Effect of biological control agents on grapevine rhizosphere microbiome and grapevine defenses

The wine closure industry is mainly divided into three categories: screw caps, synthetic closures, and cork-based closures. Among this latter, microagglomerated cork stoppers treated with supercritical CO2 are now widely used, especially to avoid cork taint contaminations[1]. They are designed with cork granules obtained from cork offcuts of the punching process during the natural cork stoppers production. A previous study[2] showed that these stoppers released fewer polyphenols in 12 % (v/v) hydroalcoholic solution than natural cork stoppers.

In the production of sparkling wines, during the second fermentation, mannoproteins are released by yeast autolysis, which affect the quality of the wines. The effect of mannoproteins has been extensively studied, and may affect aroma and foam quality. However, there are no studies on the effect of other polysaccharides such as those from grapes. Considering the large production of waste from the wine industry, it was proposed to obtain polysaccharide-rich extracts from some of these by-products[1].

Top quality sparkling wines (SW) are mostly produced using the traditional method that implies a second fermentation into the bottle[1]. That is the case of sparkling wines of reputed AOC such as Champagne, Cava or Franciacorta. However, it seems that the first SW was elaborated using the ancestral method in which only one fermentation takes place[2]. That is the case of the classical SW from the AOC Blanquette de Limoux[3]. In both cases, SW age in the bottle during some time in contact with lees favoring yeast’s autolysis[4]. There is a lot of information about traditional method but only few exists about ancestral method. The aim of this work was to compare SW made by the ancestral method with SW made by the traditional method.

The use of cover crops under the vines might be an alternative to the use of herbicides or tillage, improving grapevine quality and soil characteristics. The aim of this research was to study the implications of different management strategies of the soil under the vines (herbicide, cultivation or cover crops) on grapevine growth, water and nutritional status, gas exchange parameters and belowground microbial communities.
The experimental design consisted in 4 treatments applied on 35L-potted Tempranillo vegetative grapevines with 10 replicates each grown in an open-top greenhouse in 2022 and 2023. Treatments included two cover crop species (Trifolium fragiferum and Bromus repens), herbicide (glyphosate al 36%) and an untreated control.

Global warming and increased frequency and/or severity of drought events are among the most threatening consequences of climate change for agricultural crops. In response to drought, grapevine (as many other plants) exhibits osmotic adjustment through active accumulation of osmolytes which in turn shift the leaf turgor loss point (TLP) to more negative values, allowing to maintain stomata opened at lower water potentials1. We investigated the capacity of Pinot noir leaves to modulate their osmotic potential as a function of: (i) time (seasonal osmoregulation), (ii) growing temperatures, and (iii) drought events, to enhance comprehension of the resilience of grapevines in drought conditions. We performed trails under semi-controlled field conditions, and in two different greenhouse chambers (20/15 °C vs 25/20 °C day/night). For two consecutive vegetative seasons, grafted potted grapevines (Pinot noir/SO4) were subjected to two different water regimes for at least 30 days: well-watered (WW) and water deficit (WD).