Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Différenciation mésoclimatique des terroirs alsaciens et relation avec les paramètres du milieu naturel

Différenciation mésoclimatique des terroirs alsaciens et relation avec les paramètres du milieu naturel

Abstract

The influence of climatic conditions on the development of the vine and on the quality of the wines no longer needs to be demonstrated: at the scale of the vineyard, by the regional climatic characteristics, determining on this scale the viticultural potentialities (Huglin, 1978; Branas, 1946; Riou et al ., 1994); but also on a local scale, at the level of the basic terroir unit (Morlat, 1989), by the landscape differentiation of the natural environment inducing climatic variability within the same vineyard, and partly explaining differences in functioning of the vine, in connection with the processes of maturation and the quality of the wine (Becker, 1977 and 1984; Morlat, 1989 and Lebon, 1993a). According to these authors, the climatic diversity in a wine region constitutes in addition to the edaphic component, an important component of characterization of the Basic Terroir Units (UTB).

Several authors have described spatial climatic variability (Choisnel, 1987; Godart, 1949). Depending on the scale of investigation, they distinguish the macroclimate or regional climate, then the topoclimate resulting from topographic variability and finally the microclimate corresponding to the climate of the plant on the scale of the plot. The concept of mesoclimate, or local climate, is very close to topoclimate. It designates the climate resulting from the spatial differentiation of the regional climate, induced by the variability of the natural environment defining the landscape (Scaeta, 1935 and Godart, 1949).

The influence of topographic parameters; more specifically the declivity and orientation of the slope on solar radiation and on the distribution of air temperatures, have been the subject of numerous studies (Seltzer, 1935; Godart, 1949; Nigond, 1968). More recently, taking into account the type of weather (radiative or overcast) has proven to be important to better analyze and understand the processes of nocturnal thermal differentiation at the mesoclimatic scale (Geiger, 1980; Endlicher, 1980; Paul, 1980). . Erpicum in 1980, thus leads to a descriptive schematization of nocturnal thermal variability in two distinct environments of valley and plateau in Upper Belgium, according to the main types of regional weather.

At this scale of investigation, the advective term is an important parameter to take into account. Ventilation is highly dependent on the quantity and height of the surrounding masks. These can be topographic, vegetal or anthropic (Guyot, 1963). Thus, the analysis of the landscape is necessary during the integrated characterization of the terroirs (Morlat, 1989 and Jacquet et al ., 1995). This work defines simple landscape descriptors such as for example the Landscape Openness Index (LO.P.), making it possible to characterize mesoclimatic differences and lead to a cartographic representation of the landscape (Lebon, 1993b). Based on the spatial variability of global radiation, wind speed and air temperature recorded at the UTB scale of the Alsatian vineyard, the communication proposes a hierarchy of the parameters of the landscape environment generating such differences. climatic.

DOI:

Publication date: March 25, 2022

Type: Poster

Issue: Terroir 1996

Authors

V. Dumas (1), E. Lebon (2), R. Morlat (3)

(1) INRA Agronomy Laboratory, Colmar
28, rue d’Henlisheim BP 507, 68021 Colmar cedex
(2) INRA/ENSAM, GAP Viticulture Laboratory
2, place Viala, 34060 Montpellier cedex
(3) INRA, URVV, Angers
42 rue Georges Morel , 49071 Beaucouze

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 1996

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.

Inhibition of Oenococcus oeni during alcoholic fermentation by a selected Lactiplantibacillus plantarum strain

The use of selected cultures of the species Lactiplantibacillus plantarum in Oenology has grown in prominence in recent years. While initial applications of this species centred very much around malolactic fermentation (MLF), there is strong evidence to show that certain strains can be harnessed for their bio-protective effects. Unwanted spontaneous MLF during alcoholic fermentation (AF), driven by rogue Oenococcus oeni, is a winemaking deviation that is very difficult to manage when it occurs. This work set out to determine the efficacy of one particular strain of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum(Viniflora® NoVA™ Protect), against this problem in Cabernet Sauvignon must. The work was carried out at commercial scale and in a winery environment and compared the bio-protective culture with the more traditional approach of reducing must pH by the addition of tartaric acid. The combination of both was also investigated. The concentration of both Oenococcus oeni and Lactiplantibacillus plantarum was determined using qPCR. The adventitious Oenococcus oeni showed the most growth during AF in the control wine, whereas in the wines treated with Lactiplantibacillus plantarum a bacteriostatic effect against this species was observed. This effect was comparable to the wines treated with tartaric acid. This has particular commercial relevance for controlling the flora in musts with high pH, or when the addition of tartaric acid is either not permitted or is prohibitive for other reasons.

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 fertigation strategies to adapt PGI Côtes de Gascogne production to hot vintage

The development of fertigation could be a possible solution to adapt PGI Côtes de Gascogne (south-western France) wine production to climate change. The goal would be to limit the negative effects of water stress on yield performance expectation (around 15 tons per hectare) and to make the use of fertilizers more efficient. This study aimed to compare the effects of three strategies of water and minerals supply on grapes and wines qualities. Two fertigation practices were compared to a rainfed control which is the current standard of the local grape growing production. The fertilizers (nitrogen and potassium) were (i) fully brought by irrigation pipe during the season, (ii) partially brought by irrigation pipe and partially on the soil or (iii) fully brought on the soil at the beginning of the season for the non-irrigated control (local standard). The trial was run on cv. Colombard trained on spur pruned with vertical shoot positioning system on a sandy-silty-clay soil over the 2020 vintage which was particularly hot for the region. Moderate to strong water deficit appeared during the growing period of the berries and held on after veraison. Irrigation strategies allowed for maintaining grapevine without water deficit and being significantly different from the control water status. Grapevine with fully or partial fertigation strategies produced 25% more yield mainly due to the increase of the bunch weight. Also, the fully fertigation showed the best ratio between yield and maturity and brought 30% less of fertilizers (both nitrogen and potassium) than the two other strategies. Finally, the analysis of aromatic compounds in Colombard wines, varietal thiols family, showed the same level of concentrations for the 3 treatments, confirming that the yield performance did not impact the aromatic potential in this trial.

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.