Terroir 2016 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 International Terroir Conferences 9 Terroir 2016 9 Climates of Wine Regions Worldwide 9 Within vineyard temperature structure and variability in the umpqua valley of Oregon

Within vineyard temperature structure and variability in the umpqua valley of Oregon

Abstract

Climate influences viticulture and wine production at various scales with the majority of attention given to regional characteristics that define the general varieties that can be grown and the wine styles that can be produced. However, within vineyard scale effects of climate can be substantial due to landscape variations. To better understand the effect of local weather and climate on terroir, the goal of this research was to examine within vineyard temperature variations. Temperature data was collected from 23 sites in a commercial 33 ha vineyard in the Umpqua Valley of Oregon over a five-year period during 2011-2015. Dormant period temperatures (Nov-Mar) varied by roughly 1°C across the 23 sites with the extreme minimum temperatures varying by just over 3°C. Spring temperatures (Apr-May) varied by roughly 2°C for the vineyard locations with frost occurrence varying as much as nine days in most years. During the summer (Jun-Aug) maximum temperatures varied more than minimum temperatures across the sites, while extreme maximums ranged nearly 5°C.

During the ripening period (Sept-Oct) diurnal temperatures ranges at the 23 sites averaged 20°C. Over all years and sites the growing season heat accumulation averaged 1467 GDD but ranged from 1181 in the coolest year (2011) to 1705 in the warmest year (2015). The average range of GDD during these vintages shows that within vineyard variability in heat accumulation is 375 GDD. These variations in temperatures and heat accumulation are weakly correlated with elevation differences between the sites, however the combined effects of slope/aspect have more significant correlations with temperatures at these sites, especially minimum temperatures. As a result of the within vineyard differences in temperatures and heat accumulation, this commercial vineyard adequately ripens a range of varieties from Albariño, , Viognier, Syrah, Tempranillo, Grenache, , Touriga Nacional, Tannat and others.

DOI:

Publication date: June 22, 2020

Issue: Terroir 2016

Type: Article

Authors

Henry E. Jones1, Gregory V. Jones1,2

(1) Fault Line Vineyards and Abacela Winery, 12500 Lookingglass Road, Roseburg, Oregon, USA
(2) Southern Oregon University, 1250 Siskiyou Blvd, Ashland, Oregon, USA

Contact the author

Keywords

terroir, temperature, mesoscale, viticulture, spatial variation

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2016

Citation

Related articles…

The Douro region: wine and tourism

The Demarcated Douro Region (DDR) dates from 1756, when it was recognized as one of the first demarcated regions in the world. The DDR economic activities fit the terroir model and are based on wine and tourism.

Role of climate on grape characteristics of “Moscato bianco” in Piemonte (Italy)

L’objectif de l’étude était de connaître le rôle du climat sur les aspects phénologiques du cépage « Moscato bianco » dans les différentes zones de production du vin Moscato d’Asti aocg en Piemonte (Italie) et ses effets sur l’époque de vendange. La représentation cartographique ( échelle 1 :25000) de exposition, altitude, climat, index

CONSENSUS AND SENSORY DOMINANCE ARE DEPENDENT ON QUALITY CONCEPT DEFINITIONS

The definition of the term “quality” in sensory evaluation of food products does not seem to be consensual. Descriptive or liking methods are generally used to differentiate between wines (Lawless et al., 1997). Nevertheless, quality evaluation of a product such as wine can also relate to emotional aspects. As exposed by Costell (2002), product quality is defined as an integrated impression, like acceptability, pleasure, or emotional experiences during tasting. According to the ‘modality appropriateness’ hypothesis which predicts that wine tasters weigh the most suitable sensory inputs for a specific assess- ment (Freides, 1974; Welch & Warren, 1980), the nature of the quality definitions may modulate sensory influences.

Identifying best parameters to characterize genotypes capability of retaining adequate malic acid at harvest and in final wines

Under current climate change pressures, obtaining grapes with adequate acidity at harvest is one of the main challenges for growers, especially if the goal is producing sparkling wines. This issue arises from two main occurrences: i) higher temperatures enhance degradation of malic acid; ii) grape maturity may occur under suboptimal climatic conditions due to an advanced phenology.

Optimizing stomatal traits for future climates

Stomatal traits determine grapevine water use, carbon supply, and water stress, which directly impact yield and berry chemistry. Breeding for stomatal traits has the strong potential to improve grapevine performance under future, drier conditions, but the trait values that breeders should target are unknown. We used a functional-structural plant model developed for grapevine (HydroShoot) to determine how stomatal traits impact canopy gas exchange, water potential, and temperature under historical and future conditions in high-quality and hot-climate California wine regions (Napa and the Central Valley). Historical climate (1990-2010) was collected from weather stations and future climate (2079-99) was projected from 4 representative climate models for California, assuming medium- and high-emissions (RCP 4.5 and 8.5). Five trait parameterizations, representing mean and extreme values for the maximum stomatal conductance (gmax) and leaf water potential threshold for stomatal closure (Ψsc), were defined from meta-analyses. Compared to mean trait values, the water-spending extremes (highest gmax or most negative Ysc) had negligible benefits for carbon gain and canopy cooling, but exacerbated vine water use and stress, for both sites and climate scenarios. These traits increased cumulative transpiration by 8 – 17%, changed cumulative carbon gain by -4 – 3%, and reduced minimum water potentials by 10 – 18%. Conversely, the water-saving extremes (lowest gmax or least negative Ψsc) strongly reduced water use and stress, but potentially compromised the carbon supply for ripening. Under RCP 8.5 conditions, these traits reduced transpiration by 22 – 35% and carbon gain by 9 – 16% and increased minimum water potentials by 20 – 28%, compared to mean values. Overall, selecting for more water-saving stomatal traits could improve water-use efficiency and avoid the detrimental effects of highly negative canopy water potentials on yield and quality, but more work is needed to evaluate whether these benefits outweigh the consequences of minor declines in carbon gain for fruit production.