Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Terroir e DOC: riflessi produttivi e commercial

Terroir e DOC: riflessi produttivi e commercial

Abstract

Da dove scaturisce tutto l’interesse attuale per il terroir? Si provi, per dare risposta a questo quesito, ad immaginare il vino avulso dalla sua dimensione territoriale. Cosa si otterrebbe? Un vino bianco, un vino rosso o quant’altro, ma comunque un prodotto privo di conno­tazione geografica, di premesse storiche, di radici tradizionali, di potere evocativo, di iden­tità e di personalità.
La viticoltura, a differenza di altre produzioni agroalimetari, ha da sempre “denominato” i propri prodotti con il nome della zona d’origine ed oggi, nell’epoca in cui spesso la qualità e il valore degli alimenti vengono riconosciuti solo in riferimento all’area di produzione, il vino continua a godere di questo innegabile vantaggio strategico.
Inoltre il binomio vino-territorio assume rinnovato interesse ai giomi nostri, dove sotto la spinta dell’enoturismo, il territorio ha assunto accanto alla funzione storica di “fattore di pro­duzione”, anche quella moderna di “prodotto” (De Ros & Falcetti, 1996). Il vino, cioè, si vende sia in virtù della qualità intrinseca (che potremo definire tecnica ed organolettica), sia grazie al suo “intorno” rappresentato dalla cantina, dalla zona di produzione, dalle manifes­tazioni legaate ad esso, etc.
Il presente contributo è volto a chiarire la relazione tra terroir e DOC, sia per quanto riguar­da gli aspetti produttivi che la sua componente extraproduttiva (marketing, comunicazione, commerciale, etc.).

DOI:

Publication date: March 2, 2022

Issue: Terroir 1998

Type: Article

Authors

MARIO FALCETTI

Segretario G.E. “Zonage Vitivinicole” 0.I.V. – Paris
Direttore Contadi Gastaldi, Franciacorta – Adro (Brescia)

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 1998

Citation

Related articles…

Late frost protection in Champagne

Probably one of the most counterintuitive impacts of climate change on vine is the increased frequency of late frost. Champagne, due to its septentrional position is historically and regularly affected by this meteorological hazard. Champagne has therefore developed a strong experience in frost protection with first experiments dating from the end of 19th century. Frost protection can be divided in two parts: passive and active. Passive protection includes all the methods that do not seek to modify the vine’s environment or resistance at the time of frost. The most iconic passive protection in Champagne is the establishment of the individual reserve. This reserve allows to stock a certain quantity of clear wine during a surplus year to compensate a meteorological hazard like frost during the following years. Other common passive methods are the control of planting area (walls, bushes, topography), the choice of grape variety, late pruning, or the impact of grass cover and tillage. Active frost protection is also divided in two parts. Most of the existing techniques tend to modify vine’s environment. Most of the time they provide warmth (candles, heaters, windmills, heating cables…), or stabilise bud’s temperature above a lethal threshold (water sprinkling). The other way to actively fight is to enhance the resistance of buds to frost (elicitors). The Comité Champagne evaluates frost protection methods following three main axes: the efficiency, the profitability, and the environmental impact through a lifecycle assessment. This study will present the results on both passive and active protection following these three axes.

Sustainable fertilisation of the vineyard in Galicia (Spain)

Excessive fertilization of the vineyard leads to low quality grapes, increased costs and a negative impact on the environment. In order to establish an integrated management system aimed at a sustainable fertilization of the vineyards, nutritional reference levels were established. For this purpose, 30 representative vineyards of the Albariño variety were studied, in which soil and petiole analyses were carried out for two years and grape yield and quality at harvest were measured. In both years of study, soil pH, calcium, sodium and cation exchange capacity were positively correlated with calcium content and negatively correlated with manganese in grapes. Irrigated vineyards had higher levels of aluminium in soil and lower levels of calcium in petiole. Climatic conditions were very different in the years of the study. The year 2019 was colder than usual, in 2020 there was a marked water stress with high summer temperatures. This resulted in medium-high acidity in grapes in 2019 and low acidity in 2020, with sugar levels being similar both years. A very marked decrease in must amino nitrogen was observed in 2020, with ammonia nitrogen remaining stable. The correlation of acidity and sugar values in grapes with soil and petiole analysis data made it possible to establish reference levels for the nutritional diagnosis of the Albariño variety in this region. Based on these results, an easy-to-use TIC application is currently being created for grapegrowers, aimed at improving the sustainability of the vineyard through reasoned fertilization. This study has now been extended to other Galician vine varieties.

Deconstructing the soil component of terroir: from controversy to consensus

Wine terroir describes the collectively recognized relation between a geographical area and the distinctive organoleptic characteristics of the wines produced in it. The overriding objective in terroir studies is therefore to provide scientific proof relating the properties of terroir components to wine quality and typicity. In scientific circles, the role of climate (macro-, meso- and micro-) on grape and wine characteristics is well documented and accepted as the most critical. Moreover, there has been increasing interest in recent years about new elements with possible importance in shaping wine terroir like berry/leaf/soil microbiology or even aromatic plants in proximity to the vineyard conferring flavors to the grapes. However, the actual effect of these factors is also dependent on complex interactions with plant material (variety/clone, rootstock, vine age) and with human factors.
The contribution of soil, although a fundamental component of terroir and extremely popular among wine enthusiasts, remains a much-debated issue among researchers. The role of geology is probably the one mostly associated by consumers with the notion of terroir with different parent rocks considered to give birth to different wine styles. However, the relationship between wine properties and the underlying parent material raises a lot of controversy especially regarding the actual existence of rock-derived flavors in the wine (e.g. minerality). As far as the actual soil properties are concerned, the effect of soil physical properties is generally regarded as the most significant (e.g sandy soils being associated with lighter wines while those on clay with colored and tannic ones) mostly through control of water availability which ultimately modifies berry ripening conditions either directly by triggering biosynthetic pathways, or indirectly by altering vigor and yield components. The role of soil chemistry seems to be weakly associated to wine sensory characteristic, although N, K, S and Ca, but also soil pH, are often considered important in the overall soil effect.
Recently, in the light of evidence provided by precision agriculture studies reporting a high variability of vineyard soils, the spatial scale should also be taken into consideration in the evaluation of the soil effects on wines. While it is accepted that soil effects become more significant than climate on a local level, it is not clear whether these micro-variations of vineyard soils are determining in the terroir effect. Moreover, as terroir is not a set of only natural factors, the magnitude of the contribution of human-related factors (irrigation, fertilization, soil management) to the soil effect still remains ambiguous. Lastly, a major shortcoming of the majority of works about soil effects on wine characteristics is the absence of connection with actual vine physiological processes since all soil effects on grape and wine chemistry and sensorial properties are ultimately mediated through vine responses.
This article attempts to breakdown the main soil attributes involved in the terroir effect to suggest an improved understanding about soil’s true contribution to wine sensory characteristics. It is proposed that soil parameters per se are not as significant determining factors in the terroir effect but rather their mutual interactions as well as with other natural and human factors included in the terroir concept. Consequently, similarly to bioclimatic indices, composite soil indices (i.e. soil depth, water holding capacity, fertility, temperature etc), incorporating multiple soil parameters, might provide a more accurate and quantifiable means to assess the relative weight of the soil component in the terroir effect.

The plantation frame as a measure of adaptation to climate change

The mechanization of vineyard work originally led to a reduction in planting densities due to the lack of machinery adapted to the vineyard. The current availability of specific machinery makes it possible to establish higher planting densities. In this work, three planting densities (1.40×0.80 m, 1.80×1 m and 2.20×1.20 m, corresponding to 8928, 5555 and 3787 plants/ha respectively) were studied with four varieties autochthonous of Galicia (northwestern Spain): Albariño and Treixadura (white), Sousón and Mencía (red). The vines were trained in a vertical shoot positioning system using a single Royat cordon, and pruned to spurs with two buds each. Agronomic data (yield, pruning wood weight, Ravaz index) and oenological data in must were collected. The higher planting density (1.40×0.80 m) had no significant effect on grape yield per vine in white varieties, although production per hectare was much higher due to the greater number of plants. In red varieties, this planting density resulted in a significantly lower production per vine, compensated by the greater number of plants. In addition, it significantly reduced the Brix degree in the must of the Albariño, Treixadura and Sousón varieties, and increased the total acidity in the latter two and Mencía. It also caused an increase in extractable and total anthocyanins and IPT in red grapes. The effects of high planting density on grapes are of great interest for the adaptation of varieties in the context of climate change. In the future, it could be advisable to modify the limits imposed by the appellations of origin on the planting density of these varieties in order to obtain more balanced wines.

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.