IVAS 2022 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 IVAS 9 IVAS 2022 9 Climate change, regional adaptation necessities and impact on grape and wine composition – an integrated view on a moving target

Climate change, regional adaptation necessities and impact on grape and wine composition – an integrated view on a moving target

Abstract

Grapevines are cultivated on 6 out of 7 continents, roughly between latitudes 4° and 56° in the Northern Hemisphere and between 6° and 42° in the Southern Hemisphere across a large diversity of climates (oceanic, warm oceanic, transition temperate, continental, cold continental, Mediterranean, subtropical, attenuated tropical, and arid climates). Accordingly, the range and magnitude of environmental factors differ considerably from region to region and so do the principal environmental constraints for grape production. Due to climate change, temperature, as the primary factor limiting the suitability for wine production is changing causing shifts in the regional distribution of wine producing areas and bringing “new” cool climate producers to the map and may be putting warmer areas at risk. 

The recent publication of the IPCC report (2021, 2022) will be analysed with respect to regional projections relevant for Viticulture and Oenology across the northern and southern hemisphere. The presentation will examine the climate development of various regions across cooler and warmer grape growing areas, and the potential impact on varietal distribution. As a second major environmental factor, water availability is a constraint in many grape growing areas. But projected changes in precipitation (P) rates are only one part of the equation. Since the water cycle is coupled to temperature because temperature plays a large role in the evaporation of water from surfaces or the transpiration of water through plants (ETp), it is the balance between P and ETp which determines water availability and this balance is changing in different directions in various grape growing regions. 

Both temperature and water availability have known effects on fruit composition. Much more difficult to quantify are effects through, for instance, changes in soils. We observe rising temperatures in the upper soil layers in access to the warming observed for air temperature. This will have an impact on the distribution of microbial populations, the decay rate of organic matter, the supply with nutrients, or the storage capacity for soil organic carbon (SOC), thus affecting the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and the viscosity of water in the soil-plant pathway, altering the transport of water. Interactions between micro-organisms in the rhizosphere, the grapevine root system, degradation and fixation of SOC are complex and poorly understood but respond to environmental factors (such as increased soil temperatures), the plant material (rootstock for instance), respectively the cultivation system (for example bio-organic versus conventional, cover crop use versus open tillage for example). 

It is one of the major challenges in projecting analytical changes in the fruit and wine induced by these complex changes of a viticultural system through climate change aside of the main components sugar and acidity. The rising ambient CO2-concentration itself will also contribute to changes in leaf and fruit biochemistry and the interaction with the environmental factors temperature and water may act synergistically or antagonistically, exacerbating or mitigating effects

DOI:

Publication date: June 22, 2022

Issue: IVAS 2022

Type: Article

Authors

Hans Reiner Schultz¹*

¹Hochschule Geisenheim University, von-Lade-Straße 1, D-65366 Geisenheim, Germany

Hans Reiner Schultz¹*

¹Hochschule Geisenheim University, von-Lade-Straße 1, D-65366 Geisenheim, Germany

Contact the author

Keywords

climate change and regional impacts, regulation programs, adaptation strategies, grape and wine composition 

Tags

IVAS 2022 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

A predictive model of spatial Eca variability in the vineyard to support the monitoring of plant status

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.19.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

Variations of soil attributes in vineyards influence their reflectance spectra

Knowledge on the reflectance spectrum of soil is potentially useful since it carries information on soil chemical composition that can be used to the planning of agricultural practices. If compared with analytical methods such as conventional chemical analysis, reflectance measurement provides non-destructive, economic, near real-time data. This paper reports results from reflectance measurements performed by spectroradiometry on soils from two vineyards in south Brazil. The vineyards are close to each other, are on different geological formations, but were subjected to the same management. The objective was to detect spectral differences between the two areas, correlating these differences to variations in their chemical composition, to assess the technique’s potential to predict soil attributes from reflectance data.To that end, soil samples were collected from ten selected vine parcels. Chemical analysis yield data on concentration of twenty-one soil attributes, and spectroradiometry was performed on samples. Chemical differences significant to a 95% confidence level between the two studied areas were found for six soil attributes, and the average reflectance spectra were separated by this same level along most of the observed spectral domain. Correlations between soil reflectance and concentrations of soil attributes were looked for, and for ten soil traits it was possible to define wavelength domains were reflectance and concentrations are correlated to confidence levels from 95% to 99%. Partial Least Squares Regression (PLSR) analyses were performed comparing measured and predicted concentrations, and for fifteen out of 21 soil traits we found Pearson correlation coefficients r > 0.8. These preliminary results, which have to be validated, suggest that variations of concentration in the investigated soil attributes induce differences in reflectance that can be detected by spectroradiometry. Applications of these observations include the assessment of the chemical content of soils by spectroradiometry as a fast, low-cost alternative to chemical analytical methods.

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.

Grapevine yield-gap: identification of environmental limitations by soil and climate zoning in Languedoc-Roussillon region (south of France)

Grapevine yield has been historically overlooked, assuming a strong trade-off between grape yield and wine quality. At present, menaced by climate change, many vineyards in Southern France are far from the quality label threshold, becoming grapevine yield-gaps a major subject of concern. Although yield-gaps are well studied in arable crops, we know very little about grapevine yield-gaps. In the present study, we analysed the environmental component of grapevine yield-gaps linked to climate and soil resources in the Languedoc Roussillon. We used SAFRAN data and IGP Pays d’Oc wine yields from 2010 to 2018. We selected climate and soil indicators proving to have a significant effect on average wine yield-gaps at the municipality scale. The most significant factors of grapevine yield were the Soil Available Water Capacity; followed by the Huglin Index and the Climatic Dryness Index. The Days of Frost; the Soil pH; and the Very Hot Days were also significant. Then, we clustered geographical zones presenting similar indicators, facilitating the identification of resources yield-gaps. We discussed the number of zones with the experts of IGP Pays d’Oc label, obtaining 7 zones with similar limitations for grapevine yield. Finally, we analysed the main resources causing yield-gaps and the grapevine varieties planted on each zone. Mapping grapevine resource yield-gaps are the first stage for understanding grapevine yield-gaps at the regional scale.

Impact of geographical location on the phenolic profile of minority varieties grown in Spain. II: red grapevines

Because terroir and cultivar are drivers of wine quality, is essential to investigate theirs effects on polyphenolic profile before promoting the implantation of a red minority variety in a specific area. This work, included in MINORVIN project, focuses in the polyphenolic profile of 7 red grapevines minority varieties of Vitis vinifera L. (Morate, Sanguina, Santafe, Terriza Tinta Jeromo Tortozona Tinta) and Tempranillo) from six typical viticulture Spanish areas: Aragón (A1), Cataluña (A2), Castilla la Mancha (A3), Castilla –León (A4), Madrid (A5) and Navarra (A6) of 2020 season. Polyphenolic substances were extracted from grapes. 35 compounds were identified and quantified (mg subtance/kg fresh berry) by HPLC and grouped in anthocyanins (ANT) flavanols (FLAVA), flavonols (FLAVO), hydroxycinnamic (AH), benzoic (BA) acids and stilbenes (ST). Antioxidant activity (AA, mmol TE /g fresh berry) was determined by DPPH method. The results were submitted to a two-way ANOVA to investigate the influence of variety, area and their interaction for each polyphenolic family and cluster analysis was used to construct hierarchical dendrograms, searching the natural groupings among the samples. Sanguina (A3) had the most of total polyphenols while Tempranillo (A5) those of ANT. Sanguina (A2) and (A3) reached the highest values of FLAVO, FLAVA and AA. These two last samples had also the maximum of AA. The effect cultivar and area were significant for all polyphenolic families analyzed. A high variability due to variety (>50%) was observed in FLAVA and the maximum value of variability due to growing area was detected in AA (86.41%), ANT and FLAVO (51%); the interaction variety*zone was significant only for ANT, FLAVO, EST and AA. Finally, dendrograms presented five cluster: i) Sanguina (A2); ii) Sanguina (A3); iii) Tempranillo (A5); iv) Tempranillo (A3); Terriza (A3,A5), Morate (A5,A6); v) Santafé (A1,A6); Tortozona tinta (A1,A3,A6); Tinta Jeromo (A3,A4).