OENO IVAS 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Coming of age: do old vines actually produce berries with higher enological potential than young vines? A case study on the Riesling cultivar

Coming of age: do old vines actually produce berries with higher enological potential than young vines? A case study on the Riesling cultivar

Abstract

Consumers and the wine industry tend to agree on the ability of old vines to produce fruit that allows the production of wine of superior character. However, despite past and ongoing research, objective evidence of this point of view is still debated and studies on robust, specifically dedicated plots are scarce.

Thus the impact of grapevine age on berry oenological potential and wine quality remains an open question. To try to objectively address the issue, a unique vineyard was established at Geisenheim University, Germany. It was planted in 1971 with cv. Riesling grafted on 5C Teleki. In 1995 and 2012, several rows were uprooted and replanted with the same rootstock/scion combination, resulting in a vineyard with alternate rows of identical plant material, but with different planting dates. The parameters of technical maturity and grape composition at harvest were analyzed during seasons 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 combining HPLC and enzymatic methods. Separate micro-vinifications were made for each age group and wine composition was analyzed by a combination of 1H-NMR and SPE-GC-MS.

The results showed that technical maturity parameters (TSS, TA, must pH) were not significantly different across the three grapevine age groups. Berry composition showed little differences in quality-relevant metabolite contents, with the noticeable exceptions of α-amino acid, skin flavonols, free and bound monoterpene and norisoprenoid amounts that were significantly higher in vines planted in 2012 compared to older vines, but only in seasons 2014 and 2015 where soil management practices of the young vines differed. Berries from vines planted in 1971 and 1995 did not exhibit significant differences in berry composition, throughout the four seasons. Wine chemical analysis complemented and confirmed results obtained in berry composition. Wine made from grapes produced by vines planted in 2012 had higher terpene and norisoprenoid amounts, compared to wines made with grapes from the two other vines groups, but only for the 2014 and 2015 vintages. Wines from grapes produced by vines planted in 1971 and 1995 did not exhibit significant differences in composition throughout the four seasons.

conclusion:

In conclusion, even though vines planted in 2012 exhibits significant differences in berry and wine composition for their two first vintages compared to older ones, these differences appeared to vanished once the vines were fully established and soil management practices became uniform.

Acknowledgments:

This work was supported by a PhD grant to K. Bou Nader from the Forschungsring Deutscher Weinbau.

DOI:

Publication date: June 23, 2020

Issue: OENO IVAS 2019

Type: Article

Authors

Khalil Bou Nader (1, 2), Ghislaine Hilbert (1), Doris Rauhut (3), Christel Renaud (1), Otmar Löhnertz (4), Claus-Dieter Patz (5), Rainer Jung (6), Hans-Reiner Schultz (7), Manfred Stoll (2), Eric Gomes (1) 

1 UMR EGFV, Bordeaux Sciences Agro, INRA, Université de Bordeaux, ISVV, Villenave d’Ornon, France 
2 Hochschule Geisenheim University (HGU), Department of General and Organic Viticulture,, Von-Lade-Str. 1, 65366, Geisenheim, Germany 
3 Hochschule Geisenheim University (HGU), Department of Microbiology and Biochemistry, Von-Lade-Str. 1, 65366, Geisenheim, Germany 
4 Hochschule Geisenheim University (HGU), Department of Soil Sciences and Plant Nutrition 
5 Hochschule Geisenheim University (HGU), Department of Beverage Sciences, Von-Lade-Str. 1, 65366, Geisenheim, Germany 
6 Hochschule Geisenheim University (HGU), Department of Oenology, Von-Lade-Str. 1, 65366, Geisenheim, Germany 
7 Hochschule Geisenheim University (HGU), Presidency; Von-Lade-Str. 1, 65366, Geisenheim, Germany

Contact the author

Keywords

Grapevine age, vineyard management, berry composition, primary and secondary metabolites

Tags

IVES Conference Series | OENO IVAS 2019

Citation

Related articles…

Terroir analysis and its complexity

Terroir is not only a geographical site, but it is a more complex concept able to express the “collective knowledge of the interactions” between the environment and the vines mediated through human action and “providing distinctive characteristics” to the final product (OIV 2010). It is often treated and accepted as a “black box”, in which the relationships between wine and its origin have not been clearly explained. Nevertheless, it is well known that terroir expression is strongly dependent on the physical environment, and in particular on the interaction between soil-plant and atmosphere system, which influences the grapevine responses, grapes composition and wine quality. The Terroir studying and mapping are based on viticultural zoning procedures, obtained with different levels of know-how, at different spatial and temporal scales, empiricism and complexity in the description of involved bio-physical processes, and integrating or not the multidisciplinary nature of the terroir. The scientific understanding of the mechanisms ruling both the vineyard variability and the quality of grapes is one of the most important scientific focuses of terroir research. In fact, this know-how is crucial for supporting the analysis of climate change impacts on terroir resilience, identifying new promised lands for viticulture, and driving vineyard management toward a target oenological goal. In this contribution, an overview of the last findings in terroir studies and approaches will be shown with special attention to the terroir resilience analysis to climate change, facing the use and abuse of terroir concept and new technology able to support it and identifying the terroir zones.

Rootstock regulation of scion phenotypes: the relationship between rootstock parentage and petiole mineral concentration

Grapevine is grown as a graft since the end of the 19th century. Rootstocks not only provide tolerance to Phylloxera but also ensure the supply of water and mineral nutrients to the scion. Rootstocks are an important mean of adaptation to environmental conditions, because the scion controls the typical features of the grapes and wine. However, among the large diversity of rootstocks worldwide, few of them are commercially used in the vineyard. The aim of this study was to investigate the extent to which rootstocks modify the mineral composition of the petioles of the scion. Vitis vinifera cvs. Cabernet-Sauvignon, Pinot noir, Syrah and Ugni blanc were grafted onto 55 different rootstock genotypes and planted in a vineyard as three replicates of 5 vines. Petioles were collected in the cluster zone with 6 replicates per combination. Petiolar concentrations of 13 mineral elements (N, P, K, S, Mg, Ca, Na, B, Zn, Mn, Fe, Cu, Al) at veraison were determined. Scion, rootstock and the interaction explained the same proportion of the phenotypic variance for most mineral elements. Rootstock genotype showed a significant influence on the petiole mineral element composition. Rootstock effect explained from 7 % for Cu to 25 % for S of the variance. The difference of rootstock conferred mineral status is discussed in relation to vigor and fertility. Rootstocks were also genotyped with 23 microsatellite markers. Data were analysed according to genetic groups in order to determine whether the petiole mineral composition could be related to the genetic parentage of the rootstock. Thanks to a highly powerful design, it is the first time that such a large panel of rootstocks grafted with 4 scions has been studied. These results give the opportunity to better characterize the rootstocks and to enlarge the diversity used in the vineyard.

Making sense of available information for climate change adaptation and building resilience into wine production systems across the world

Effects of climate change on viticulture systems and winemaking processes are being felt across the world. The IPCC 6thAssessment Report concluded widespread and rapid changes have occurred, the scale of recent changes being unprecedented over many centuries to many thousands of years. These changes will continue under all emission scenarios considered, including increases in frequency and intensity of hot extremes, heatwaves, heavy precipitation and droughts. Wine companies need tools and models allowing to peer into the future and identify the moment for intervention and measures for mitigation and/or avoidance. Previously, we presented conceptual guidelines for a 5-stage framework for defining adaptation strategies for wine businesses. That framework allows for direct comparison of different solutions to mitigate perceived climate change risks. Recent global climatic evolution and multiple reports of severe events since then (smoke taint, heatwave and droughts, frost, hail and floods, rising sea levels) imply urgency in providing effective tools to tackle the multiple perceived risks. A coordinated drive towards a higher level of resilience is therefore required. Recent publications such as the Australian Wine Future Climate Atlas and results from projects such as H2020 MED-GOLD inform on expected climate change impacts to the wine sector, foreseeing the climate to expect at regional and vineyard scale in coming decades. We present examples of practical application of the Climate Change Adaptation Framework (CCAF) to impacts affecting wine production in two wine regions: Barossa (Australia) and Douro (Portugal). We demonstrate feasibility of the framework for climate adaptation from available data and tools to estimate historical climate-induced profitability loss, to project it in the future and to identify critical moments when disruptions may occur if timely measures are not implemented. Finally, we discuss adaptation measures and respective timeframes for successful mitigation of disruptive risk while enhancing resilience of wine systems.

Deconstructing the soil component of terroir: from controversy to consensus

Wine terroir describes the collectively recognized relation between a geographical area and the distinctive organoleptic characteristics of the wines produced in it. The overriding objective in terroir studies is therefore to provide scientific proof relating the properties of terroir components to wine quality and typicity. In scientific circles, the role of climate (macro-, meso- and micro-) on grape and wine characteristics is well documented and accepted as the most critical. Moreover, there has been increasing interest in recent years about new elements with possible importance in shaping wine terroir like berry/leaf/soil microbiology or even aromatic plants in proximity to the vineyard conferring flavors to the grapes. However, the actual effect of these factors is also dependent on complex interactions with plant material (variety/clone, rootstock, vine age) and with human factors.
The contribution of soil, although a fundamental component of terroir and extremely popular among wine enthusiasts, remains a much-debated issue among researchers. The role of geology is probably the one mostly associated by consumers with the notion of terroir with different parent rocks considered to give birth to different wine styles. However, the relationship between wine properties and the underlying parent material raises a lot of controversy especially regarding the actual existence of rock-derived flavors in the wine (e.g. minerality). As far as the actual soil properties are concerned, the effect of soil physical properties is generally regarded as the most significant (e.g sandy soils being associated with lighter wines while those on clay with colored and tannic ones) mostly through control of water availability which ultimately modifies berry ripening conditions either directly by triggering biosynthetic pathways, or indirectly by altering vigor and yield components. The role of soil chemistry seems to be weakly associated to wine sensory characteristic, although N, K, S and Ca, but also soil pH, are often considered important in the overall soil effect.
Recently, in the light of evidence provided by precision agriculture studies reporting a high variability of vineyard soils, the spatial scale should also be taken into consideration in the evaluation of the soil effects on wines. While it is accepted that soil effects become more significant than climate on a local level, it is not clear whether these micro-variations of vineyard soils are determining in the terroir effect. Moreover, as terroir is not a set of only natural factors, the magnitude of the contribution of human-related factors (irrigation, fertilization, soil management) to the soil effect still remains ambiguous. Lastly, a major shortcoming of the majority of works about soil effects on wine characteristics is the absence of connection with actual vine physiological processes since all soil effects on grape and wine chemistry and sensorial properties are ultimately mediated through vine responses.
This article attempts to breakdown the main soil attributes involved in the terroir effect to suggest an improved understanding about soil’s true contribution to wine sensory characteristics. It is proposed that soil parameters per se are not as significant determining factors in the terroir effect but rather their mutual interactions as well as with other natural and human factors included in the terroir concept. Consequently, similarly to bioclimatic indices, composite soil indices (i.e. soil depth, water holding capacity, fertility, temperature etc), incorporating multiple soil parameters, might provide a more accurate and quantifiable means to assess the relative weight of the soil component in the terroir effect.

Using δ13C and hydroscapes as a tool for discriminating cultivar specific drought response

Measurement of carbon isotope discrimination in berry juice sugars at maturity (δ13C) provides an integrated assessment of water use efficiency (WUE) during the period of berry ripening, and when collected over multiple seasons can be used as an indication of drought stress response. Berry juice δ13C measurements were carried out on 48 different varieties planted in a common garden experiment in Bordeaux, France from 2014 through 2021 and were paired with midday and predawn leaf water potential measurements on the same vines in a subset of six varieties. The aim was to discriminate a large panel of varieties based on their stomatal behaviour and potentially identify hydraulic traits characterizing drought tolerance by comparing δ13C and hydroscapes (the visualisation of plant stomatal behaviour as a response to predawn water potential). Cluster analysis found that δ13C values are likely affected by the differing phenology of each variety, resulting in berry ripening of different varieties taking place under different stress conditions within the same year. We accounted for these phenological differences and found that cluster analysis based on specific δ13C metrics created a classification of varieties that corresponds well to our current empirical understanding of their relative drought tolerances. In addition, we analysed the water potential regulation of the subset of six varieties (using the hydroscape approach) and found that it was well correlated with some δ13C metrics. Surprisingly, a variety’s water potential regulation (specifically its minimum critical leaf water potential under water deficit) was strongly correlated to δ13C values under well-watered conditions, suggesting that base WUE may have a stronger impact on drought tolerance than WUE under water deficit. These results give strong insights on the innate WUE of a very large panel of varieties and suggest that studies of drought tolerance should include traits expressed under non-limiting conditions.