Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 El viñedo en Lanzarote y el Archipiélago Canario

El viñedo en Lanzarote y el Archipiélago Canario

Abstract

La isla de Lanzarote, primera en ser ocupada en los albores del siglo XV, es la única del archipiélago, junto con Fuerteventura, que no produjo vino. Ocasionalmente hubo algún parral para el consumo de su uva, pero no fue hasta la erupción volcánica de 1730-1736 en que se posibilitó su cultivo.
La dieta mediterránea (pan, aceite, vino, frutas) fue impuesta desde un principio por los ocupantes europeos. Lanzarote producía y exportaba cereales, carne y queso de cabra, mientras que adquiría fuera los vinos, bien andaluces, canarios o madeirenses.
Así siguieron las cosas hasta la erupción volcánica de 1730. Durante casi siete años, la lava y las arenas volcánicas arruinaron las mejores zonas agrícolas de la isla, impidiendo el cultivo de los cereales tradicionales. Ante tanta desgracia se comenzó a observar que ahoyando la tierra, es decir, apartando las arenas volcánicas hasta llegar a la tierra cultivable, podían plantarse árboles frutales, incluso viñas.
En los cuarenta del siglo XVIII se va acelerando el proceso de plantación por los obstáculos legales que se impuso a los aguardientes foráneos, señaladamente catalanes y mallorquines. Ello hizo que los comerciantes tinerfeños a​quella isla dominaba el mercado del vino del archipiélago, además de ser la mayor productora- se interesaran por los incipientes caldos conejeros con la finalidad de convertirlos en aguardiente. A tal fin, instalaron en Arrecife sus destilerías llegando a traer el combustible desde Tenerife, pues esta nueva actividad dejó a los lanzaroteños sin leña para cocinar.
El impulso del viñedo, merced a la demanda tinerfeña aceleró su plantación, que resultaba muy fatigosa pues obligaba a ahoyar las arenas (lo que solucionaba en parte la escasez de agua) y a proteger la planta de los vientos, bien con el hoyo de arena si resultaba lo suficiente profundo, bien mediante la construcción de unas pequeñas paredes de piedra seca, obtenidas picando las rocas volcánicas.
George Glas, comerciante británico, profundo conocedor de la sociedad canaria del segundo tercio del siglo XVIII, ilustrado y llevado a prisión por la Inquisición, mercader de vinos, viajero incansable y que visitó varias veces Lanzarote, nos da cuenta del incipiente comienzo de la viña en nuestra isla. Según él, en la década de 1750 o inicios de 1760 se producía cierta cantidad de vino que casi en su totalidad se exportaba a Tenerife, una vez destilado.
En 1749, el Cabildo lanzaroteño ya adopta un acuerdo “sobre la preferencia de los vinos de esta isla y compra de pipas de las que vienen de fuera”.
En 1776, aparece una obra de autor desconocido, titulada “El Compendio”, que nos da una idea pormenorizada del estado de la agricultura en la isla, cuarenta años después de la erupción del Timanfaya. Destaca que el viñedo se multiplica y que el vino se destinaba en su mayor parte para la elaboración de aguardientes que los tinerfeños realizaban en Arrecife, impulsando su desarrollo en detrimento de la Villa de Teguise, a la que acabó por arrebatar la capitalidad de la isla.
A mediados del XVIII, los malvasías canarios estaban casi desaparecidos, porque se elaboraban nuevos vinos tipo madeira (y que pasaban por tales en el mercado internacional), muy alcohólicos y con bastante color, que se obtenía utilizando parte de uva negra. En Lanzarote primaban las listanes blancas, como en el resto del archipiélago.
En el comienzo del siglo XIX, el vino lanzaroteño se consume cada vez más como vino, disminuyendo por tanto la importancia de los destilados. Este proceso se ve acelerado por la decadencia de los vinos canarios a partir de 1818, que llevó en 1853 a su casi exterminio, merced a unos ataques de oidio mal combatidos. La importancia de la vinificación en Lanzarote desde los comienzos del XIX, hizo que se sustituyeran buena parte de los Listanes por cepas de Malvasía, algo menos productiva pero de mayor calidad. En esta época la crisis afectó a los vinos comunes, con lo cual hasta finales del XIX, consecuencia de la filoxera en Francia, no se produce una recuperación de los vinos canarios.
En la exposición vitícola nacional de 1877, celebrada en Madrid como consecuencia del boom vitivinícola que se produjo como consecuencia del ataque de filoxera en Francia, se elaboró un informe sobre plantaciones, varietales, tipos de vino, etc.
De Lanzarote destaca como variedad la Malvasía, plantada en la isla a lo largo del XIX, probablemente de Sitges, varietal y vino fuertemente cotizados en la península desde comienzos de dicho siglo. En los comienzos de la viña lanzaroteña se plantaron los listanes, más productivos, ya que se trataba de elaborar aguardientes, aunque posteriormente fue la Malvasía la que se plantó de modo mayoritario cuando se trataba de exportar vinos a las islas mayores.
El siglo XX puede resumirse en lo ocurrido en los últimos años. En los años 60-70 se produce un abandono de gran parte del viñedo, principalmente de grandes propietarios debido al inicio del ciclo turístico. Esto supone también el cierre de muchas bodegas.
En la década de los 80, se inicia el cambio de los métodos de vinificación, introduciendo nuevas tecnologías que acercan la producción a los gustos del consumidor.

DOI:

Publication date: February 24, 2022

Issue: Terroir 2000 

Type: Article

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2000

Citation

Related articles…

Comparison of imputation methods in long and varied phenological series. Application to the Conegliano dataset, including observations from 1964 over 400 grape varieties

A large varietal collection including over 1700 varieties was maintained in Conegliano, ITA, since the 1950s. Phenological data on a subset of 400 grape varieties including wine grapes, table grapes, and raisins were acquired at bud break, flowering, veraison, and ripening since 1964. Despite the efforts in maintaining and acquiring data over such an extensive collection, the data set has varying degrees of missing cases depending on the variety and the year. This is ubiquitous in phenology datasets with significant size and length. In this work, we evaluated four state-of-the-art methods to estimate missing values in this phenological series: k-Nearest Neighbour (kNN), Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations (mice), MissForest, and Bidirectional Recurrent Imputation for Time Series (BRITS). For each phenological stage, we evaluated the performance of the methods in two ways. 1) On the full dataset, we randomly hold-out 10% of the true values for use as a test set and repeated the process 1000 times (Monte Carlo cross-validation). 2) On a reduced and almost complete subset of varieties, we varied the percentage of missing values from 10% to 70% by random deletion. In all cases, we evaluated the performance on the original values using normalized root mean squared error. For the full dataset we also obtained performance statistics by variety and by year. MissForest provided average errors of 17% (3 days) at budbreak, 14% (4 days) at flowering, 14.5% (7 days) at veraison, and 17% (3 days) at maturity. We completed the imputations of the Conegliano dataset, one of the world’s most extensive and varied phenological time series and a steppingstone for future climate change studies in grapes. The dataset is now ready for further analysis, and a rigorous evaluation of imputation errors is included.

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"...

The use of rootstock as a lever in the face of climate change and dieback of vineyard

As viticulture faces challenges such as climate change or vineyard dieback, the choice of the variety and rootstock becomes more and more crucial. To study rootstock levers in the Bordeaux region, a parcel of Cabernet Sauvignon (CS) was planted with four rootstocks in 2014. Twenty repetitions of each of the following four rootstocks were set up: 101-14 MGt, Nemadex AB, 420A MGt and Gravesac. The number of bunches, yields and pruning weights of the vine shoots were measured individually on 240 vines from 2017 to 2021. Since 2020, nitrogen status assessed by assimilable nitrogen level, hydric status assessed by δ13C and berry maturity were measured on 80 samples taken from 20 repetitions of the four rootstocks. A lower yield was measured for CS grafted onto Nemadex AB due to the lower number of bunches and the lower weight of berries. The differences between the other three rootstocks are small, but CS grafted onto 420A MGt was the most productive. The CS grafted onto Nemadex AB had the lowest pruning weight while 101-14 MGt had the highest. In 2020, δ13C showed a more moderate water stress with 101-14 MGt and 420A MGt than with Nemadex AB. Surprisingly, the Gravesac was under more stress than the 101-14 MGt. The nitrogen status in the berries was better for Nemadex AB but this was perhaps due to the significantly lower weight of the berries.Rootstock 101-14 MGt attained the highest accumulation of sugars in the berries while 420A MGt allows to preserve higher acidity. The parcel is still young which may explain some of the results. These measures must therefore be continued over the next several years to fully assess the effects of these rootstocks on the development of the vines and the quality of the production under new climatic conditions.

Use of a new, miniaturized, low-cost spectral sensor to estimate and map the vineyard water status from a mobile 

Optimizing the use of water and improving irrigation strategies has become increasingly important in most winegrowing countries due to the consequences of climate change, which are leading to more frequent droughts, heat waves, or alteration of precipitation patterns. Optimized irrigation scheduling can only be based on a reliable knowledge of the vineyard water status.

In this context, this work aims at the development of a novel methodology, using a contactless, miniaturized, low-cost NIR spectral tool to monitor (on-the-go) the vineyard water status variability. On-the-go spectral measurements were acquired in the vineyard using a NIR micro spectrometer, operating in the 900–1900 nm spectral range, from a ground vehicle moving at 3 km/h. Spectral measurements were collected on the northeast side of the canopy across four different dates (July 8th, 14th, 21st and August 12th) during 2021 season in a commercial vineyard (3 ha). Grapevines of Vitis vinifera L. Graciano planted on a VSP trellis were monitored at solar noon using stem water potential (Ψs) as reference indicators of plant water status. In total, 108 measurements of Ψs were taken (27 vines per date).

Calibration and prediction models were performed using Partial Least Squares (PLS) regression. The best prediction models for grapevine water status yielded a determination coefficient of cross-validation (r2cv) of 0.67 and a root mean square error of cross-validation (RMSEcv) of 0.131 MPa. This predictive model was employed to map the spatial variability of the vineyard water status and provided useful, practical information towards the implementation of appropriate irrigation strategies. The outcomes presented in this work show the great potential of this low-cost methodology to assess the vineyard stem water potential and its spatial variability in a commercial vineyard.

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.