Exploring the regulatory role of the grapevine MIXTA homologue in cuticle formation and abiotic stress resilience

Climate change is a major challenge in wine production. The IPCC (2014) projected that by the end of the 21st century average temperatures will increase by 1-3.7°C. Consequently, harvest dates could advance by approximately 30 days. A general observed trend is the increase in berry sugar content and decrease in organic acids, posing challenges for winegrowers. Variability among cultivars is a precious resource to adapt viticulture to a changing environment.

The potential climate change, due to global change, will increase temperature general and could increase at local level. These changes are not going to be the same in different parts of the world, being especially important in the Mediterranean Basin.

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.

Sustainable weed control with little detrimental effects on vine physiology, yield, berry quality, soil structure, health and biodiversity is a key factor in vineyard management. Few options are available to avoid herbicide utilization and minimize negative effects of frequent tillage on soil quality. The present project aims to investigate and develop different cover management strategies in a cool climate viticultural region in Switzerland. The impact of different treatments on vine, must and wine has been studied in an experimental vineyard in Changins, Switzerland for one year and will be continued over the next three years.

Bordeaux is the largest appellation vineyard in France. This contrasting vineyard with varied terroirs offers all styles of wine, resulting from the blending of several grape varieties. If these different profiles make the renown of Bordeaux wines, it can appear as a constraint when the aim is to study Bordeaux wines in their diversity. The selection of a representative sample can be performed by a sensory analysis carried out by trained panelists or by wine professionals, which can take several forms: consensus among experts, conventional descriptive analysis, typicality or quality evaluation. However, because of time, economic, and logistical constraints, these methods have limited applications. As an alternative to classical descriptive analysis, more intuitive methods that do not require training have been proposed recently to describe wines using an expert panel such as Napping, Free Choice or Flash Profiling, CATA or RATA.