Effect of “Terroir” on quanti-qualitative paramethers of “vino nobile di Montepulciano”

During aging, wine consumes small amounts of oxygen. This oxygen intake triggers a series of reactions that lead to flavonoid elongation, which is known to reduce bitterness and astringency while enhancing color stability.

The measurement of carbon isotopic discrimination of musts (δ13C) at harvest is an integrated assessment of water status during ripening of grapevine. It is an alternative to traditional measurements of water status in the field, which is crucial for understanding spatial variability of plant physiology at the vineyard scale, proven useful for delineation of management zones in precision viticulture. The aim of this work was to attune the method for the first time to California conditions across a range of areas and cultivars with different hydric behavior, and to evaluate its efficiency in delineating management zones for selective harvest in commercial vineyards.

Implementing artificial intelligence (AI) in viticulture and enology is a rapidly growing field of research with an essential number of potential practical applications.

This study evaluated the levels of trans-resveratrol in commercial wines made from Cabernet Sauvignon grapes from different valleys of Chile stilbenes. The Cabernet Sauvignon is the most planted variety in Chile, being 38% of the total vineyard country. Chile is the fourth largest wine exporter in the world, so it is important to evaluate the Cabernet-Sauvignon wines in their concentration levels of trans-resveratrol and its relation to the benefits provided to human health in moderate consumption. Evaluation comprises commercial wines from different valleys of Chile and its relationship with climatic characteristics, soil and vineyard handling.

For a long time environment was known as one of the most important factors to characterize the quality of wines but at the same time it appears very difficult to distinguish inside the “terroir” the role of the single factor. These remarks partially explain why methods for viticultural evaluation are often quite different (Amerine et al., 1944; Antoniazzi et al., 1986; Asselin et al., 1987; Astruc et al., 1980; Bonfils, 1977; Boselli, 1991; Colugnati, 1990; Costantinescu, 1967; Costantini et al., 1987; Dutt et al., 1981; Falcetti et al., 1992; Fregoni et al., 1992; Hidalgo, 1980; Intrieri et al., 1988; Laville, 1990; Morlat et al., 1991; Scienza et al., 1990; Shubert et al., 1987; Turri et al., 1991).