Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Revisión de estudios sobre suelos vitícolas de las tierras del Jerez

Revisión de estudios sobre suelos vitícolas de las tierras del Jerez

Abstract

Dada la importancia de los suelos y de los substratos geológicos en la zonificación vitivinícola, los autores realizan una revisión de estudios sobre las formaciones más importantes en la D.O. Jerez-Xérès-Sherry y Manzanilla-Sanlúcar de Barrameda.
En el concepto de Pago vitícola (PEMARTÍN, 1965; Paneque et al., 1996 a, b, c; González GordOn, 1990; García de LujÁn, 1997) se destaca la singularidad del tipo o clase de suelo, subsuelo y substrato geológico que, conjuntamente con otras circunstancias ambientales, participan e intervienen en su delimitación (Suter y Palacios, 1857), caracterización y funcionamiento (Carbonel y BRAVO, 1820; EchegarAy, 1852; BARBADILLO, 1996).
El marco o región del Jerez y de la Manzanilla representa una de las regiones vitinícolas más antiguas de la Península Ibérica (Sáez fernández, 1995; Hidalgo, 1999). Los suelos citados por Columela como más importantes para el cultivo de la vid (cretosi, sabulosi y palustres) tienen distinta importancia en la calidad del viñedo y del vino, como se manifiesta por algunos autores citados, y especialmente por Boutelou (1807), Fernández Bobadilla (1949), García del Barrio (1972, 1979, 1988) y García de LujÁn (1997). Suelos calizos, silíceos y otros se citan en el Estudio Agrobiológico de la Provincia de Cádiz (CEBAC, 1963) y en el Mapa del INIA (1971), con la descripción morfológica de sus horizontes, la situación en el terreno y la caracterización analítica de los mismos, etc. Sin duda alguna, distintos Calcisols (CL), Cambisols (CB), Vertisols (VR), Leptosols (LP) y otros Grupos de suelos (ISRIC, ISSS, FAO, 1998); y lustrillos, polvillejos y barros rojos sobre albarizas (García del Barrio, 1979) y otros tipos de rocas (GAVALA laborde, 1959; IGME, 1977, 1988), muestran la diversidad de formaciones edafogeológicas en el viñedo del Jerez.

DOI:

Publication date: February 24, 2022

Issue: Terroir 2000

Type: Article

Authors

PANEQUE, G. (1), ROCA, M. (2), PANEQUE, P. (1), PARDO, C. (2), ALDECOA, J. (2)

(1) Departamento de Cristalografía, Mineralogía y Química Agrícola. Facultad de Química. Universidad de Sevilla
(2) Laboratorio de Edafología y Climatología. Escuela Universitaria de Ingeniería Técnica Agrícola. Cortijo de Cuarto. Diputación de Sevilla

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2000

Citation

Related articles…

Underpinning terroir with data: rethinking the zoning paradigm

Agriculture, natural resource management and the production and sale of products such as wine are increasingly data-driven activities. Thus, the use of remote and proximal crop and soil sensors to aid management decisions is becoming commonplace and ‘Agtech’ is proliferating commercially; mapping, underpinned by geographical information systems and complex methods of spatial analysis, is widely used. Likewise, the chemical and sensory analysis of wines draws on multivariate statistics; the efficient winery intake of grapes, subsequent production of wines and their delivery to markets relies on logistics; whilst the sales and marketing of wines is increasingly driven by artificial intelligence linked to the recorded purchasing behaviour of consumers. In brief, there is data everywhere!

Opinions will vary on whether these developments are a good thing. Those concerned with the ‘mystique’ of wine, or the historical aspects of terroir and its preservation, may find them confronting. In contrast, they offer an opportunity to those interested in the biophysical elements of terroir, and efforts aimed at better understanding how these impact on vineyard performance and the sensory attributes of resultant wines. At the previous Terroir Congress, we demonstrated the potential of analytical methods used at the within-vineyard scale in the development of Precision Viticulture, in contributing to a quantitative understanding of regional terroir. For this conference, we take this approach forward with examples from contrasting locations in both the northern and southern hemispheres. We show how, by focussing on the vineyards within winegrowing regions, as opposed to all of the land within those regions, we might move towards a more robust terroir zoning than one derived from a mixture of history, thematic mapping, heuristics and the whims of marketers. Aside from providing improved understanding by underpinning terroir with data, such methods should also promote improved management of the entire wine value chain.

Climate ethnography and wine environmental futures

Globalisation and climate change have radically transformed world wine production upsetting the established order of wine ecologies. Ecological risks and the future of traditional agricultural systems are widely debated in anthropology, but very little is understood of the particular challenges posed by climate change to viticulture which is seen by many as the canary in the coalmine of global agriculture. Moreover, wine as a globalised embedded commodity provides a particularly telling example for the study of climate change having already attracted early scientific attention. Studies of climate change in viticulture have focused primarily on the production of systematic models of adaptation and vulnerability, while the human and cultural factors, which are key to adaptation and sustainable futures, are largely missing. Climate experts have been unanimous in recognising the urgent need for a better understanding of the complex dynamics that shape how climate change is experienced and responded to by human systems. Yet this call has not yet been addressed. Climate ethnography, coined by the anthropologist Susan Crate (2011), aims to bridge this growing disjuncture between climate science and everyday life through the exploration of the social meaning of climate change. It seeks to investigate the confrontation of its social salience in different locations and under different environmental guises (Goodman 2018: 340). By understanding how wine producers make sense of the world (and the environment) and act in it, it proposes to focus on the co-production of interdisciplinary knowledge by identifying and foreshadowing problems (Goodman 2018: 342; Goodman & Marshall 2018). It seeks to offer an original, transformative and contrasted perspective to climate change scenarios by investigating human agency -individual or collective- in all its social, political and cultural diversity. An anthropological approach founded on detailed ethnographies of wine production is ideally placed to address economic, social and cultural disruptions caused by the emergence of these new environmental challenges. Indeed, the community of experts in environmental change have recently called for research that will encompass the human dimension and for more broad-based, integrated through interdisciplinarity, useful knowledge (Castree & al 2014). My paper seeks to engage with climate ethnography and discuss what it brings to the study of wine environmental futures while exploring the limitations of the anthropological environmental approach.

Effects of graft quality on growth and grapevine-water relations

Climate change is challenging viticulture worldwide compromising its sustainability due to warmer temperatures and the increased frequency of extreme events. Grafting Vitis vinifera L.

Effect of regulated deficit irrigation regime on amino acids content of Monastrell (Vitis vinifera L.) grapes

Irrigation is an important practice to influence vine quality, especially in Mediterranean regions, characterized by hot summers and severe droughts during the growing season. This study focused on deficit irrigation regime influence on amino acids composition of Monastrell grapevines under semiarid conditions (Albacete, Southeastern of Spain). In 2019, two treatments were applied: non-irrigation (NI) and regulated deficit irrigation (RDI), watered at 30% of the estimated crop evapotranspiration from fruit set to onset of veraison. Grape amino acids content was analyzed by HPLC. Berries from non-irrigated vines showed higher concentration of several amino acids, such as tryptophan (73%), arginine (70%), lysine (36%), isoleucine (27%), and leucine (21%), compared to RDI grapes. Arginine is, together with ammonium ion, the principal nitrogen source for yeasts during the alcoholic fermentation; while isoleucine, tryptophan, and leucine are precursors of fermentative volatile compounds, key compounds for wine quality. Moreover, NI treatment increased in a 14% the total amino acids content in grapes compared to RDI treatment. The reported effects might be because yield was 70% higher in RDI vines than in the NI ones and, therefore, the sink demand was increased in the irrigated vines. In addition, NI vines suffered more severe water stress and it is known that the amino acids synthesis and accumulation can be influenced by the plant response to stress. According to the results, the irrigation regime showed effect on amino acids concentration in Monastrell grapes under semiarid conditions. Grapes from non-irrigated vines showed a higher content of several amino acids relevant to the fermentative process and to the wine aroma compounds formation. It is demonstrated that the final content of nitrogen-related components in grapes is influenced by the irrigation regime. The convenience of the irrigation strategy to suggest will depend on the desired wine style and the target yield levels.

Teasing apart terroir: the influence of management style on native yeast communities within Oregon wineries and vineyards

Newer sequencing technologies have allowed for the addition of microbes to the story of terroir. The same environmental factors that influence the phenotypic expression of a crop also shape the composition of the microbial communities found on that crop. For fermented goods, such as wine, that microbial community ultimately influences the organoleptic properties of the final product that is delivered to customers. Recent studies have begun to study the biogeography of wine-associated microbes within different growing regions, finding that communities are distinct across landscapes. Despite this new knowledge, there are still many questions about what factors drive these differences. Our goal was to quantify differences in yeast communities due to management style between seven pairs of conventional and biodynamic vineyards (14 in total) throughout Oregon, USA. We wanted to answer the following questions: 1) are yeast communities distinct between biodynamic vineyards and conventional vineyards? 2) are these differences consistent across a large geographic region? 3) can differences in yeast communities be tied to differences in metabolite profiles of the bottled wine? To collect our data we took soil, bark, leaf, and grape samples from within each vineyard from five different vines of pinot noir. We also collected must and a 10º brix sample from each winery. Using these samples, we performed 18S amplicon sequencing to identify the yeast present. We then used metabolomics to characterize the organoleptic compounds present in the bottled wine from the blocks the year that we sampled. We are actively in the process of analysing our data from this study.