GiESCO 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 GiESCO 9 Temperature variability assessment at vineyard scale: control of data accuracy and data processing protocol

Temperature variability assessment at vineyard scale: control of data accuracy and data processing protocol

Abstract

Context and purpose of the study – Climatic variability studies at fine scale have been developed in recent years with the reduction of material cost and the development of competitive miniaturized sensors. This work is forming part the LIFE-ADVICLIM project, of which one of the objectives is to model spatial temperature variability at vineyard scale. In the Bordeaux pilot site, a large network of data loggers has been set up to record temperature close to the vine canopy. The reduced distance between plant foliage and measurement equipment raises specific issues and leads to an increased rate of outliers compared to data retrieved from classical weather stations. Some of these were detected during data analysis, but others could not be easily identified. The present study aims to address the issue of data quality control and provide recommendations for data processing in climatic studies at fine scale.
Material and methods – Temperature variability at vineyard scale was assessed from a network of 90 temperature stations set up in Saint-Emilion, Pomerol, and their satellite appellations. In order to test the accuracy of the measurement, 2 temperature sensors T1 and T2 (Tinytag talk 2, Gemini UK) have been connected to each temperature station and programmed to record hourly minimum and maximum temperature. The accuracy given by the constructor for this material is 0.4°C. The difference between the 2 sensors for each temperature station was analyzed during the 2017 campaign and compared. A classical meteorological station installed in Saint-Emilion (Meteo France) provided the information on climatic condition in the pilot site. A temperature station was also set up next to this meteorological station to assess both the impact of canopy and the type of material on temperature. Raw temperature data and bioclimatic indices like Winkler index were analyzed.
Results – Differences exceeding material accuracy have been detected over the whole network for several locations and dates. Average of differences is higher for maximum temperature than minimum when the whole year is taken into account. Differences can change Winkler index up to 106 degree.days for the same temperature station. Seasonal effect was observed for minimum and maximum temperature with higher differences between T1 and T2 during the winter.
Significant difference on maximum temperature was observed between data from the classical meteorological station and temperature recorded by the neighboring data logger installed in the canopy. Temperature recorded by temperature station is 1 to 4 °C warmer because the solar shield is less ventilated. A seasonal effect was observed, with higher difference recorded during the summer, which induced significant differences between calculated degree days. To eliminate confusion between degree days recorded by these 2 systems, a “Canopy Winkler Index” was created for the Winkler Index constructed with the temperature station, located inside the canopy.
Careful data processing is needed to obtain accurate temperatures from miniaturized temperature station located inside the canopy. Installation of 2 sensors for each temperature station is recommended to control and detect outliers. An automatic data processing system is under development to detect and replace outliers.

DOI:

Publication date: March 11, 2024

Issue: GiESCO 2019

Type: Poster

Authors

Théo PETITJEAN1*, Laure de RESSEGUIER1, Hervé QUENOL², Cornelis van LEEUWEN1

1 EGFV, Bordeaux Sciences Agro, INRA, Univ. Bordeaux, F-33882 Villenave d’Ornon, 
² LETG-Rennes, CNRS-UMR 6554, Université Rennes-2, Place Recteur H. Le Moal, 35043 Rennes cedex, France

Contact the author

Keywords

Fine scale, Temperature variability, Temperature stations, Data accuracy, Data processing , Vineyards

Tags

GiESCO | GiESCO 2019 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Environmental and viticultural practice effects on the phenolic composition of grapes: impact on wine sensory properties

Grape phenolic compounds are located in the internal layers of grape skins and seeds. They are synthesized via the phenyl-propanoid biosynthetic pathway which is modulated by both biotic and abiotic factors.

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).

The combined use of Lachancea thermotolerans and lactic bacteria in wine technology

The production of most red wines that are sold involves an alcoholic fermentation carried out by yeasts of the Saccharomyces genus, and a subsequent fermentation carried out by lactic bacteria of the Oenococus oeni species after the first one is fully completed. However, the traditional process can face complications, which can be more likely in grape juices with high levels of sugar and pH. Because of climate change, these situations are more frequent in the wine industry. The main hazards in those scenarios are halts or delays in the alcoholic fermentation or the growth of unwanted bacteria while the alcoholic fermentation is not done yet and the wine still has residual sugars.

Metabolomic discrimination of grapevine water status for Chardonnay and Pinot noir

Water status impact in viticulture has been widely explored, as it strongly affects grapevine physiology and grape chemical composition. It is considered as a key component of vitivinicultural terroir. Most of the studies concerning grapevine water status have focused on either physiological traits, or berry compounds, or traits involved in wine quality. Here, the response of grapevine to water availability during the ripening period is assessed through non-targeted metabolomics analysis of grape berries by ultra-high resolution mass spectrometry. The grapevine water status has been assessed during 2 consecutive years (2019 & 2020), through carbon isotope discrimination on juices from berries collected at maturity (21.5 brix approx.) for 2 Vitis vinifera cv. Pinot noir (PN) and Chardonnay (CH). A total of 220 grape juices were collected from 5 countries worldwide (Italy; Argentina; France; Germany; Portugal). Measured δ13C (‰) varied from -28.73 to -22.6 for PN, and from -28.79 to -21.67 for CH. These results also clearly revealed higher water stress for the 2020 vintage. The same grape juices have been analysed by Fourier Transform Ion Cyclotron Resonance Mass Spectrometry (FT-ICR-MS) and Liquid Chromatography coupled to Mass Spectrometry (LC-qTOF-MS), leading to the detection of up to 4500 CHONS containing elemental compositions, and thus likely tens of thousands of individual compounds, which include fatty acids, organic acids, peptides, phenolics, also with high levels of glycosylation. Multivariate statistical analysis revealed that up to 160 elemental compositions, covering the whole range of detected masses (100 –1000 m/z), were significantly correlated to the observed gradients of water status. Examples of chemical markers, which are representative of these complex fingerprints, include various derivatives of the known abscisic acid (ABA), such as phaesic acid or abscisic acid glucose ester, which are significantly correlated with higher water stress, regardless of the variety. Cultivar-specific behaviours could also be identified from these fingerprints. Our results provide an unprecedented representation of the metabolic diversity, which is involved in the water status regulation at the grape level, and which could contribute to a better knowledge of the grapevine mitigation strategy in a climate change context.

Aroma profile of Oenococcus oeni strains in different life styles

AIM: Three Oenococcus oeni strains previously isolated from spontaneous malolactic fermentation were characterized for their surface properties. Planktonic and sessile cells were investigated for aroma compounds production and the expression of genes involved in citrate and malate metabolism (citE and mleA, respectively), glycoside-hydrolase (dsrO), fructansucrase (levO), rhamnosyl-transferase (wobB), glycosyltransferase (wobO).