Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Caractéristiques physiques et agronomiques des principaux terroirs viticoles de l’Anjou (France). Conséquences pour la viticulture

Caractéristiques physiques et agronomiques des principaux terroirs viticoles de l’Anjou (France). Conséquences pour la viticulture

Abstract

Une étude conduite dans le cœur du vignoble A.O.C. angevin, sur une surface d’environ 30.000 ha, a permis de caractériser et cartographier finement (levé au 1/12.500), sur le plan des facteurs naturels, les différentes unités de terroir présentes. Pour cela, on a mis en œuvre une méthode basée sur le concept d’Unité Terroir de Base (U.T.B.). Elle utilise, à une même échelle cartographique, une clef géologique (stratigraphie et lithologie) et une clef agro-pédologique (modèle de terrain : roche, altération, altérite) pour identifier et zoner l’U.T.B. Une caractérisation agronomique de chaque U.T.B. a été faite sur le plan physique et chimique en mettant en œuvre les outils et mesures de la science du sol et de l’agronomie. Au plan viticole, une caractérisation de l’U.T.B. a également été conduite, grâce à l’utilisation d’algorithmes experts élaborés spécialement pour avoir une estimation chiffrée des principales variables de fonctionnement du système terroir / vigne : réservoir utilisable en eau pour la vigne, potentiel de précocité du terroir, potentiel de vigueur et rendement. L’effet terroir sur la vigne et le vin a été abordé par l’intermédiaire d’une enquête menée, au niveau de la parcelle, auprès de chaque vigneron de la zone étudiée.
Les résultats concernant les plus importantes Unités Terroir de Base de l’Anjou sont présentés. Ils montrent des différences souvent considérables entre U.T.B., en ce qui concerne les propriétés agro-viticoles. En conséquence, l’adaptation des porte-greffes, des pratiques agro-viticoles, de même que l’aptitude de l’U.T.B. à produire divers types de vins et le choix des cépages qui en résulte, sont discutés.

A study realized in the vineyard of Anjou, allowed to characterize and to map the different viticultural “terroirs”. A method based on the concept of the “Base Terroir Unit” (B.T.U) was utilized. It uses a geologic key (stratigraphical and lithological components) and a ground model known as: Roche, Altération, Altérite, to identify and to cartography the B.T.U. B.T.U. corresponds to an entity (a territory) that is sufficiently homogeneous with respect to functioning of the “terroir” / vine / wine system and that has a surface area sufficient for enhanced value through viticulture. An agronomic study was made for every T.B.U. from the point of view of physical and chemical factors. Viticultural potentialities were studied by using algorithms experts which allowed to estimate : soil water capacity, potential for early growth and potential of vigour, for each B.T.U. The results obtained were confirmed by means of the viticultural survey, amongst the wine growers.
Results show important differences between Base “Terroir” Units. As a consequence, the adaptation of the vineyard and the viticultural practices are discussed

DOI:

Publication date: February 24, 2022

Issue: Terroir 2000

Type: Article

Authors

R. Morlat*, P. Guilbault**, D. Rioux**, S. Cesbron**

*U.R.V.V. INRA. 42, rue Georges Morel. 49071 Angers. France
**Equipe Terroirs d’Anjou. Angers

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2000

Citation

Related articles…

Mapping and tracking canopy size with VitiCanopy

Understanding vineyard variability to target management strategies, apply inputs efficiently and deliver consistent grape quality to the winery is essential. However, despite inherent vineyard variability, the majority are managed as if they are uniform. VitiCanopy is a simple, grower-friendly tool for precision/digital viticulture that allows users to collect and interpret objective spatial information about vineyard performance. After four years of field and market research, an upgraded VitiCanopy has been created to achieve a more streamlined, technology-assisted vine monitoring tool that provides users with a set of superior new features, which could significantly improve the way users monitor their grapevines. These new features include:
• New user interface
• User authentication
• Batch analysis of multiple images
• Ease the learning curve through enhanced help features
• Reporting via the creation of colour maps that will allow users to assess the spatial differences in canopies within a vineyard.
Use-case examples are presented to demonstrate the quantification and mapping of vineyard variability through objective canopy measurements, ground-truthing of remotely sensed measurements, monitoring of crop conditions, implementation of disease and water management decisions as well as creating a history of each site to forecast quality. This intelligent tool allows users to manage grapevines and make informed management choices to achieve the desired production targets and remain profitable.

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.

Adapting the vineyard to climate change in warm climate regions with cultural practices

Since the 1980s global regime shift, grape growers have been steadily adapting to a changing climate. These adaptations have preserved the region-climate-cultivar rapports that have established the global trade of wine with lucrative economic benefits since the middle of 17th century. The advent of using fractions of crop and actual evapotranspiration replacement in vineyards with the use of supplemental irrigation has furthered the adaptation of wine grape cultivation. The shift in trellis systems, as well as pruning methods from positioned shoot systems to sprawling canopies, as well as adapting the bearing surface from head-trained, cane-pruned to cordon-trained, spur-pruned systems have also aided in the adaptation of grapevine to warmer temperatures. In warm climates, the use of shade cloth or over-head shade films not only have aided in arresting the damage of heat waves, but also identified opportunities to reduce the evapotranspiration from vineyards, reducing environmental footprint of vineyard. Our increase in knowledge on how best to understand the response of grapevine to climate change was aided with the identification of solar radiation exposure biomarker that is now used for phenotyping cultivars in their adaptability to harsh environments. Using fruit-based metrics such as sugar-flavonoid relationships were shown to be better indicators of losses in berry integrity associated with a warming climate, rather than solely focusing on region-climate-cultivar rapports. The resilience of wine grape was further enhanced by exploitation of rootstock × scion combinations that can resist untoward droughts and warm temperatures by making more resilient grapevine combinations. Our understanding of soil-plant-atmosphere continuum in the vineyard has increased within the last 50 years in such a manner that growers are able to use no-till systems with the aid of arbuscular mycorrhiza fungi inoculation with permanent cover cropping making the vineyard more resilient to droughts and heat waves. In premium wine grape regions viticulture has successfully adapted to a rapidly changing climate thus far, but berry based metrics are raising a concern that we may be approaching a tipping point.

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.

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.