GiESCO 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 GiESCO 9 GiESCO 2019 9 Treated wastewater irrigation: how to manage water salinity without reducing its nutrients content?

Treated wastewater irrigation: how to manage water salinity without reducing its nutrients content?

Abstract

Context and purpose of the study ‐ Nutrients in municipal treated wastewater (N, P, K, mainly) are a particular advantage in this source over conventional irrigation water sources, so supplemental fertilizers would sometimes not be necessary. However, additional environmental and health requirements are taken into account for this source of irrigation water. Most treated wastewaters are not very saline. Salinity levels usually ranging between 500 and 2000 mg/L (ECw = 0.7 to 3.0 dS/m). However, there may be instances where the salinity concentration exceeds the 2000 mg/L. Anyway, appropriate water management practices should be followed to prevent soil salinization, regardless of the salt content of the treated wastewater and plant sensibility. The ability of soil to self–cleanse in each rain event decreases the salinity supplied with treated wastewater, but this will depend on the balance between supply‐water and rain‐water. The aims of this study were to assess the effect of fertigation with municipal treated wastewater, on the soil‐plant‐fruit‐ wine system and the need, in some cases, to control salinity thresholds (Na + and Cl‐ ions) of irrigation water by membrane technology.

Material and methods ‐ Two experimental vineyards of Viognier B and Carignan N. were monitored for growing seasons 2017 and 2018. Two different water sources were compared: drinking water (DW) and municipal treated wastewater (TWW) at two irrigation levels by drip irrigation system. Vegetative growth was monitored once a week. Berry fresh weight and juice composition (primary metabolites) were determined at harvest. Soil sampling was carried out at postharvest for analytical determinations. Given that, in the event of low rainfall, excess sodium and chloride resulting from irrigation with TWW are not leached from the soil. This paper looks at the process membrane technology, most adapted by which salt levels in irrigation water can be reduced.

Results ‐ TWW played a substantial role in the shoot growth and the variation of irrigation level caused significant difference compared to the irrigation with DW. Moreover, yeast assimilable nitrogen was higher in grapes from vines irrigated with TWW. Wine sensorial quality was mainly influenced by irrigation levels. Results showed a higher Na 2O content in soils that have received TWW. Success in using TWW for crop production will largely depend on adopting appropriate strategies aimed at optimizing crop yields and quality, maintaining soil productivity and safeguarding the environment. Electrodialysis, from homogeneous membranes technologies does not filter the water, but extracts a quantity controllable in line of dissolved salts (Na+ and Cl‐ in particular selectable) under the effect of an electric field, in order to adapt to the soil or crop concerned. In the context of vineyard sustainability and an eco‐responsible approach, electrodialysis can be seen as an agricultural water treatment technology reliable and fit for purpose. 

DOI:

Publication date: June 22, 2020

Issue: GiESCO 2019

Type: Article

Authors

Flor ETCHEBARNE (1), Hernán OJEDA (2), Florence LUTIN (3), Bernard GILLERY (3), Jean‐Louis ESCUDIER (2)

(1) Independent Scientist, F-11560 Saint Pierre la Mer, France
(2) UE PECH-ROUGE, INRA, Université de Montpellier, CIRAD, Montpellier SupAgro, F-11430, Gruissan, France
(3) EURODIA, Chemin de Saint-Martin, F-84120 Pertuis, France

Contact the author

Keywords

Grapevine, irrigation, treated wastewater, fertigation, control water salinity, electrodialysis

Tags

GiESCO 2019 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Local adaptation tools to ensure the viticultural sustainability in a changing climate

[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"...

Comparison of imputation methods in long and varied phenological series. Application to the Conegliano dataset, including observations from 1964 over 400 grape varieties

A large varietal collection including over 1700 varieties was maintained in Conegliano, ITA, since the 1950s. Phenological data on a subset of 400 grape varieties including wine grapes, table grapes, and raisins were acquired at bud break, flowering, veraison, and ripening since 1964. Despite the efforts in maintaining and acquiring data over such an extensive collection, the data set has varying degrees of missing cases depending on the variety and the year. This is ubiquitous in phenology datasets with significant size and length. In this work, we evaluated four state-of-the-art methods to estimate missing values in this phenological series: k-Nearest Neighbour (kNN), Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations (mice), MissForest, and Bidirectional Recurrent Imputation for Time Series (BRITS). For each phenological stage, we evaluated the performance of the methods in two ways. 1) On the full dataset, we randomly hold-out 10% of the true values for use as a test set and repeated the process 1000 times (Monte Carlo cross-validation). 2) On a reduced and almost complete subset of varieties, we varied the percentage of missing values from 10% to 70% by random deletion. In all cases, we evaluated the performance on the original values using normalized root mean squared error. For the full dataset we also obtained performance statistics by variety and by year. MissForest provided average errors of 17% (3 days) at budbreak, 14% (4 days) at flowering, 14.5% (7 days) at veraison, and 17% (3 days) at maturity. We completed the imputations of the Conegliano dataset, one of the world’s most extensive and varied phenological time series and a steppingstone for future climate change studies in grapes. The dataset is now ready for further analysis, and a rigorous evaluation of imputation errors is included.

Late frost protection in Champagne

Probably one of the most counterintuitive impacts of climate change on vine is the increased frequency of late frost. Champagne, due to its septentrional position is historically and regularly affected by this meteorological hazard. Champagne has therefore developed a strong experience in frost protection with first experiments dating from the end of 19th century. Frost protection can be divided in two parts: passive and active. Passive protection includes all the methods that do not seek to modify the vine’s environment or resistance at the time of frost. The most iconic passive protection in Champagne is the establishment of the individual reserve. This reserve allows to stock a certain quantity of clear wine during a surplus year to compensate a meteorological hazard like frost during the following years. Other common passive methods are the control of planting area (walls, bushes, topography), the choice of grape variety, late pruning, or the impact of grass cover and tillage. Active frost protection is also divided in two parts. Most of the existing techniques tend to modify vine’s environment. Most of the time they provide warmth (candles, heaters, windmills, heating cables…), or stabilise bud’s temperature above a lethal threshold (water sprinkling). The other way to actively fight is to enhance the resistance of buds to frost (elicitors). The Comité Champagne evaluates frost protection methods following three main axes: the efficiency, the profitability, and the environmental impact through a lifecycle assessment. This study will present the results on both passive and active protection following these three axes.

Effects of graft quality on growth and grapevine-water relations

Climate change is challenging viticulture worldwide compromising its sustainability due to warmer temperatures and the increased frequency of extreme events. Grafting Vitis vinifera L.

Making sense of available information for climate change adaptation and building resilience into wine production systems across the world

Effects of climate change on viticulture systems and winemaking processes are being felt across the world. The IPCC 6thAssessment Report concluded widespread and rapid changes have occurred, the scale of recent changes being unprecedented over many centuries to many thousands of years. These changes will continue under all emission scenarios considered, including increases in frequency and intensity of hot extremes, heatwaves, heavy precipitation and droughts. Wine companies need tools and models allowing to peer into the future and identify the moment for intervention and measures for mitigation and/or avoidance. Previously, we presented conceptual guidelines for a 5-stage framework for defining adaptation strategies for wine businesses. That framework allows for direct comparison of different solutions to mitigate perceived climate change risks. Recent global climatic evolution and multiple reports of severe events since then (smoke taint, heatwave and droughts, frost, hail and floods, rising sea levels) imply urgency in providing effective tools to tackle the multiple perceived risks. A coordinated drive towards a higher level of resilience is therefore required. Recent publications such as the Australian Wine Future Climate Atlas and results from projects such as H2020 MED-GOLD inform on expected climate change impacts to the wine sector, foreseeing the climate to expect at regional and vineyard scale in coming decades. We present examples of practical application of the Climate Change Adaptation Framework (CCAF) to impacts affecting wine production in two wine regions: Barossa (Australia) and Douro (Portugal). We demonstrate feasibility of the framework for climate adaptation from available data and tools to estimate historical climate-induced profitability loss, to project it in the future and to identify critical moments when disruptions may occur if timely measures are not implemented. Finally, we discuss adaptation measures and respective timeframes for successful mitigation of disruptive risk while enhancing resilience of wine systems.