Effect of kaolin foliar application on grape cultivar Assyrtiko (Vitis vinifera L.) under vineyard conditions

Many fleshy fruit, including the grape berry, exhibit a double‐sigmoid growth (DSG) pattern. Identification of the curious DSG habit has long been attributed to Connors’ (1919) work with peaches

Scientific information on grapevine response to predicted levels of climate parameters is scarce and not sufficient to properly position the Wine Industry for the future. It is critical that the combined effects of increased temperature and CO2 on grapevines should be examined, without omitting the important link to soil water conditions. The purpose of this study is to quantify the effects of envisioned changes in climatic parameters on the functioning and growth of young grafted grapevines under controlled conditions, simulating expected future climate changes. Scientific knowledge of precisely how the newly-planted grapevine will react morphologically, anatomically and physiologically (at leaf, root and whole plant level) to the expected changes in important climatic parameters will enable producers to make better-informed decisions regarding terroir, cultivar and rootstock choices as well as the adaptation of current cultivation practices.

Yield monitoring can provide the winegrowers with information for precise production inputs during the season, thereby, ensuring the best possible harvest. Yield estimation is currently achieved through an intensive process that is destructive and time-consuming. However, remote sensing provides a group of proximal technologies and techniques for a non-destructive and less time-consuming method for yield monitoring.The objective of this study was to analyse three different approaches, for measuring grapevine yield close to harvest.

According to the algorithm “A step back towards the future 4.1C”, (Cargnello,1986a, 1987d, 1988a.b, 1991, 1993, 1994b, 1995, 1999a.e, 2000b, 2007c, 2008a, 2009d, 2013; and according to the principles of “Charter of Sustainable Viticulture BIO‐MetaEthics 4.1CC” of GiESCO (Carbonneau and Cargnello, 2003 2015, 2017), the historical, applied philosophy and productive analysis connected to the innovations and to the “Certification of the Universal Holistic MetaEthical Sustainability 4.1C” “indexed new global production model 4.1C” has always been fundamental, especially for the “Prosecco Territory” and for the “Prosecco Wine” to design and implement their synergistic future “Sustainable and Certificable 4.1CC” according to the principles of the “Charter of Sustainable Viticulture BIO‐MetaEthics 4.1CC” by the GiESCO (Carbonneau and Cargnello, lc, Cargnello et Carbonneau, 2007, 2018), and of the Conegliano Campus 5.1C. (Cargnello, lc). Nowadays, people think that Prosecco is a wine from the Veneto Region (from Conegliano and Valdobbiadene in particular), while it comes from Friuli‐Venezia Giulia Region (in North Eastern Italy, such as Veneto) more precisely from “Prosecco” in the Municipality of Trieste (TS‐Italy), as documented in 1382 and in 1548, when Pier Andrea Mattioli, described “that ancient wine, which is born in Prosecco”, as a wine with the following characteristics “thin, clear, shiny, golden, odorous and pleasant to taste». In 1888 at the “Wine Fair” of Trieste there were the “Sparkling wine Prosecco” by Giovanni Balanc, by Giuseppe Klampferer and that one by Marino Luxa. In the 19th century, many expressed their appreciation for the “Prosecco” of Trieste. In order to implement intra and extra territorial and cross‐border relations, as well as, the “Certification of: Products, Companies, Territory, Bio‐MétaÉthique District 4.1C” of Prosecco, a series of activities and researches were conducted in 8 companies: 5 in the “Territory of Prosecco” (TS) in which the principles of “Charter of Sustainable Viticulture BIO‐MetaEthics 4.1CC” of GiESCO (Carbonneau and Cargnello, lc) have been successfully applied. In particolar: 1‐ new and original “Sustainable 4.1C global production model” developed also to prevent the problems caused by wild boar, roe deer, and birds while safeguarding their “psychophysical wellness”, as well as the “psychophysical wellness 4.1C” of the macro and micro flora and fauna, of the biodiversity, of the landscape, etc. (Cargnello, lc), 1.2‐ chemical weed control and “Non MetaEthics 4.1C” processing with the total grass growing of the ground without or with mowing, better if it is manual to protect grass, air and soil, 2‐ recovery of “Historic”: land, vineyards, vines, biodiversity, landscapes, productions, products, … , 3‐ production of the famous “Prosekar, also rosé, of Prosecco” and “Prosecco di Prosecco”, according to “A step back towards the future 4.1C” 4‐ to offer a deserved psychophysical well‐being to the “Prosecco Territory” and entrepreneurs. 

It is fundamental for wineries to know the potential yield of their vineyards as soon as possible for future planning of winery logistics. As such, non-invasive image-based methods are being investigated for early yield prediction. Many of these techniques have limitations that make it difficult to implement for practical use commercially. The aim of this study was to assess whether yield can be estimated using images taken in-field with a smartphone at different phenological stages.