GiESCO 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 GiESCO 9 GiESCO 2019 9 The myth of the universal rootstock revisited: assessment of the importance of interactions between scion and rootstock

The myth of the universal rootstock revisited: assessment of the importance of interactions between scion and rootstock

Abstract

Aim‐ Rootstocks provide protection against soil borne pests and are a powerful tool to manipulate growth, fruit composition and wine quality attributes. The present study aimed to assess the consistency of rootstock effects on growth and fruit composition of scion varieties and identify scion x rootstock interactions.

Methods and Results‐ Vine performance and fruit composition of hot climate, drip irrigated, spur pruned Chardonnay, Cabernet Sauvignon and Shiraz grafted on 7 rootstocks was assessed over 5 seasons, 2013‐2017. Rootstocks included Ramsey, 1103 Paulsen and 140 Ruggeri and 4 promising selections from the CSIRO rootstock development program. Vines were trained as quadrilateral cordons on a 1.8 m high 2‐wire vertical trellis with a 3.0 m x 1.8 m, row x vine spacing and irrigated with 5.5 – 6.0 Ml/ha of water each season. The study was conducted with mature vines established in 2006, as a randomized block design with 5 replicates.

There were significant effects of both variety and rootstock on yield, bunch number, bunch weight, berry weight (scion only), berries per bunch, pruning weight and the Ravaz Index (yield/pruning weight). Despite identical management practices, there were large differences between scion varieties in key growth characteristics across rootstocks. Chardonnay produced a high yield (mean 25.2 kg/vine) with low pruning weight (2.3 kg/vine) and a high mean Ravaz Index value of 12.1. Shiraz had the highest yield (27.4 kg/vine) with high pruning weight (5.1 kg/vine) and a Ravaz index of 6.3. Cabernet Sauvignon had the lowest yield (15.9 kg/vine) and highest pruning weight (6.6 kg/vine) and a very low Ravaz Index value of 3.0. Effects of rootstock on growth characteristics were smaller than the effects of variety, with mean yields ranging from 19.5 to 25.9 kg/vine, pruning weights ranging from 3.24 to 6.13 kg/vine and mean Ravaz Index values ranging from 5.54 to 8.63. Each variety was harvested when mean total soluble solids reached 25.0 oBrix. There were significant effects of variety and rootstock on fruit composition including pH, titratable acidity (scion only), malate, tartrate (scion only), yeast assimilable nitrogen (YAN) and for the red varieties, total anthocyanins (scion only) and phenolic substances (scion only). 

Significant interactions between scion variety and rootstocks were found for yield, bunch number, berry weight, pruning weight and Ravaz index. The effect of rootstock on bunch weight and berries per bunch was consistent across scions. Significant scion x rootstock interactions were also found for pH and YAN. For each variety, significant effects of rootstock on fruit composition were linked to growth characteristics. However, these relationships, based on correlation analyses, varied for each scion.

Conclusions

The study has shown that growth characteristics and fruit composition of the major varieties was not consistent across 7 rootstock genotypes, as significant scion x rootstock interactions were determined. Hence, different rootstocks may be required for each variety to optimise scion performance and fruit composition. The study has also shown that the new CSIRO rootstock selections, covering a range of vigour classifications, may be useful alternatives to those currently in use by industry.

Significance and impact of the study‐ The study has shown that the performance of scion varieties and to a lesser degree fruit composition, is dependent on rootstock choice. The inherent vigour of the scion variety must be considered in rootstock selection. Furthermore, individual scion/rootstock combinations may require specific irrigation, pruning or canopy management to achieve vine balance and optimise fruit and wine composition.

DOI:

Publication date: June 19, 2020

Issue: GiESCO 2019

Type: Article

Authors

Peter CLINGELEFFER (1), Norma MORALES (1), Hilary DAVIS (2) and Harley SMITH (1)

(1) CSIRO Agriculture and Food, Locked Bag 2, Glen Osmond SA, 5064, Australia.
(2) CSIRO Agriculture and Food, PO Box 447, Irymple Vic, 3498, Australia.

Contact the author

Keywords

Grapevine, Scion, Variety, Rootstock, Growth, Composition, Interactions

Tags

GiESCO 2019 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Grapevine yield-gap: identification of environmental limitations by soil and climate zoning in Languedoc-Roussillon region (south of France)

Grapevine yield has been historically overlooked, assuming a strong trade-off between grape yield and wine quality. At present, menaced by climate change, many vineyards in Southern France are far from the quality label threshold, becoming grapevine yield-gaps a major subject of concern. Although yield-gaps are well studied in arable crops, we know very little about grapevine yield-gaps. In the present study, we analysed the environmental component of grapevine yield-gaps linked to climate and soil resources in the Languedoc Roussillon. We used SAFRAN data and IGP Pays d’Oc wine yields from 2010 to 2018. We selected climate and soil indicators proving to have a significant effect on average wine yield-gaps at the municipality scale. The most significant factors of grapevine yield were the Soil Available Water Capacity; followed by the Huglin Index and the Climatic Dryness Index. The Days of Frost; the Soil pH; and the Very Hot Days were also significant. Then, we clustered geographical zones presenting similar indicators, facilitating the identification of resources yield-gaps. We discussed the number of zones with the experts of IGP Pays d’Oc label, obtaining 7 zones with similar limitations for grapevine yield. Finally, we analysed the main resources causing yield-gaps and the grapevine varieties planted on each zone. Mapping grapevine resource yield-gaps are the first stage for understanding grapevine yield-gaps at the regional scale.

Modulation of berry composition by different vineyard management practices

High concentration of sugars in grapes and alcohol in wines is one of the consequences of climate change on viticulture production in several wine-growing regions. In order to investigate the possibilities of adaptation of vineyard management practices aimed to reduce the accumulation of sugar during the maturation phase without reducing the accumulation of anthocyanins in grapes, a study with severe shoot trimming, shoot thinning, cluster thinning and date of harvest was conducted on Merlot variety in Istria region (Croatia), under the Mediterranean climate. Four factors which may affect grape maturation and its composition at harvest were investigated in a two-years experiment; severe shoot trimming applied at veraison when >80% of berries changed colour (in comparison to untreated control), shoot thinning (0 and 30%), cluster thinning (0 and 30%), and the date of harvest (early and standard harvest dates). Shoot thinning had no significant impact on berry composition, despite the obtained reduction in yield per vine. Lower Brix in grapes were obtained with earlier harvest date and if no cluster thinning was applied, although at the same time a reduction in the concentration of anthocyanins in berries was observed in these treatments. On the other hand, if severe shoot trimming was applied when >80% of berries changed colour, a reduction of Brix was obtained without a negative impact on berry anthocyanins concentration. We conclude that in cases when undesirably high sugar concentrations at harvest are expected, severe shoot trimming at 80% veraison may effectively be used in order to obtain moderate sugar concentration in berries together with the adequate phenolic composition.

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.

Climate, Viticulture, and Wine … my how things have changed!

The planet is warmer than at any time in our recorded past and increasing greenhouse emissions and persistence in the climate system means that continued warming is highly likely. Climate change has already altered the basic framework of growing grapes for wine production worldwide and will likely continue to do so for years to come. The wine sector can continue to play an important role in leading the agricultural sector in addressing climate change. From developing on…

Terroir analysis and its complexity

Terroir is not only a geographical site, but it is a more complex concept able to express the “collective knowledge of the interactions” between the environment and the vines mediated through human action and “providing distinctive characteristics” to the final product (OIV 2010). It is often treated and accepted as a “black box”, in which the relationships between wine and its origin have not been clearly explained. Nevertheless, it is well known that terroir expression is strongly dependent on the physical environment, and in particular on the interaction between soil-plant and atmosphere system, which influences the grapevine responses, grapes composition and wine quality. The Terroir studying and mapping are based on viticultural zoning procedures, obtained with different levels of know-how, at different spatial and temporal scales, empiricism and complexity in the description of involved bio-physical processes, and integrating or not the multidisciplinary nature of the terroir. The scientific understanding of the mechanisms ruling both the vineyard variability and the quality of grapes is one of the most important scientific focuses of terroir research. In fact, this know-how is crucial for supporting the analysis of climate change impacts on terroir resilience, identifying new promised lands for viticulture, and driving vineyard management toward a target oenological goal. In this contribution, an overview of the last findings in terroir studies and approaches will be shown with special attention to the terroir resilience analysis to climate change, facing the use and abuse of terroir concept and new technology able to support it and identifying the terroir zones.