GiESCO 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 GiESCO 9 Different yield regulation strategies in semi-minimal-pruned hedge (SMPH) and impact on bunch architecture

Different yield regulation strategies in semi-minimal-pruned hedge (SMPH) and impact on bunch architecture

Abstract

Context and purpose of the study – Yields in the novel viticulture training system Semi-Minimal-Pruned Hedge (SMPH) are generally higher compared to the traditional Vertical Shoot Positioning (VSP). Excessive yields have a negative impact on the vine and wine quality, which can result in substantial losses in yield in subsequent vintages (alternate bearing) or penalties in fruit quality. Therefore yield regulation is essential. The bunch architecture in SMPH differs from VSP. Generally there is a higher amount but smaller bunches with lower single berry weights in SMPH compared to VSP. By means of different yield-regulating measures, i.e. biochemical thinning concepts, harvester thinning and Darwin-rotor (Fruit Tec Maschinenbau, Markdorf, Germany) the bunch architecture in SMPH is altered. A loose bunch architecture minimizes the risk of bunch rot and improves grape health. The aim of the study was to investigate the impact of different yield regulation strategies in SMPH on the bunch architecture.

Material and methods – Under field conditions, three different thinning methods were tested on the two fungus-resistant grape varieties Rondo, Regent, and additionally Riesling at Geisenheim, Germany (49°59´20” N; 7°55´56 ” E). Both biochemical and mechanical thinning concepts were pursued. The biochemical grape thinning treatment was applied during flowering with the plant growth regulator gibberellic acid (Gibb3; Plantan GmbH, Buchholz, Germany). The mechanical thinning was performed using a harvester at berry pea size stage of fruit development and the Darwin-rotor, which was originally developed for horticultural crops and commonly used for mechanical blossom thinning by horizontally rotating strings. In the vineyard it has been used for thinning young canes a week after budburst (E-L-scale: 9). The three thinning treatments were compared to non-treated VSP and SMPH control and bunch architecture has been investigated.

Results – Lower bunch weight, berry weight and rachis weight were detected in all SMPH treatments compared to VSP. Statistically significant lower bunch weight was detected for SMPH using harvester thinning compared to SMPH thinning with gibberellic acid, thinning with Darwin-rotor and a non-treated SMPH control. No differences in rachis weight were observed between the SMPH treatments. Our results indicate a looser bunch architecture using a harvester and gibberellic acid for yield regulation compared to a non-treated SMPH control. Whereas thinning with the Darwin-rotor resulted in an increase of berry diameter and bunch weight hence more compact bunches.

DOI:

Publication date: September 29, 2023

Issue: GiESCO 2019

Type: Poster

Authors

Jan SCHÄFER*, Matthias FRIEDEL and Manfred STOLL

Hochschule Geisenheim University, Von-Lade-Str. 1, D-65366 Geisenheim, Germany

Contact the author

Keywords

Semi-Minimal-Pruned Hedge (SMPH), yield regulation, thinning, bunch architecture, Darwin-rotor, gibberellic acid

Tags

GiESCO | GiESCO 2019 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

New use of natural silk fiber as a fining agent in wines

Undesirable compounds in wine, like OTA, biogenic amines, and pesticide residues, can negatively affect its quality and pose health risks to consumers. In addition, an excess of tannins can lead to an unpleasant rise in astringency and bitterness, which makes tannins another target of reduction.

Oligosaccharides in red wines: could their structure and composition be influenced by the grape-growing

Oligosaccharides have only recently been characterized in wine, and the information on composition and content is still limited. In wine, these molecules are mainly natural byproducts of the degradation of grape berry cell wall polysaccharides. Wine oligosaccharides present several physicochemical properties, being one relevant factor linked to the astringency perception of wines (1,2). A terroir can be defined as a grouping of homogeneous environmental units based on the typicality of the products obtained. This notion is particularly associated with wine, being the climate and the soil two of the major elements of terroir concept.

EFFECT OF FUMARIC ACID ON SPONTANEOUS FERMENTATION IN GRAPE MUST

Malolactic fermentation (MLF)¹, the decarboxylation of L-malic acid into L-lactic acid, is performed by lactic acid bacteria (LAB). MLF has a deacidifying effect that may compromise freshness or microbiological stability in wines² and can be inhibited by fumaric acid [E297] (FA). In wine, can be added at a maximum allowable dose of 0.6 g/L³. Its inhibition with FA is being studied as an alternative strategy to minimize added doses of SO₂⁴. In addition, wine yeasts are capable of metabolizing and storing small amounts of FA and during alcoholic fermentation (AF).

Using combinations of recombinant pectinases to elucidate the deconstruction of the polysaccharide‐rich grape cell wall during winemaking

The effectiveness of enzyme-mediated maceration processes in red winemaking relies on a clear picture of the target (berry cell wall structure) to achieve the optimum combination of specific enzymes to be used. However, we lack the information on both essential factors of the reaction (i.e. specific activities in commercial enzyme preparation and the cell wall structure of berry tissue). In this study, the different combinations of pure recombinant enzymes and the recently validated high throughput cell wall profiling tools were applied to extend our knowledge on the grape berry cell wall polymeric deconstruction during the winemaking following a combinatorial enzyme treatment design.

Interactions of wine polyphenols with dead or living Saccharomyces cerevisiae Yeast Cells and Cell Walls: polyphenol location by microscopy

Tannin, anthocyanins and their reaction products play a major role in the quality of red wines. They contribute to their sensory characteristics, particularly colour and astringency. Grape tannins and anthocyanins are extracted during red wine fermentation. However, their concentration and composition change over time, due to their strong chemical reactivity1. It is also well known that yeasts influence the wine phenolic content, either through the release of metabolites involved in the formation of derived pigments1, or through polyphenol adsorption2,3.