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…

Genetic traceability of ‘Nebbiolo’ musts and wines by single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping assays

AIM: ‘Nebbiolo’ (Vitis vinifera L.) is one of the most ancient and prestigious Italian grape cultivars. It is renowned for its use in producing monovarietal high-quality red wines, such Barolo and Barbaresco. Wine quality and value can be heavily modified if cultivars other than those allowed are employed.

Thermal risk assessment for viticulture using monthly temperature data

Temperature extremes affect grapevine physiology, as well as grape quality and production. In most grape growing regions, frost or heat wave events are rare and as such conducting a risk analysis using robust statistics makes the use of long term daily data necessary.

Optical visualization of embolism spread in drought‐induced leaves: revealing differences across three grapevine genotypes

‐Evaluation of xylem embolism is an important challenge in identifying drought tolerant genotypes within the context of climate change.

Multivariate data analysis applied on Fourier Transform Infrared spectroscopy for the prediction of tannins levels during red wine fermentation

Red wine is a beverage with one of the highest polyphenol concentration, which are extracted during the maceration step of the winemaking process.

Oenococcus oeni clonal diversity in the carbonic maceration winemaking

This essay was aimed to describe the clonal diversity of Oenococcus oeni in the malolactic fermentation of the carbonic maceration (CM) winemaking. The free and the pressed liquids from CM were sampled and compared to the wine from a standard winemaking with previous destemming and crushing (DC) of grapes [1]. O. oeni strain typification was performed by PFGE as González-Arenzana et al. described (2014) [2]. Results showed that 13 genotypes, referred as to letters, were distinguished from the 49 isolated strains, meaning the genotype “a” the 27%, the “b” the 14%, the “c” the 12%, the “d and e” the 10 % each other, and the remaining ones less than the 8% each one.