GiESCO 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 GiESCO 9 GiESCO 2019 9 Sustainable yield management through fruitfulness and bunch architecture manipulation

Sustainable yield management through fruitfulness and bunch architecture manipulation

Abstract

Context and purpose of the study ‐ Vineyards are highly variable and this variation is largely driven by environmental conditions and seasonal variation. For example, warm temperatures and sunny days during bud initiation generally result in high yields in the next season while cold periods during flowering and fruitset can reduce yield. As such, this variation in yield and potentially quality is difficult to predict and therefore manage. Early and more accurate assessments of fruitfulness and bunch architecture may improve these predictions. Vineyard management can be used to manage this variation and limit negative impacts on production. This study summarises research that; (1) investigated different methods for the assessment of bud fertility and bunch architecture and (2) assessed the impact of different management techniques on fruitfulness, bunch architecture and resultant yield.

Material and methods – Vineyard management trials were carried out in South‐eastern Australia during the last 4 years and were performed on Syrah, Cabernet Sauvignon, Semillon, Riesling, Grenache, Tempranillo, Merlot and Sauvignon Blanc. Management strategies investigated include; winter pruning, shoot thinning, shoot leaf removal, and bunch thinning. Bud dissection and image analysis was used to assess bud fertility and the size of inflorescence primordia. Image analysis during the growing season and at harvest was used to assess bunch architecture and bunch volume. Bunch weight and yield were determined at harvest to assess yield performance and validate early predictions.

Results – Bud dissection using image analysis was an effective method for early prediction of fruitfulness and bunch weight (R2=0.79). Similarly, assessing bunch volume at veraison correlated with bunch weight 2 at harvest (R =0.78). Assessment methods used in these studies have the potential to be used commercially for yield prediction and management. Management strategies applied in different experimental trials varied in their impact on both bud fertility and bunch architecture (in the current and future seasons). Not surprisingly, timing, extent of application as well as variety had an impact on the final outcome. Understanding how different vineyard management approaches can manipulate components of yield can help producers to manage their vineyards to desired yield and quality outcomes. 

DOI:

Publication date: June 22, 2020

Issue: GiESCO 2019

Type: Article

Authors

Cassandra COLLINS (1), Xiaoyi Wang (1), Marco ZITO (1,2), Jingyun OUYANG (1), Annette JAMES(1), Roberta DE BEI (1), Catherine KIDMAN (1,3), Peter DRY(1)

(1) The University of Adelaide, School of Agriculture, Food and Wine, Waite Research Institute, PMB 1 Glen Osmond, 5064, South Australia. Australia
(2) Istituto di Scienze della Vita, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, Piazza dei Martiri della Libertà 33, 56127 Pisa, Italy
(3) Wynns Coonawarra Estate, PO Box 319 Coonawarra, South Australia 5263, Australia

Contact the author

Keywords

bunch architecture, canopy management, bud fertility, fruitset, yield management

Tags

GiESCO 2019 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Determination of steviol glycosides in wine by HPLC

The SCL laboratory in Bordeaux is one of the two official control laboratories for wine and wine products in france, under the authority of the ministry of finance and two of its general directorates: the DGCCRF (directorate general for competition, consumer affairs and fraud control) and the DGDDI (directorate general of customs and excise duties). In this capacity, it verifies the regulatory compliance of wines and investigates any possible falsifications or fraud. Steviol glycosides are natural sweeteners that are not authorized as additives in wine.

Gastrointestinal digestion of wine sulphites and their effects on human gut microbiota

Sulphites are by far the most widely used additive in the wine industry. In relation to health, the interaction of sulphites with the gut microbiota has not been addressed so far. Following the consumption of wine and other sulphite-containing foods, the gastrointestinal tract and the microbiome are one of the first barriers that these compounds face in the human organism. In this study, we used a previously validated gastrointestinal digestion model (SIMGI®) [1,2] to evaluate the effect of intestinal digestion of wine sulphites on the gut microbiome.

NEW INSIGHTS INTO THE FATE OF MARKERS INVOLVED IN FRESH MUSHROOM OFF-FLAVOURS DURING ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATION

The fresh mushroom off-flavour (FMOff) has been appearing in wines since the 2000s. Some C8 compounds such as 1-octen-3-one, 1-octen-3-ol, 1-hydroxyoctan-3-one, 3-octanol and others are involved in this specific off-flavour [1-3]. At the same time, glycosidic precursors of some FMOff compounds have been identified in musts contaminated by Crustomyces subabruptus [4], highlighting the role of aroma precursors in this specific taint. However, the fate of these volatile molecules and glycosidic fractions during fermentation is not well known.

Effects of regulated deficit irrigation (RDI) on grape composition in Monastrell grapevines under semiarid conditions

The influence of two pre-veraison and post-veraison regulated deficit irrigation (RDI) strategies on yield and grape quality was analyzed during a two year period for mature grapevines (cv. Monastrell) in Southeastern of Spain

Integration of the AOC and terroir concepts by future professionals of the international wine sector

A survey has been conducted on 32 students and 25 former students of 28 nationalities of an international master course training executives of the international Wine sector.