terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Yield formation and grape composition: more than meets the eye 

Yield formation and grape composition: more than meets the eye 

Abstract

Fruit quality in grapes is not well defined but is often depicted as correlating inversely with crop yield. Both fruit yield and composition, however, are made from distinct components that interact in complex ways. Reproductive growth of grapevines extends over two growing seasons. Inflorescences initiated in buds during the previous year differentiate flowers and set and develop berries during the harvest year. Compensation mechanisms ensure that changing one yield component typically results in a less than proportional change in yield. For example, reducing the number of berries per vine may increase berry size. Nevertheless, warm temperatures and ample water during budbreak or bloom will increase both the number and size of berries, and increase or decrease berry sugar while decreasing acidity. Moreover, the time of fruit set and the number of seeds, rather than yield, may drive the time of ripening onset. By that time, berry size is effectively predetermined and can no longer be manipulated by cultural practices. Ripening starts with berry softening and is followed by sugar accumulation, acid breakdown and, finally, anthocyanin accumulation in dark-skinned grapes. Like yield components, these processes can be modified by altering the size and density of the canopy, which changes the fruit-zone microclimate. Unlike vegetative and reproductive growth, fruit composition is much more responsive to temperature than to water supply. This presentation will give an overview of yield formation and grape ripening, and discuss some key environmental and viticultural factors that lead to differences in harvest yield and fruit composition.

DOI:

Publication date: June 13, 2024

Issue: Open GPB 2024

Type: Article

Authors

Markus Keller1*
1 Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA 99350, USA

Contact the author*

Keywords

grapevine, yield components, water stress, temperature, Vitis

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Open GPB | Open GPB 2024

Citation

Related articles…

Identification of key-odorants in Sauternes Wines

The aim of the present work was to investigate Sauternes wines aromas. The flavor profiles of two wines (vintages 2002 and 2003) were investigated. Key-odorants have been determined by AEDA applied to Amberlite XAD-2 resin extracts. Various complementary techniques were used to identify the compounds (pHMB extraction, chemical synthesis of non-commercial standards, co-injections on two capillary columns, odor description at the sniffing port, GC-MS and GC-PFPD).

Assessing the Effectiveness of Electrodialysis in Controlling Brettanomyces Growth in Wine

Brettanomyces yeast can negatively impact the quality and stability of wines, posing a significant challenge to winemakers. [1] This study aims to develop novel management practices to limit Brettanomyces impact on wines by evaluating the effectiveness of electrodialysis (ED) technology in removing magnesium (Mg2+) from wine to prevent the development of Brettanomyces yeast. The ED technique utilizes charged membranes to extract ions from the wine, and it is considered an alternative to cold stabilization that requires less energy. [2]

Analysis of voltammetric fingerprints of different white grape musts reveals genotype-related oxidation patterns

Must oxidation is a complex process involving multiple enzymatic transformations, including the oxidation of phenolics containing an ortho-diphenol function. The latter process has a primary influence on wine aroma characteristics and stability, due to the central role of ortho-diphenols in the non-enzymatic oxidative reactions taking place during winemaking and in finished wine. Although oxidation of must is traditionally avoided, in recent years its contribution to wine quality has been revisited, and in some cases improvements to wine aroma have been observed with the application of controlled must oxidation. Nowadays there is a great interest in the wine industry towards the identification of specific markers or patterns to characterize and classify the response of grape must to oxidation.

Full automation of oenological fermentations and its application to the processing of must containing high sugar or acetic acid concentrations

Climate change and harvest date decisions have led to the evolution of must quality over the last decades. Increases in must sugar concentrations are among the most obvious consequences, quantitatively. Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a robust and acid tolerant organism. These properties, its sugar to ethanol conversion rate and ethanol tolerance make it the ideal production organism for wine fermentations. Unfortunately, high sugar concentrations may affect S. cerevisiae and lead to growth inhibition or yeast lysis, and cause sluggish or stuck fermentations. Even sublethal conditions cause a hyperosmotic stress response in S. cerevisiae which leads to increased formation of fermentation by-products, including acetic acid, which may exceed legal limits in some wines.

Frost risk projections in a changing climate are highly sensitive in time and space to frost modelling approaches

Late spring frost is a major challenge for various winegrowing regions across the world, its occurrence often leading to important yield losses and/or plant failure. Despite a significant increase in minimum temperatures worldwide, the spatial and temporal evolution of spring frost risk under a warmer climate remains largely uncertain. Recent projections of spring frost risk for viticulture in Europe throughout the 21st century show that its evolution strongly depends on the model approach used to simulate budburst. Furthermore, the frost damage modelling methods used in these projections are usually not assessed through comparison to field observations and/or frost damage reports.
The present study aims at comparing frost risk projections simulated using six spring frost models based on two approaches: a) models considering a fixed damage threshold after the predicted budburst date (e.g BRIN, Smoothed-Utah, Growing Degree Days, Fenovitis) and b) models considering a dynamic frost sensitivity threshold based on the predicted grapevine winter/spring dehardening process (e.g. Ferguson model). The capability of each model to simulate an actual frost event for the Vitis vinifera cv. Chadonnay B was previously assessed by comparing simulated cold thermal stress to reports of events with frost damage in Chablis, the northernmost winegrowing region of Burgundy. Models exhibited scores of κ > 0.65 when reproducing the frost/non-frost damage years and an accuracy ranging from 0.82 to 0.90.
Spring frost risk projections throughout the 21st century were performed for all winegrowing subregions of Bourgogne-Franche-Comté under two CMIP5 concentration pathways (4.5 and 8.5) using statistically downscaled 8×8 km daily air temperature and humidity of 13 climate models. Contrasting results with region-specific spring frost risk trends were observed. Three out of five models show a decrease in the frequency of frost years across the whole study area while the other two show an increase that is more or less pronounced depending on winegrowing subregion. Our findings indicate that the lack of accuracy in grapevine budburst and dehardening models makes climate projections of spring frost risk highly uncertain for grapevine cultivation regions.