GiESCO 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 GiESCO 9 Herbicide-free systems based on under-the-row grass cover in French vineyards

Herbicide-free systems based on under-the-row grass cover in French vineyards

Abstract

Context and purpose of the study – In a context of reducing herbicide use, the most part of French vineyards are developing permanent grass cover crops on inter-rows alleys, while under the row chemical weeding remains the general case. The setting up of a controlled grass cover crop under the vine row could be a complementary alternative to mechanical weeding – which one is very restrictive – interesting from a technical and economical point of view. The present study aimed at assessing agronomic impacts of grass cover crop under the row in different climatic conditions and production objectives.

Material and methods – Two soil management treatments – under-the-row grass cover and chemical weeding, i.e. bare soil – were compared on two experimental plots in South-west and Mediterranean regions of France. Maximum percentage of grass cover per plot was 100% on South-west site and 30% on Mediterranean site. Experiments were implemented since 2007 on Malbec grape variety within AOP Cahors and since 2010 on Syrah within IGP Vin de Pays d’Oc. Each treatment was replicated three times in a complete randomized block design. Experimental monitoring was carried out over the medium to long term (six to nine years). Data were annually collected on grapevine production – yield, vigour – and water and nitrogen status (water potentials dynamics, leaf chlorophyll index, must assimilable nitrogen).

Results – On Mediterranean site, introduction of under-the-row grass cover has not resulted in a significant decrease in yield or vigour. On South-west site, yield was reduced for this treatment in comparison to bare soil most of the years of monitoring, with variation according to climate. AOP production objective was nevertheless achieved for more than 50% of the vintages studied. Regarding vigour, over the first four years of study, an increasing rise of the relative difference between under-the-row grass cover treatment and bare soil was registered, until it reaches -45%. Proportion of grass coverage per plot seems to be a more important factor than climatic context to explain the impact of under-the-row grass cover on the vine. Monitoring of water and nitrogen status indicators highlighted that competition from under-the-row grass cover focuses on nitrogen rather than water. In South-west region, foliar nitrogen fertilisation was applied after four years of grass cover under the row. A strong reduction of the relative difference between under-the-row grass cover treatment and bare soil was then observed in terms of vigour and leaf nitrogen. The setting up of a grass cover under the row of vines appeared to be a viticultural practice compatible with different sets of constraints and objectives pertaining to the adaptation of production system such as management of the proportion of grass coverage and adaptation of the fertilisation practices.

DOI:

Publication date: September 21, 2023

Issue: GiESCO 2019

Type: Poster

Authors

Laure GONTIER1*, Christophe GAVIGLIO1, Xavier DELPUECH2

1 IFV Sud-ouest, V’innopôle, BP22, F-81310 Lisle sur Tarn, France
2 IFV Rhône-Méditerranée, 361 rue J.F. Breton, BP5095, F-34196 Montpellier, France

Contact the author

Keywords

grapevine, under-the-row grass cover, mediterranean and oceanic climates

Tags

GiESCO | GiESCO 2019 | 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"...

Influence of grapevine rootstock/scion combination on rhizosphere and root endophytic microbiomes

Soil is a reservoir of microorganisms playing important roles in biogeochemical cycles and interacting with plants whether in the rhizosphere or in the root endosphere. The composition of the microbial communities thus impacts the plant health. Rhizodeposits (such as sugar, organic and amino acids, secondary metabolites, dead root cells …) are released by the roots and influence the communities of rhizospheric microorganisms, acting as signaling compounds or carbon sources for microbes. The composition of root exudates varies depending on several factors including genotypes. As most of the cultivated grapevines worldwide are grafted plants, the aim of this study was to explore the influence of rootstock and scion genotypes on the microbial communities of the rhizosphere and the root endosphere. The work was conducted in the GreffAdapt plot (55 rootstocks x 5 scions), in which the 275 combinations have been planted into 3 blocks designed according to the soil resistivity. Samples of roots and rhizosphere of 10 scion x rootstock combinations were first collected in May among the blocks 2 and 3. The quantities of bacteria, fungi and archaea have been assessed in the rhizosphere by quantitative PCR, and by cultivable methods for bacteria and fungi. The communities of bacteria, fungi and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) was analyzed by Illumina sequencing of 16S rRNA gene, ITS and 28S rRNA gene, respectively. The level of mycorrhization was also evaluated using black ink coloration of newly formed roots harvested in October. The level of bacteria, fungi and archaea was dependent on rootstock and scion genotypes. A block effect was observed, suggesting that the soil characteristics strongly influenced the microorganisms from the rhizosphere and root endosphere. High-throughput sequencing of the different target genes showed different communities of bacteria, fungi and AMF associated with the scion x rootstock combinations. Finally, all the combinations were naturally mycorrhized. The root mycorrhization intensity was influenced by the rootstock genotype, but not by the scion one. Altogether, these results suggest that both rootstock and scion genotypes influence the rhizosphere and root endophytic microbiomes. It would be interesting to analyze the biochemical composition of the rhizodeposition of these genotypes for a better understanding of the processes involved in the modulation of these microbiomes. Moreover, crossing our data with the plant agronomic characteristics could provide insights into their roles on plant fitness.

Ecophysiological performance of Vitis rootstocks under water stress

The use of rootstocks tolerant to soil water deficit is an interesting strategy to cope with limited water availability. Currently, several nurseries are breeding new genotypes, but the physiological basis of its responses under water stress are largely unknown. To this end, an ecophysiological assessment of the conventional 110-Richter (110R) and SO4, and the new M1 and M4 rootstocks was carried out in potted ungrafted plants. During one season, these Vitis genotypes were grown under greenhouse conditions and subjected to two water regimes, well-watered and water deficit. Water potentials of plants under water deficit down to < -1.4 MPa, and net photosynthesis (AN) <5 μmol m-2 s-1 did not cause leaf oxidative stress damage compared to well-watered conditions in any of the genotypes. The antioxidant capacity was sufficient to neutralize the mild oxidative stress suffered. Under both treatments, gravimetric differences in daily water use were observed among genotypes, leading to differences in the biomass of root, shoot and leaf. Under well-watered conditions, SO4 and 110R were the most vigorous and M1 and M4 the least. However, under water stress, SO4 exhibited the greatest reduction in biomass while M4 showed the lowest. Remarkably, under these conditions, SO4 reached the least negative stem water potential (Ψstem), while M1 reduced stomatal conductance (gs) and AN the most. In addition, SO4 and M1 genotypes also showed the highest and lowest hydraulic conductance values, respectively. Our results suggest that there are differences in water use regulation among genotypes, not only attributed to differences in stomatal regulation or intrinsic water use efficiency at the leaf level. Therefore, because no differences in canopy-to-root ratio were achieved, it is hypothesized that xylem vessel anatomical differences may be driving the reported differences among rootstocks performance. Results demonstrate that each Vitis rootstock differs in its ecophysiological responses under water stress.

Aromatic maturity is a cornerstone of terroir expression in red wine

Harvesting grapes at adequate maturity is key to the production of high-quality red wines. Enologists and wine makers define several types of maturity, including technical maturity, phenolic maturity and aromatic maturity. Technical maturity and phenolic maturity are relatively well documented in the scientific literature, while articles on aromatic maturity are scarcer. This is surprising, because aromatic maturity is, without a doubt, the most important of the three in determining wine quality and typicity (including terroir expression). Optimal terroir expression can be obtained when the different types of maturity are reached at the same time, or within a short time frame. This is more likely to occur when the ripening takes place under mild temperatures, neither too cool, nor too hot. Aromatic expression in wine can be driven, from low to high maturity, by green, herbal, fresh fruit, ripe fruit, jammy fruit, candied fruit or cooked fruit aromas. Green and cooked fruit aromas are not desirable in red wines, while the levels of other aromatic compounds contribute to the typicity of the wine in relation to its origin. Wines produced in cool climates, or on cool soils in temperate climates, are likely to express herbal or fresh fruit aromas; while wines produced under warm climates, or on warm soils in temperate climates, may express ripe fruit, jammy fruit or candied fruit aromas. Growers can optimize terroir expression through their choice of grapevine variety. Early ripening varieties perform better in cool climates and late ripening varieties in warm climates. Additionally, maturity can be advanced or delayed by different canopy management practices or training systems.

Adaptation to soil and climate through the choice of plant material

Choosing the rootstock, the scion variety and the training system best suited to the local soil and climate are the key elements for an economically sustainable production of wine. The choice of the rootstock/scion variety best adapted to the characteristics of the soil is essential but, by changing climatic conditions, ongoing climate change disrupts the fine-tuned local equilibrium. Higher temperatures induce shifts in developmental stages, with on the one hand increasing fears of spring frost damages and, on the other hand, ripening during the warmest periods in summer. Expected higher water demand and longer and more frequent drought events are also major concerns. The genetic control of the phenotypes, by genomic information but also by the epigenetic control of gene expression, offers a lot of opportunities for adapting the plant material to the future. For complex traits, genomic selection is also a promising method for predicting phenotypes. However, ecophysiological modelling is necessary to better anticipate the phenotypes in unexplored climatic conditions Genetic approaches applied on parameters of ecophysiological models rather than raw observed data are more than ever the basis for finding, or building, the ideal varieties of the future.