Nitrogen requirements of table grape cultivars grown in the san Joaquin valley of California

Grape quality potential for wine production is strongly influenced by environmental parameters and agronomic factors. Several studies underline the rootstock effect on scions vegetative growth and berry composition [1] with an impact on wine quality. Rootstocks are promising agronomic tools for climate change adaptation and in most grape-growing regions the potential diversity of rootstocks is not fully used and only a few genotypes are planted. Moreover, little is known about the effect of rootstock genetic variability on the aromatic composition in wines.

vine plant material is one of the major factors of terroir. The vine numbers over 1,000 species, of which the main cultivated species, Vitis vinifera, includes some 6,000 varieties. For the last forty years, selection has been carried out on these, mainly through clonal selection. However, today, only 300 varieties present one or more clones. A dozen varieties are considered as international. The extreme requirements of selection, in terms of diseases, provoke the elimination of the majority of selected plants. This approach to selection is not thorough because it focuses mainly on elimination of virosis and phytoplasma diseases.

One of the major threats to viticulture is represented by fungal pathogens. Plasmopara viticola, an oomycete causing grapevine downy mildew, is one of the principal causes of grape production losses. The most efficient management strategies are represented by a combination of agronomical practices, fungicides’ applications, and use of resistant varieties. Plant resistance is conferred by the presence of resistance (R) genes. Opposed to them, susceptibility (S) genes are encoded by plants and exploited by pathogens to promote infection. Loss or mutation of S genes can limit the ability of pathogens to infect the host. By exploiting post-transcriptional gene silencing, known as RNA intereference (RNAi), it is possible to knock-down the expression of S genes, promoting plant resistance.

Most grape scion cultivars grown around the world are derived from a single species, Vitis vinifera. Yet, the proportion of interspecific hybrids is increasing for a variety of reasons, including resistance to abiotic stresses such as low temperatures; societal, economic and environmental pressures to reduce pesticide usage; and to add a greater range of flavors to new table grape cultivars.

Newer sequencing technologies have allowed for the addition of microbes to the story of terroir. The same environmental factors that influence the phenotypic expression of a crop also shape the composition of the microbial communities found on that crop. For fermented goods, such as wine, that microbial community ultimately influences the organoleptic properties of the final product that is delivered to customers. Recent studies have begun to study the biogeography of wine-associated microbes within different growing regions, finding that communities are distinct across landscapes. Despite this new knowledge, there are still many questions about what factors drive these differences. Our goal was to quantify differences in yeast communities due to management style between seven pairs of conventional and biodynamic vineyards (14 in total) throughout Oregon, USA. We wanted to answer the following questions: 1) are yeast communities distinct between biodynamic vineyards and conventional vineyards? 2) are these differences consistent across a large geographic region? 3) can differences in yeast communities be tied to differences in metabolite profiles of the bottled wine? To collect our data we took soil, bark, leaf, and grape samples from within each vineyard from five different vines of pinot noir. We also collected must and a 10º brix sample from each winery. Using these samples, we performed 18S amplicon sequencing to identify the yeast present. We then used metabolomics to characterize the organoleptic compounds present in the bottled wine from the blocks the year that we sampled. We are actively in the process of analysing our data from this study.