Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 The developement of vineyard zonation and demarcation in South Africa

The developement of vineyard zonation and demarcation in South Africa

Abstract

[English version below]

L’histoire de viticulture de l’Afrique du Sud embrasse 340 ans, et a commencé, à la province du Cap, où les colonisateurs hollandais ont planté les premières vignes. L’arrivée des Huguenots français en 1688 a avancé, le développement. Les vins de Constantia deviennent renommés, et ainsi ils sont les premiers “vins d’origine” de l’Afrique du Sud. Pendant l’occupation britannique de la province du Cap en 1806, la viticulture a développé, davantage, dû à l’inaccessibilité, de l’Europe et ses vins pendant cette période. On a plant, la plupart des vignobles à la région côtière du sud-ouest, aux environs de la province du Cap, et aux vallées limitrophes. Ces régions sont toujours productrices principales de vin. Vers 1850, les exportations de vin étaient très limitées, dû à la détérioration de la qualité de vin. Ce fait a résulté du manque de contrôle d’origine et de qualité. L’industrie a reconnu ce problème, ce qui mène à la fondation d’un système de contrôle de Vin d’Origine en 1973. Des experts techniques font la démarcation des secteurs de vin, en employant quatre catégories. Ces sont: (1) Régions, (2) Districts, (3) Circonscriptions (‘Wards’), et (4) Domaines. Faute d’assez de traditions, d’expérience et des données expérimentales (contrasté avec les pays européens de viticulture), la philosophie sud-africaine de démarcation embrasse l’identification des unités de terrain naturel, en employant des données techniques qui sont disponibles.

The 340 year old history of viticulture in South Africa started with the first planting of vines by the Commander of the first Dutch settlers at the Cape. Further expansion was encouraged by succeeding Governors and also stimulated by the arrival of the French Huguenots in 1688. Constantia wines became internationally famous and thus were the first ‘wines of origin’ from South Africa. After the British occupation of the Cape in 1806, viticulture was further stimulated due to the inaccessibility of Europe and its wines to Britain at that stage. Vineyards were mainly established in the south-western coastal zone around the Cape and in adjacent Inland River valleys were irrigation water was available. These areas, characterized by a Mediterranean climate, are still the main wine producing regions today. Towards 1850, wine exports reached an ail time low because of the deterioration in wine quality, mainly as result of the absence of control over origin and quality. This problem was realized by the industry and resulted in a Wine of Origin Control system since 1973. Demarcation of existing vineyards was, and still is, done by technical experts, using four categories, viz. (1) Regions, based on broad geographical features and administrative boundaries; (2) Districts, based on geographical and macro climatic features; (3) Wards, essentially based on uniform soil, climatic and ecological patterns; and (4) Estates, based on the concept of singular ownership of vineyards and wine being produced on the estate. To demarcate Wards, land type maps are used. Land types are a concept unique to South Africa and are defined as a class of land over which the macro climate, the terrain form and soil pattern each displays a marked uniformity. Land types differ from each other in terms of macro climate, terrain form or soil pattern, or combinations of these natural factors. Lacking sufficient tradition, experience and experimental information, compared to the old word wine countries, the philosophy behind demarcation in South Africa is to identify natural terrain units, using available technical information, and then allowing such units to develop and demonstrate particular wine styles and character, rather than demanding proof of uniqueness before demarcation is done.

DOI:

Publication date: March 2, 2022

Issue: Terroir 1998

Type: Article

Authors

D. SAAYMAN

Dept. Of Soil Science, University of Stellenbosch, P/Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, RSA

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 1998

Citation

Related articles…

A predictive model of spatial Eca variability in the vineyard to support the monitoring of plant status

[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"...

Estimating bulk stomatal conductance of grapevine canopies

In response to changes in their environment, grapevines regulate transpiration using various physiological mechanisms that alter conductance of water through the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum. Expressed as bulk stomatal conductance at the canopy scale, it varies diurnally in response to changes in vapor pressure deficit and net radiation, and over the season to changes in soil water deficits and hydraulic conductivity of both soil and plant. It is necessary to characterize the response of conductance to these variables to better model how vine transpiration also responds to these variables. Furthermore, to be relevant for vineyard-scale modeling, conductance is best characterized using data collected in a vineyard setting. Applying a crop canopy energy flux model developed by Shuttleworth and Wallace, bulk stomatal conductance was estimated using measurements of individual vine sap flow, temperature and humidity within the vine canopy, and estimates of net radiation absorbed by the vine canopy. These measurements were taken on several vines in a non-irrigated vineyard in Bordeaux France, using equipment that did not interfere with ongoing vineyard operations. An inverted Penman-Monteith equation was then used to calculate bulk stomatal conductance on 15-minute intervals from July to mid-September 2020. Time-series plots show significant diurnal variation and seasonal decreases in conductance, with overall values similar to those in the literature. Global sensitivity analysis using non-parametric regression found transpiration flux and vapor pressure deficit to be the most important input variables to the calculation of bulk stomatal conductance, with absorbed net radiation and bulk boundary layer conductance being much less important. Conversely, bulk stomatal conductance was one of the most important inputs when calculating vine transpiration, further emphasizing the need for characterizing its response to environmental changes for use in vineyard water use modeling.

Variety and climatic effects on quality scores in the Western US winegrowing regions

Wine quality is strongly linked to climate. Quality scores are often driven by climate variation across different winegrowing regions and years, but also influenced by other aspects of terroir, including variety. While recent work has looked at the relationship between quality scores and climate across many European regions, less work has examined New World winegrowing regions. Here we used scores from three major rating systems (Wine Advocate, Wine Enthusiast and Wine Spectator) combined with daily climate and phenology data to understand what drives variation across wine quality scores in major regions of the Western US, including regions in California, Oregon and Washington. We examined effects of variety, region, and in what phenological period climate was most predictive of quality. As in other studies, we found climate, based mainly on growing degree day (GDD) models, was generally associated with quality—with higher GDD associated with higher scores—but variety and region also had strong effects. Effects of region were generally stronger than variety. Certain varieties received the highest scores in only some areas, while other varieties (e.g., Merlot) generally scored lower across regions. Across phenological stages, GDD during budbreak was often most strongly associated with quality. Our results support other studies that warmer periods generally drive high quality wines, but highlight how much region and variety drive variation in scores outside of climate.

Making sense of available information for climate change adaptation and building resilience into wine production systems across the world

Effects of climate change on viticulture systems and winemaking processes are being felt across the world. The IPCC 6thAssessment Report concluded widespread and rapid changes have occurred, the scale of recent changes being unprecedented over many centuries to many thousands of years. These changes will continue under all emission scenarios considered, including increases in frequency and intensity of hot extremes, heatwaves, heavy precipitation and droughts. Wine companies need tools and models allowing to peer into the future and identify the moment for intervention and measures for mitigation and/or avoidance. Previously, we presented conceptual guidelines for a 5-stage framework for defining adaptation strategies for wine businesses. That framework allows for direct comparison of different solutions to mitigate perceived climate change risks. Recent global climatic evolution and multiple reports of severe events since then (smoke taint, heatwave and droughts, frost, hail and floods, rising sea levels) imply urgency in providing effective tools to tackle the multiple perceived risks. A coordinated drive towards a higher level of resilience is therefore required. Recent publications such as the Australian Wine Future Climate Atlas and results from projects such as H2020 MED-GOLD inform on expected climate change impacts to the wine sector, foreseeing the climate to expect at regional and vineyard scale in coming decades. We present examples of practical application of the Climate Change Adaptation Framework (CCAF) to impacts affecting wine production in two wine regions: Barossa (Australia) and Douro (Portugal). We demonstrate feasibility of the framework for climate adaptation from available data and tools to estimate historical climate-induced profitability loss, to project it in the future and to identify critical moments when disruptions may occur if timely measures are not implemented. Finally, we discuss adaptation measures and respective timeframes for successful mitigation of disruptive risk while enhancing resilience of wine systems.

An analytical framework to site-specifically study climate influence on grapevine involving the functional and Bayesian exploration of farm data time series synchronized using an eGDD thermal index

Climate influence on grapevine physiology is prevalent and this influence is only expected to increase with climate change. Although governed by a general determinism, climate influence on grapevine physiology may present variations according to the terroir. In addition, these site-specific differences are likely to be enhanced when climate influence is studied using farm data. Indeed, farm data integrate additional sources of variation such as a varying representativity of the conditions actually experienced in the field. Nevertheless, there is a real challenge in valuing farm data to enable grape growers to understand their own terroir and consequently adapt their practices to the local conditions. In such a context, this article proposes a framework to site-specifically study climate influence on grapevine physiology using farm data. It focuses on improving the analysis of time series of weather data. The analytical framework includes the synchronization of time series using site-specific thermal indices computed with an original method called Extended Growing Degree Days (eGDD). Synchronized time series are then analyzed using a Bayesian functional Linear regression with Sparse Steps functions (BLiSS) in order to detect site-specific periods of strong climate influence on yield development. The article focuses on temperature and rain influence on grape yield development as a case study. It uses data from three commercial vineyards respectively situated in the Bordeaux region (France), California (USA) and Israel. For all vineyards, common periods of climate influence on yield development were found. They corresponded to already known periods, for example around veraison of the year before harvest. However, the periods differed in their precise timing (e.g. before, around or after veraison), duration and correlation direction with yield. Other periods were found for only one or two vineyards and/or were not referred to in literature, for example during the winter before harvest.