Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Les terroirs : variae causarum figurae

Les terroirs : variae causarum figurae

Abstract

Le juriste se sent intrus pour parler des terroirs. Il regarde la presse et essaye de comprendre. On peut y lire à propos de la fête de la cuisine du 30 mai 1996 qui “..met en valeur des produits dont la qualité dépend d’un terroir”, que le Camembert du pays d’Auge est le seul à être protégé, je pensais au camembert de Normandie, que 80 % de la feta grecque est fabriquée aux Pays Bas, je croyais que c’était au Danemark, et que la Communauté européenne protège les indications géographiques de provenance IGP, sans doute une catégorie nouvelle remplaçant les indications géographiques protégées (1). J’ai appris aussi que les distributeurs redemandent des produits du terroir car “ils viennent brouiller les cartes dans la partie engagée avec les grandes marques”. Carrefour a ses “Terroirs et tiroirs”, Prisunic son “Vent d’Ouest”, Intermarché “Les bouquets du terroir”, Monoprix “Les terroirs de France” (2), Promodés et sa marque “Reflets de France” pour les hypermarchés “Continent” (3). Dans le même temps on affirme que “Le terme est un simple nom commun. Improtégeable et donc improtégé” (4).

Certes le vin et le terroir restent encore très majoritairement liés pour les consommateurs, mais au rythme actuel, le terroir non viticole risque la dépréciation rapide et le terroir viticole la banalisation par osmose. La publicité n’est pas en reste. Un dépliant décrit un produit comme un “grand cru” issu d’un “terroir exceptionnel”, l’un des “cent sites remarquables du goût”, auquel s’ajoute le “savoir faire de l’homme”, et continue encore “Les différents cépages sont pour nous les nombreuses plantes et épices que nous utilisons..”. Il s’agit d’une boisson spiritueuse anisée(5). Pour brouiller encore les cartes citons la campagne publicitaire estivale d’un vin sur “un positionnement original” grâce au slogan “Son terroir, c’est la mer” (6). Opérant un repli stratégique consécutif à l’effroi le juriste regarde avec attention l’objet habituel de ses réflexions: les textes. Les textes français et naturellement les textes communautaires et aussi quelques sources internationales. A quelques exceptions près, d’importance très modeste, les textes n’emploient jamais ou presque le vocable terroir. Terroir est un vocable utilisé, éventuellement, par les juristes, mais ce n’est pas un vocable à signification juridique (7). On se tourne alors vers les études scientifiques consacrées au(x) terroir(s). Aux yeux d’un juriste le contenu de la notion scientifique de terroir est évolutif mais avec un objectif de caractérisation pratiquement unique qui est la délimitation d’une “..aire de production..” pour le droit français (8), une “..région déterminée..” ou une “..aire géographique..” dans le droit communautaire (9). Il s’agit d’optimiser les caractéristiques d’une production en effectuant un zonage, en l’occurrence un mésozonage. Le lien terroir-appellation d’origine apparaît : “Constitue une appellation d’origine, la dénomination d’un pays, d’une région ou d’une localité servant à désigner un produit qui en est originaire et dont la qualité ou les caractères sont dus au milieu géographique, comprenant des facteurs naturels et des facteurs humains” (10). Est-ce à dire que le terroir se moule sur l’appellation d’origine etomporte dans son étude les facteurs naturels et les facteurs humains? L’équivalence terroir-appellation d’origine a pu être pratiquée par les scientifiques. De même la distinction des facteurs naturels et des facteurs humains a pu être variable dans sa signification (11). Aujourd’hui la notion scientifique de terroir parait devoir être comprise comme incluant seulement les éléments naturels du milieu, les facteurs naturels de l’appellation d’origine. Le terroir est l’ensemble des facteurs naturels d’une appellation d’origine, c’est à dire d’une aire de production déterminée produisant des vins “..aux caractéristiques qualitatives particulières..” (12). Mais en quelques années les réglementations nationales et communautaires, les conventions internationales, ont beaucoup changé. Le lien au terroir a fait recette et les noms géographiques sont devenus de plus en plus attractifs. Il faut vendre ce que l’on produit.

Le terroir reste toujours consubstantiel pour l’appellation d’origine, mais il a fallu tenir compte de produits autres que les vins. Il a fallu tenir compte de situations différentes de celles qui correspondent au moule de l’appellation d’origine à la française, typiquement et essentiellement vinicole. On a vu apparaître d’autres définitions depuis 1992: celles de l’indication géographique protégée – IGP dans la Communauté européenne et de l’indication géographique reconnue – IGR à l’O.I.V.. On a vu apparaître aussi les indications géographiques en 1994 dans l’un des accords résultant du cycle de l’Uruguay, l’Accord sur les Droits de Propriété Intellectuelle qui touchent au Commerce – ADPIC (Agreement on Trade related aspects of intellectual property rights – TRIPS).

Au travers de ces définitions y-a-t-il migration, influence, ou abandon de la notion de terroir ? peut-on penser qu’il existe désormais une gamme de terroirs ? (I). Par ailleurs les produits issus d’un lieu déterminé sont désignés par un nom géographique, parfois par une dénomination traditionnelle. La solution habituelle pour les appellations d’origine est-elle transmissible aux nouvelles situations d’indication géographique? Les noms des terroirs méritent aussi notre attention (II).

DOI:

Publication date: March 25, 2022

Issue: Terroir 1996

Type : Poster

Authors

J. AUDIER

Faculté de droit et de science politique d’Aix-Marseille
3, avenue R. Schuman 13628 Aix en Provence cedex 1

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 1996

Citation

Related articles…

Impact on leaf morphology of Vitis vinifera L. cvs Riesling and Cabernet Sauvignon under Free Air Carbon dioxide Enrichment (FACE)

Atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration has continuously increased since pre-industrial times from 280 ppm in 1750, and is predicted to exceed 700 ppm by the end of 21st century. For most of C3 plant species elevated CO2 (eCO2) improve photosynthetic apparatus results in an increased plant biomass production. To investigate the effects of eCO2 on morphological leaf characteristics the two Vitis vinifera L. cultivars, Riesling and Cabernet Sauvignon, grown in the Geisenheim VineyardFACE (Free Air Carbon dioxide Enrichment) system were used. The FACE site is located at Geisenheim University (49° 59′ N, 7° 57′ E, 94 m above sea level), Germany and was implemented in 2014 comparing future atmospheric CO2-concentrations (eCO2, predicted for the mid-21st century) with current ambient CO2-conditions (aCO2). Experiments were conducted under rain-fed conditions for two consecutive years (2015 and 2016). Six leaves per repetition of the CO2 treatment were sampled in the field and immediately fixed in a FAA solution (ethanol, H2O, formaldehyde and glacial acetic acid). After 24 h leaf samples were transferred and stored in an ethanol solution. Subsequently, leaf tissue was dehydrated using ethanol series and embedded in paraffin. By using a rotary microtomesections of 5 µm were prepared and fixed on microscopic slides. Subsequent the samples were stained using consecutive staining and washing solutions. Afterwards pictures of the leaf cross-sections were taken using a light microscope and consecutive measurements were conducted with an open source image software. Differences found in leaf cross-sections of the two CO2 treatments were detected for the palisade parenchyma. Leaf thickness, upper and lower epidermis and spongy parenchyma remained less affected under eCO2 conditions. The observed results within grapevine leaf tissues can provide first insights to seasonal adaptation strategies of grapevines under future elevated CO2 concentrations.

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.

Rootstock regulation of scion phenotypes: the relationship between rootstock parentage and petiole mineral concentration

Grapevine is grown as a graft since the end of the 19th century. Rootstocks not only provide tolerance to Phylloxera but also ensure the supply of water and mineral nutrients to the scion. Rootstocks are an important mean of adaptation to environmental conditions, because the scion controls the typical features of the grapes and wine. However, among the large diversity of rootstocks worldwide, few of them are commercially used in the vineyard. The aim of this study was to investigate the extent to which rootstocks modify the mineral composition of the petioles of the scion. Vitis vinifera cvs. Cabernet-Sauvignon, Pinot noir, Syrah and Ugni blanc were grafted onto 55 different rootstock genotypes and planted in a vineyard as three replicates of 5 vines. Petioles were collected in the cluster zone with 6 replicates per combination. Petiolar concentrations of 13 mineral elements (N, P, K, S, Mg, Ca, Na, B, Zn, Mn, Fe, Cu, Al) at veraison were determined. Scion, rootstock and the interaction explained the same proportion of the phenotypic variance for most mineral elements. Rootstock genotype showed a significant influence on the petiole mineral element composition. Rootstock effect explained from 7 % for Cu to 25 % for S of the variance. The difference of rootstock conferred mineral status is discussed in relation to vigor and fertility. Rootstocks were also genotyped with 23 microsatellite markers. Data were analysed according to genetic groups in order to determine whether the petiole mineral composition could be related to the genetic parentage of the rootstock. Thanks to a highly powerful design, it is the first time that such a large panel of rootstocks grafted with 4 scions has been studied. These results give the opportunity to better characterize the rootstocks and to enlarge the diversity used in the vineyard.

Evolution of the amino acids content through grape ripening: Effect of foliar application of methyl jasmonate with or without urea

The parameters that determine the grape quality, and therefore the optimal harvest time, suffer variations during berry ripening, related to climate change, with the widely known problem of the gap between technological and phenolic maturities. However, there are few studies about its incidence on grape nitrogen composition. For this reason, the use of an elicitor, methyl jasmonate (MeJ), alone or with urea, is proposed as a tool to reduce climatic decoupling, allowing to establish the harvest time in order to achieve the optimum grape quality. The aim was to study the effect of MeJ and MeJ+Urea foliar applications on the evolution of Tempranillo amino acids content throughout the grape maturation. Three treatments were foliarly applied, at veraison and 7 days later: control (water), MeJ (10 mM) and MeJ+Urea (10 mM+6 kg N/ha). Grape samples were taken at five stages of maturation: day before the first and second applications, 15 days after the second application (pre-harvest), harvest day, and 15 days after harvest (post-harvest). The amino acids analysis of the samples was carried out by HPLC. Results showed that the evolution of amino acids was similar regardless of the treatment; however, foliar applications influenced the nitrogen compounds content, i.e., there was no qualitative effect but quantitative one. Most of the amino acids reached their maximum concentration in pre-harvest, being higher in grapes from the treatments than in the control. In general, no differences in grape amino acids content were observed between MeJ and MeJ+Urea treatments. Foliar applications with MeJ and MeJ+Urea enhanced the grape amino acids content, without affecting their profile, helping to optimize their quality and allowing to establish a more complete grape ripening standard. Therefore, MeJ and MeJ+Urea foliar applications can be a simple agronomic practice, which has shown promising results in order to enhance the grape quality.

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.