Grape quality potential for wine production is strongly influenced by environmental parameters such as climate and agronomic factors such as rootstock. Several studies underline the effect of rootstock on vegetative growth of the scions [1] and on berry composition [2, 3] with an impact on wine quality. Rootstocks are promising agronomic tools for climate change adaptation and in most grape-growing regions the potential diversity of rootstocks is not fully used and only a few genotypes are planted. Little is known about the effect of rootstock genetic variability on the aromatic composition in wines; thus further investigations are needed.

Lately several works highlighted the capacity of grape cell-wall material (CWM) to interact with proanthocyanidins (PA), indicating its potential use as fining agent for red wines.1–4 However, those studies were performed by using purified PAs and very high doses of CWM (almost ten-fold higher than those used in wine industry for other commercial fining agents). The present study focuses on the applicability of CWM from Cabernet sauvignon pomace as fining agent for red wines under real winery conditions. Grapes of cultivar Cabernet sauvignon were harvested at three different maturity levels
(unripe, mature, and overripe) and used for red winemaking. The pomace of such vinifications were used as source of CWM, and applied into red wines at two different concentrations: 0.2 g/L and 2.5 g/L.

Climate change poses significant challenges to the global wine sector, with cool-climate countries particularly vulnerable to its effects. The research employs a panel data analysis to investigate the impact of climate change on the wine industry in 66 countries, focusing on 11 cool-climate countries located north of the wine belt in the northern hemisphere. Utilizing data from OIV, FAO and climatic statistics from the climate change knowledge portal of the world bank spanning from 1961 to 2020, the research examines the relationship between temperature, precipitation, and wine production.

AIM: The current loss of genetic grapevine diversity is mainly due to the reduced number of varieties used for making wine. A way of preserved endangered varieties is the establishment of germplasm banks.

There are fundamentally two different ways in which indications of geographical origin (igos) can be protected. The us approach favors the pre-existing trademark system through collective marks (cms), while the eu approach favors a maximalist approach via a sui generis system which promotes appellations of origin (aos). A consensus however emerges regarding the fundamental protection of origin against misleading, confusing and dilutive uses. Previous literature discusses these competing igo logics from historical, legal and international trade perspectives. In this paper, we depart from the field of social sciences, in particular from recent advancements in the well-established literature on proximities, in order to provide a reflection on the different logics underpinning the aos and cms systems.