Des enjeux individuels à l’action collective

Grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) exhibits a high level of genetic and phenotypic diversity among the approximately 6000 cultivars recorded. This perennial crop is highly vulnerable to numerous fungal diseases, including esca, which is a complex vascular pathology that poses a significant threat to the wine sector, as there is currently no cost-efficient curative method[1]. In this context, an effective approach to mitigate the impact of such diseases is by leveraging the crop’s genetic diversity. Indeed, susceptibility to esca disease appears to vary between cultivars, under artificial or natural infection. However, the mechanisms and varietal characteristics underlying cultivar susceptibility to esca are still unknown.

The objective of the work described here is the elaboration of a map of the different types of vineyard soils that to guide the famers in the choice of the most productive vine rootstocks and varieties. 90 vineyard soils profiles were analysed in the entire territory of the Origen Denominations of Valdepeñas. The sampling was carried out in 2018 (June to October) by making a sampling grid, followed by photointerpretation and control in the field. The studied soils can be grouped into 9 different soil types (according to FAO 2006 classification): Leptosols, Regosols, Fluvisols, Gleysols, Cambisols, Calcisols, Luvisols and Anthrosols. A map showing the soil distribution with different type of soils has been made with the ArcGIS program. Regarding to the choice of rootstock, Calcisoles are soils with a high active limestone content, so the rootstocks used in these soils must be resistant to this parameter; Luvisols are deep soils with high clay content, so they will support vigorous rootstocks. Because the cartographic units are composed of two or more subgroups, with are associated in variable proportions, 9 different soil associations have been established; Unit 1: Leptosols, Cambisols and Luvisols (80%, 15% and 5% respectively); Unit 2: Cambisols with Regosols and Luvisols (40%, 30% and 30% respectively); Unit 3: Cambisols and Gleysols with Regosols (40%, 40% and 20% respectively); Unit 4: Regosols with Cambisols, Leptosols and Calcisols (40%, 30%, 15% and 15% respectively); Unit 5: Cambisols, Leptosols, Calcisols and Regosols (25% each of them); Unit 6: Luvisols with Cambisol and Calcisols (80%, 10% and 10% respectively); Unit 7: Luvisols and Calcisols with Cambisols (40%, 40% and 20% respectively); Unit 8: Calcisols with, Cambisols and Luvisols (80%, 10% and 10% respectively); Unit 9: Anthrosols. These study allow to elaborate the first map of vineyard soils of this Protected Designation of Origin in Castilla-La Mancha.

The main objective of this study was to establish if beet sugar produces a different concentration of “fruity” volatile aroma compounds (VOCs), compared to cane sugar when used for second alcoholic fermentation of Auxerrois sparkling wines. Auxerrois base wine from the 2020 vintage was separated into two lots; half was fermented with cane sugar and half with beet sugar (both sucrose products and tested for sugar purity). These sugars were used in yeast acclimation (IOC 2007), and base wines for the second fermentation (12 bottles each). Base wines were manually bottled at the Cool Climate Oenology and Viticulture Institute (CCOVI) research winery. The standard chemical analysis took place at intervals of 0, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks post-bottling. Acidity and pH measurements were carried out by an auto-titrator. Residual Sugar (g/L) (glucose (g/L), fructose (g/L)), YAN (mg N/L), malic acid, and acetic acid (g/L) were analyzed by Megazyme assay kits. parameters were analyzed by Megazyme assay kits. Alcohol (% v/v) was assessed by GC-FID. VOC analysis of base wines, finished sparkling wines, as well as the two sugars in model sparkling wine solutions, was carried out by GC-MS. VOCs included ethyl octanoate, ethyl hexanoate, ethyl butanoate, ethyl decanoate, ethyl-2-methylbutyrate, ethyl-3-methylbutyrate, ethyl 2-methyl propanoate, ethyl 2- hydroxy propanoate, 1-hexanol, 2-phenylethan-1-ol, ethyl acetate, hexyl acetate, isoamyl acetate and 2-phenylethyl acetate.

Over the past few decades, viticultural research has made numerous contributions which have made it possible to better understand the behavior of the vine as well as its response to the conditions imposed on it by the environment and agronomic practices. However, these results have only rarely been used in the practical management of vineyards because the research has been carried out using partial experimental models where reality is only represented by a few factors which are sometimes even made more complex by the introduction of elements foreign to the existing situation and difficult to apply to production (varieties, methods of cultivation, management techniques, etc.). To these reasons, one could add a low popularization of the results obtained, as well as the difficulty of implementing the scientific contributions, which does not allow the different production systems to fully express their potential. This limit of viticultural research can only be exceeded by the design of integrated projects designed directly on and for the territory. Indeed, only the integrated evaluation of a viticultural agro-system, which can be achieved through zoning, makes it possible to measure, or even attribute to each element of the system, the weight it exerts on the quality of the wine.

Brandy is a spirit drink made from “wine spirit” (<86% Alcohol by Volume – ABV; high levels of congeners and they are mainly less volatile than ethanol), it may be blended with a “wine distillate” (<94.8%ABV; low levels of congeners and these are mainly more volatile than ethanol), as long as that distillate does not exceed a maximum of 50% of the alcoholic content of the finished product[1]. Brandy must be aged for at least 6 months in oak casks with <1000L of capacity. During ageing, changes occur in colour, flavour, and aroma that improve the quality of the original distillate.