Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Système de Classification Climatique Multicritères (CCM) Géoviticole

Système de Classification Climatique Multicritères (CCM) Géoviticole

Abstract

Le travail concerne en premier la méthodologie de caractérisation du climat des vignobles, à l’échelle du macroclimat des régions viticoles du monde (géoviticulture). Trois indices climatiques viticoles synthétiques et complémentaires (hydrique, héliothermique et nycthermique), validés comme descripteurs, sont utilisés :

1) Indice de Sécheresse – IS, qui correspond à l’indice de bilan hydrique potentiel de Riou, adapté ici dans des conditions précises de calcul, comme indicateur du niveau de présence-absence de sécheresse;

2) Indice Héliothermique – IH, qui correspond à l’Indice héliothermique de Huglin;

3) Indice de Fraîcheur des nuits – IF, indice développé comme indicateur des conditions nycthermiques de maturation.

Ces indices sont représentatifs de la variabilité du climat viticole mondial liée aux exigences des cépages, à la qualité de la vendange (sucre, couleur, arôme) et à la typicité des vins. Le Système de Classification Climatique Multicritères Géoviticole (Système CCM Géoviticole), pour les régions viticoles au plan mondial est formulé sur la base des classes pour chacun des 3 indices climatiques, avec les éléments d’interprétation des résultats. Trois concepts formulés sont à la base du système : climat viticole, groupe climatique et climat viticole à variabilité intra-annuelle (pour les régions à plus d’une récolte par année). L’application du Système CCM Géoviticole est présentée sur une centaine de régions viticoles dans 30 pays. Le système est un outil de recherche dans le domaine du zonage vitivinicole. Il permet également de travailler à différents niveaux d’échelle, soit à l’échelle mondiale, soit à l’échelle plus grande – grande région viticole, petite région viticole, comme le démontrent les études réalisées. Il permet de mettre en relation le climat viticole et les éléments de la qualité du raisin et de la typicité des vins en fonction de la zone climatique.

DOI:

Publication date: February 24, 2022

Issue: Terroir 2000

Type: Article

Authors

Jorge TONIETTO, Alain CARBONNEAU

Keywords

vigne, macroclimat, mésoclimat, indices climatiques, classification climatique, système CCM géoviticole, qualité, typicité, vin, A.O.C., zonage, terroir

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2000

Citation

Related articles…

Grape berry size is a key factor in determining New Zealand Pinot noir wine composition

Making high quality but affordable Pinot noir (PN) wine is challenging in most terroirs and New Zealand’s (NZ) situation is no exception. To increase the probability of making highly typical PN wines producers choose to grow grapes in cool climates on lower fertility soils while adopting labour intensive practices. Stringent yield targets and higher input costs necessarily mean that PN wine cost is high, and profitability lower, in line-priced varietal wine ranges. To understand the reasons why higher yielding vines are perceived to produce wines of lower quality we have undertaken an extensive study of PN in NZ. Since 2018, we established a network of twelve trial sites in three NZ regions to find individual vines that produced acceptable commercial yields (above 2.5kg per vine) and wines of composition comparable to “Icon” labels. Approximately 20% of 660 grape lots (N = 135) were selected from within a narrow juice Total Soluble Solids (TSS) range and made into single vine wines under controlled conditions. Principal Component Analysis of the vine, berry, juice and wine parameters from three vintages found grape berry mass to be most effective clustering variable. As berry mass category decreased there was a systematic increase in the probability of higher berry red colour and total phenolics with a parallel increase in wine phenolics, changed aroma fraction and decreased juice amino acids. The influence of berry size on wine composition would appear stronger than the individual effects of vintage, region, vineyard or vine yield. Our observations support the hypothesis that it is possible to produce PN wines that fall within an “Icon” benchmark composition range at yields above 2.5kg per vine provided that the Leaf Area:Fruit Weight ratio is above 12cm2 per g, mean berry mass is below 1.2g and juice TSS is above 22°Brix.

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.

Local adaptation tools to ensure the viticultural sustainability in a changing climate

[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"...

Different soil types and relief influence the quality of Merlot grapes in a relatively small area in the Vipava Valley (Slovenia) in relation to the vine water status

Besides location and microclimatic conditions, soil plays an important role in the quality of grapes and wine. Soil properties influence…

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.