GiESCO 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 GiESCO 9 GiESCO 2019 9 Climate change 9 Impacts on water availability for vitiviniculture worldwide using different potential evapotranspiration methods

Impacts on water availability for vitiviniculture worldwide using different potential evapotranspiration methods

Abstract

Context and purpose of the study ‐ Beyond the sole warming globally perceived and monitored, climate change impacts water availability. Increasing heatwaves frequency observed during the last decades and projected for the 21st century certainly result (or will result)in more water deficit stress for grapevine. Change in water availability throughout the season depends on the balance between precipitation and evapotranspiration. The latter is seldom assessed through potential evapotranspiration (ET0) calculated with empirical formulae relying on air temperature only. This study compares the changes in water availability estimates for viticulture using such formulae in comparison to the reference Penman‐ Monteith approach.

Material and methods – Monthly interpolated minimum and maximum temperature, precipitation and Penman‐Monteith (PM) ET0 data for land surfaces worldwide were collected from the CRU TS4.01 gridded dataset, from 1971 to 2017. Other ET0estimates were produced using the Thornthwaite (T) and the Hargreaves (H) temperature‐based as well as the Modified Hargreaves (M) temperature‐and‐ rainfall‐based methods. PM, T, H, M ET0 data were used to calculate the dryness index (DI), a monthly water balance‐based index for viticulture. Changes between the periods 1971‐2000 (HIST) and 2001‐ 2017 (PRES) in potential evapotranspiration and in DI were compared for each of the 4 ET0calculation methods. The changes were analyzed in wine producing regions using the vineyard geodatabase v1.2.3, a shapefile referencing 691 wine producing regions worldwide.

Results – All 4 methods compute an average increase (from HIST to PRES) in ET0 of about 20 mm during the grapevine growing season, i.e. April to September (October to March) for the northern (southern) hemisphere. The change (PRES ‐ HIST) differ substantially in space, according to the method used. For instance, a decrease in ET0 is shown in southwestern and central North America when using PM method, while T method indicates a weak to moderate raise in ET0 in these regions. Changes in dryness index th st from the late 20 to the early 21 century are large and highly variable in space: from ‐65 mm to +62 mm (0.05 and 0.95 percentiles), according to the location and to the ET0 calculation method. DI also strongly varies in space, but results are less sensitive to ET0 calculation method. PM shows a decrease in DI (PRES ‐ HIST) down to ‐75 mm in most regions but Australia, central Europe and Italy. While PM, H and M methods indicate a clear decrease of DI in France, Portugal and Spain, T method suggests an increase in DI in the northern part of France and in most of Spain. It is concluded that (1) ET0 has risen and contributed to DI decrease in many wine regions worldwide and (2) using T empirical method to derive ET0 from temperature can lead to different conclusions concerning changes in water availability for viticulture

DOI:

Publication date: June 19, 2020

Issue: GiESCO 2019

Type: Article

Authors

Benjamin BOIS

CRC,UMR Biogeosciences (6282 CNRS/uB), Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, 6 Boulevard Gabriel, 21000 Dijon, France

Contact the author

Keywords

potential evapotranspiration, viticulture, climate change, temperature‐based methods, dryness

Tags

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"...

Delaying irrigation initiation linearly reduces yield with little impact on maturity in Pinot noir

When to initiate irrigation is a critical annual management decision that has cascading effects on grapevine productivity and wine quality in the context of climate change. A multi-site trial was begun in 2021 to optimize irrigation initiation timing using midday stem water potential (ψstem) thresholds characterized as departures from non-stressed baseline ψstemvalues (Δψstem). Plant material, vine and row spacing, and trellising systems were concomitant among sites, while vine age, soil type, and pruning systems varied. Five target Δψstem thresholds were arranged in an RCBD and replicated eight times at each site: 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, and 1.0 MPa (T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively). When thresholds were reached, plots were irrigated weekly at 70% ETc. Yield components and berry composition were quantified at harvest. To better generalize inferences across sites, data were analyzed by ANOVA using a mixed model including site as a random factor. Across sites, irrigation was initiated at Δψstem = 0.24, 0.50, 0.65, 0.93, and 0.98 MPa for T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively. Consistent significant negative linear trends were found for several key yield and berry composition variables. Yield decreased by 12.9, 15.9, 19.5, and 27.4% for T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively, compared to T1 (p < 0.0001) across sites that were driven by similarly linear reductions in berry weight (p < 0.0001). Comparatively, berry composition varied little among treatments. Juice total soluble solids decreased linearly from T1 to T5 – though only ranged 0.9 Brix (p = 0.012). Because producers are paid by the ton, and contracts simply stipulate a target maturity level, first-year results suggest that there is no economic incentive to induce moderate water deficits before irrigation initiation, regardless of vineyard site. Subsequent years will further elucidate the carryover effects of delaying irrigation initiation on productivity over the long term.

De novo Vitis champinii whole genome assembly allows rootstock-specific identification of potential candidate genes for drought and salt tolerance

Vitis champinii cultivars Ramsey and Dog-ridge are main choices for rootstocks to adapt viticulture in semi-arid and arid regions thanks to their distinctive tolerance to drought and salinity. However, genetic studies on non-vinifera rootstocks have heavily relied on the grapevine (Vitis vinifera) reference genome, which difficulted the assessment of the genetic variation between rootstock species and grapevines. In the present study, this limitation is addressed by introducing a novo phased genome assembly and annotation of Vitis champinii. This new Vitis champinii genome was employed as reference for mapping RNA-seq reads from the same species under drought and salt stresses, and for comparison the same reads were also mapped to the Vitis vinifera PN40024.V4 reference genome. A significant increase in alignment rate was gained when mapping Vitis champinii RNA-seq reads to its own genome, compared to the Vitis vinifera PN40024.V4 reference genome, thus revealing the expression levels of genes specific to Vitis champinii. Moreover, differences in coding sequences were observed in ortholog genes between Vitis champinii and Vitis vinifera, which therefore challenges previous differential expression analyses performed between contrasting Vitis genotypes on the same gene from the Vitis vinifera genome. Genes with possible implications in drought and salt tolerance have been identified across the genome of Vitis champinii, and the same genomic data can potentially guide the discovery of candidate genes specific from Vitis champinii for other traits of interest, therefore becoming a valuable resource for rootstock breeding designs, specially towards increased drought and salinity due to climate change.

Analysis of Cabernet Sauvignon and Aglianico winegrape (V. vinifera L.) responses to different pedo-climatic environments in southern Italy

Water deficit is one of the most important effects of climate change able to affect agricultural sectors. In general, it determines a reduction in biomass production, and for some plants, as in the case of grapevine, it can endorse fruit quality. The monitoring and management of plant water stress in the vineyard

An analytical framework to site-specifically study climate influence on grapevine involving the functional and Bayesian exploration of farm data time series synchronized using an eGDD thermal index

Climate influence on grapevine physiology is prevalent and this influence is only expected to increase with climate change. Although governed by a general determinism, climate influence on grapevine physiology may present variations according to the terroir. In addition, these site-specific differences are likely to be enhanced when climate influence is studied using farm data. Indeed, farm data integrate additional sources of variation such as a varying representativity of the conditions actually experienced in the field. Nevertheless, there is a real challenge in valuing farm data to enable grape growers to understand their own terroir and consequently adapt their practices to the local conditions. In such a context, this article proposes a framework to site-specifically study climate influence on grapevine physiology using farm data. It focuses on improving the analysis of time series of weather data. The analytical framework includes the synchronization of time series using site-specific thermal indices computed with an original method called Extended Growing Degree Days (eGDD). Synchronized time series are then analyzed using a Bayesian functional Linear regression with Sparse Steps functions (BLiSS) in order to detect site-specific periods of strong climate influence on yield development. The article focuses on temperature and rain influence on grape yield development as a case study. It uses data from three commercial vineyards respectively situated in the Bordeaux region (France), California (USA) and Israel. For all vineyards, common periods of climate influence on yield development were found. They corresponded to already known periods, for example around veraison of the year before harvest. However, the periods differed in their precise timing (e.g. before, around or after veraison), duration and correlation direction with yield. Other periods were found for only one or two vineyards and/or were not referred to in literature, for example during the winter before harvest.