisoles are soils with a high active limestone content, so the rootstocks used in these soils must be resistant to this parameter; Luvisols are deep soils with high clay content, so they will support vigorous rootstocks. Because the cartographic units are composed of two or more subgroups, with are associated in variable proportions, 9 different soil associations have been established; Unit 1: Leptosols, Cambisols and Luvisols (80%, 15% and 5% respectively); Unit 2: Cambisols with Regosols and Luvisols (40%, 30% and 30% respectively); Unit 3: Cambisols and Gleysols with Regosols (40%, 40% and 20% respectively); Unit 4: Regosols with Cambisols, Leptosols and Calcisols (40%, 30%, 15% and 15% respectively); Unit 5: Cambisols, Leptosols, Calcisols and Regosols (25% each of them); Unit 6: Luvisols with Cambisol and Calcisols (80%, 10% and 10% respectively); Unit 7: Luvisols and Calcisols with Cambisols (40%, 40% and 20% respectively); Unit 8: Calcisols with, Cambisols and Luvisols (80%, 10% and 10% respectively); Unit 9: Anthrosols. These study allow to elaborate the first map of vineyard soils of this Protected Designation of Origin in Castilla-La Mancha.

Grapevine yield-gap: identification of environmental limitations by soil and climate zoning in Languedoc-Roussillon region (south of France)

Grapevine yield has been historically overlooked, assuming a strong trade-off between grape yield and wine quality. At present, menaced by climate change, many vineyards in Southern France are far from the quality label threshold, becoming grapevine yield-gaps a major subject of concern. Although yield-gaps are well studied in arable crops, we know very little about grapevine yield-gaps. In the present study, we analysed the environmental component of grapevine yield-gaps linked to climate and soil resources in the Languedoc Roussillon. We used SAFRAN data and IGP Pays d’Oc wine yields from 2010 to 2018. We selected climate and soil indicators proving to have a significant effect on average wine yield-gaps at the municipality scale. The most significant factors of grapevine yield were the Soil Available Water Capacity; followed by the Huglin Index and the Climatic Dryness Index. The Days of Frost; the Soil pH; and the Very Hot Days were also significant. Then, we clustered geographical zones presenting similar indicators, facilitating the identification of resources yield-gaps. We discussed the number of zones with the experts of IGP Pays d’Oc label, obtaining 7 zones with similar limitations for grapevine yield. Finally, we analysed the main resources causing yield-gaps and the grapevine varieties planted on each zone. Mapping grapevine resource yield-gaps are the first stage for understanding grapevine yield-gaps at the regional scale.

Ecophysiological performance of Vitis rootstocks under water stress

The use of rootstocks tolerant to soil water deficit is an interesting strategy to cope with limited water availability. Currently, several nurseries are breeding new genotypes, but the physiological basis of its responses under water stress are largely unknown. To this end, an ecophysiological assessment of the conventional 110-Richter (110R) and SO4, and the new M1 and M4 rootstocks was carried out in potted ungrafted plants. During one season, these Vitis genotypes were grown under greenhouse conditions and subjected to two water regimes, well-watered and water deficit. Water potentials of plants under water deficit down to < -1.4 MPa, and net photosynthesis (AN) <5 μmol m-2 s-1 did not cause leaf oxidative stress damage compared to well-watered conditions in any of the genotypes. The antioxidant capacity was sufficient to neutralize the mild oxidative stress suffered. Under both treatments, gravimetric differences in daily water use were observed among genotypes, leading to differences in the biomass of root, shoot and leaf. Under well-watered conditions, SO4 and 110R were the most vigorous and M1 and M4 the least. However, under water stress, SO4 exhibited the greatest reduction in biomass while M4 showed the lowest. Remarkably, under these conditions, SO4 reached the least negative stem water potential (Ψstem), while M1 reduced stomatal conductance (gs) and AN the most. In addition, SO4 and M1 genotypes also showed the highest and lowest hydraulic conductance values, respectively. Our results suggest that there are differences in water use regulation among genotypes, not only attributed to differences in stomatal regulation or intrinsic water use efficiency at the leaf level. Therefore, because no differences in canopy-to-root ratio were achieved, it is hypothesized that xylem vessel anatomical differences may be driving the reported differences among rootstocks performance. Results demonstrate that each Vitis rootstock differs in its ecophysiological responses under water stress.