GiESCO 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 GiESCO 9 GiESCO 2019 9 Climate change 9 The temperature‐based grapevine sugar ripeness (GSR) model for adapting a wide range of Vitis vinifera L. cultivars in a changing climate

The temperature‐based grapevine sugar ripeness (GSR) model for adapting a wide range of Vitis vinifera L. cultivars in a changing climate

Abstract

Context and purpose of the study ‐ Temperatures are increasing due to climate change leading to advances in grapevine phenology and sugar accumulation in grape berries. This study aims (i) to develop a temperature‐based model that can predict a range of target sugar concentrations for various cultivars of Vitis vinifera L and (ii) develop extensive classifications for the sugar ripeness of cultivars using the model.

Material and methods ‐ Time series of sugar concentrations were collected from research institutes, extension services and private companies from various European countries. The Day of the Year (DOY) to reach the specified target sugar concentration (170, 180, 190, 200, 210, and 220 g/l) was determined and a range of models tested using these DOYs to develop the best fit model for Vitis vinifera L.

Results ‐ The best fit linear model– Growing Degree Days (parameters: base temperature (t0) = 0°C, start date (Tb) = 91 or 1 April), Northern Hemisphere) – represented the model that required the least parameters and therefore the simplest in application. The model was used to characterise and classify a wide range of cultivars for DOY to reach target sugar concentrations.
The model is referred to as the Grapevine Sugar Ripeness Model (GSR). It is viticulturist‐ friendly as it’s simple in form (linear) and its growing degree day units are easily calculated by adding average temperatures (base temperature was optimized at 0°C) derived from weather stations from the 91th day of the year (Northern Hemisphere). The classifications based on this model can inform cultivar choice as an alternative adaptation strategy to climate change, where changing cultivars may prevent the harvesting of grapes at high sugar concentrations which leads to higher alcohol wines.

DOI:

Publication date: June 19, 2020

Issue: GiESCO 2019

Type: Article

Authors

Amber K. PARKER (1), Inaki GARCÍA DE CORTÁZAR‐ATAURI (2), Laurence GÉNY (3), Jean‐Laurent SPRING (4), Agnès DESTRAC (5), Hans SCHULTZ (6), Manfred STOLL (6), Daniel MOLITOR (7), Thierry LACOMBE (8), Antonio GRACA (9), Christine MONAMY (10), Paolo STORCHI (11), Mike TROUGHT (12), Rainer HOFMANN (1), Cornelis VAN LEEUWEN (5)

(1) Department of Wine, Food and Molecular Biosciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, PO Box 85084, Lincoln University, Lincoln 7647, Christchurch, New Zealand
(2) Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), US 1116 AGROCLIM, F-84914 Avignon, France
(3) Institut des Sciences de la Vigne et du Vin, Université de Bordeaux, Unité de Recherche Oenologie EA 4577 – USC 1366 INRA, 210 chemin de Leysotte – CS 50008, 33882 Villenave d’Ornon cedex
(4) Agroscope, Av. de Rochettaz 21,1009 Pully, Switzerland
(5) EGFV, Bordeaux Sciences Agro, INRA, Univ. Bordeaux, ISVV, 33883 Villenave d’Ornon, France
(6) Hochschule, Giesenheim University, Von-Lade-Straße 1, D-65366 Geisenheim
(7) Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology (LIST), Environmental Research and Innovation (ERIN) Department 41, rue du Brill, L-4422 Belva, Luxembourg
(8) Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), AGAP, Univ Montpellier, CIRAD, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro, 2 place Viala, F-34060 Montpellier, France
(9) Sogrape Vinhos S.A., R. 5 de Outubro 558, 4430-809 Avintes, Portugal
(10) Bureau Interprofessionnel des Vins de Bourgogne – BIVB, 12 boulevard Bretonnière, 21200, Beaune, France
(11) CREA – Centro di ricerca Viticoltura ed Enologia, Viale Santa Margherita 80 52100 – Arezzo, Italy 12The New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited, Blenheim 7240, New Zealand, Department of Wine, Food and Molecular Biosciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, PO Box 85084, Lincoln University, Lincoln 7647, Christchurch, New Zealand

Contact the author

Keywords

modelling, temperature, sugar, cultivars, climate change

Tags

GiESCO 2019 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

The rootstock, the neglected player in the scion transpiration even during the night

Water is the main limiting factor for yield in viticulture. Improving drought adaptation in viticulture will be an increasingly important issue under climate change. Genetic variability of water deficit responses in grapevine partly results from the rootstocks, making them an attractive and relevant mean to achieve adaptation without changing the scion genotype. The objective of this work was to characterize the rootstock effect on the diurnal regulation of scion transpiration. A large panel of 55 commercial genotypes were grafted onto Cabernet Sauvignon. Three biological repetitions per genotype were analyzed. Potted plants were phenotyped on a greenhouse balance platform capable of assessing real-time water use and maintaining a targeted water deficit intensity. After a 10 days well-watered baseline period, an increasing water deficit was applied for 10 days, followed by a stable water deficit stress for 7 days. Pruning weight, root and aerial dry weight and transpiration were recorded and the experiment was repeated during two years. Transpiration efficiency (ratio between aerial biomass and transpiration) was calculated and δ13C was measured in leaves for the baseline and stable water deficit periods. A large genetic variability was observed within the panel. The rootstock had a significant impact on nocturnal transpiration which was also strongly and positively correlated with maximum daytime transpiration. The correlations with growth and water use efficiency related traits will be discussed. Transpiration data were also related with VPD and soil water content demonstrating the influence of environmental conditions on transpiration. These results highlighted the role of the rootstock in modulating water deficit responses and give insights for rootstock breeding programs aimed at identifying drought tolerant rootstocks. It was also helpful to better define the mechanisms on which the drought tolerance in grapevine rootstocks is based on.

Climate change projections to support the transition to climate-smart viticulture

The Earth’s system is undergoing major changes through a wide range of spatial and temporal scales as a response to growing anthropogenic radiative forcing, which is pushing the whole system far beyond its natural variability. Sources of greenhouse gases largely exceed their sinks, thus leading to a strengthened greenhouse effect. More energy is thereby being supplied to the system, with inevitable shifts in climatic patterns and weather regimes. Over the last decades, these modifications have been manifested in the full statistical distributions of the atmospheric variables, with dramatic changes in the frequency and intensity of extremes. Natural hazards, such as severe droughts, floods, forest fires, or heatwaves, are being triggered by extreme atmospheric events worldwide, thus threatening human activities. Viticultculture is not only exposed to changing climates but is also highly vulnerable, as grapevine phenology and physiological development are strongly controlled by atmospheric conditions. Therefore, the assessment of climate change projections for a given region is critical for climate change adaptation and risk reduction in viticulture. By adopting timely and suitable measures, the future sustainability and resiliency of the sector can be fostered. Climate-grapevine chain modelling is an essential tool for better planning and management. However, the accuracy of the resulting projections is limited by many uncertainties that must be duly taken into account when transferring knowledge to stakeholders and decision-makers. Climate-smart viticulture will comprise ensembles of locally tuned strategies, envisioning both adaptation and mitigation, assisted by emerging technologies and decision-support systems.

Extreme canopy management for vineyard adaptation to climate change: is it a good idea?

Climate change constitutes an enormous challenge for humankind and for all human activities, viticulture not being an exception. Long-term strategic changes are probably needed the most, but growers also need to deal with short-term changes: summers that are getting progressively warmer, earlier harvest dates and higher pH in musts and wines. In the last 10-15 years, a relevant corpus of research is being developed worldwide in order to evaluate to which extent extreme canopy management operations, aimed at reducing leaf area and, thus, limiting the source to sink ratio, could be useful to delay ripening. Although extreme canopy management can result in relevant delays in harvest dates, longer term studies, as well as detailed analysis of their implications on carbohydrate reserves, bud fertility and future yield are desirable before these practices can be recommended.

Deconstructing the soil component of terroir: from controversy to consensus

Wine terroir describes the collectively recognized relation between a geographical area and the distinctive organoleptic characteristics of the wines produced in it. The overriding objective in terroir studies is therefore to provide scientific proof relating the properties of terroir components to wine quality and typicity. In scientific circles, the role of climate (macro-, meso- and micro-) on grape and wine characteristics is well documented and accepted as the most critical. Moreover, there has been increasing interest in recent years about new elements with possible importance in shaping wine terroir like berry/leaf/soil microbiology or even aromatic plants in proximity to the vineyard conferring flavors to the grapes. However, the actual effect of these factors is also dependent on complex interactions with plant material (variety/clone, rootstock, vine age) and with human factors.
The contribution of soil, although a fundamental component of terroir and extremely popular among wine enthusiasts, remains a much-debated issue among researchers. The role of geology is probably the one mostly associated by consumers with the notion of terroir with different parent rocks considered to give birth to different wine styles. However, the relationship between wine properties and the underlying parent material raises a lot of controversy especially regarding the actual existence of rock-derived flavors in the wine (e.g. minerality). As far as the actual soil properties are concerned, the effect of soil physical properties is generally regarded as the most significant (e.g sandy soils being associated with lighter wines while those on clay with colored and tannic ones) mostly through control of water availability which ultimately modifies berry ripening conditions either directly by triggering biosynthetic pathways, or indirectly by altering vigor and yield components. The role of soil chemistry seems to be weakly associated to wine sensory characteristic, although N, K, S and Ca, but also soil pH, are often considered important in the overall soil effect.
Recently, in the light of evidence provided by precision agriculture studies reporting a high variability of vineyard soils, the spatial scale should also be taken into consideration in the evaluation of the soil effects on wines. While it is accepted that soil effects become more significant than climate on a local level, it is not clear whether these micro-variations of vineyard soils are determining in the terroir effect. Moreover, as terroir is not a set of only natural factors, the magnitude of the contribution of human-related factors (irrigation, fertilization, soil management) to the soil effect still remains ambiguous. Lastly, a major shortcoming of the majority of works about soil effects on wine characteristics is the absence of connection with actual vine physiological processes since all soil effects on grape and wine chemistry and sensorial properties are ultimately mediated through vine responses.
This article attempts to breakdown the main soil attributes involved in the terroir effect to suggest an improved understanding about soil’s true contribution to wine sensory characteristics. It is proposed that soil parameters per se are not as significant determining factors in the terroir effect but rather their mutual interactions as well as with other natural and human factors included in the terroir concept. Consequently, similarly to bioclimatic indices, composite soil indices (i.e. soil depth, water holding capacity, fertility, temperature etc), incorporating multiple soil parameters, might provide a more accurate and quantifiable means to assess the relative weight of the soil component in the terroir effect.

The impact of leaf canopy management on eco-physiology, wood chemical properties and microbial communities in root, trunk and cordon of Riesling grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.)

In the last decades, climate change required already adaptation of vineyard management. Increase in temperature and unexpected weather events cause changes in all phenological stages requiring new management tools. For example, defoliation can be a useful tool to reduce the sugar content in the berries creating differences in the wine profiles. In a ten-year field experiment using Riesling (Vitis vinifera L, planted 1986, Geisenheim, Germany), various mechanical defoliation strategies and different intensities were trialed until 2016 before the vineyard was uprooted. Wood was sampled from the plant compartments root, trunk, cordon and shoot for analyses of physicochemical properties (e.g. lignin and element content, pH, diameter), nonstructural carbohydrates and the microbial communities. The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of reduced canopy leaf area on the sink-source allocation into different compartments and potential changes of the fungal and prokaryotic wood-inhabiting community using a metabarcoding approach. Severe summer pruning (SSP) of the canopy and mechanical defoliation (MDC) above the bunch zone decreased the leaf area by 50% compared to control (C). SSP reduced the photosynthetic capacity, which resulted in an altered source-sink allocation and carbohydrate storage. With lower leaf area, less carbohydrates are allocated. This for example resulted in a decreased trunk diameter. Further, it affected the composition of the grapevine wood microbiota. SSP and MDC management changed significantly the prokaryotic community composition in wood of the root samples, but had no effect in other compartments. In general, this study found strong compartment and less management effects of the microbial community composition and associated physicochemical properties. The highest microbial diversities were identified in the wood of the trunk, and several species were recorded the first time in grapevine.