Learning from remote sensing data: a case study in the Trentino region 

A total of 52 volatile compounds were measured in varietal Cabernet Sauvignon wines from four sites in Santa Catarina State (Brazil), over two consecutive vintages (2004 and 2005).

Many farming operations aim at controlling the leaf area of the vine according to its load. There are several techniques, direct and indirect, of estimate of this leaf area in a specific way, but impossible to implement at great scales. These last years, research in airborne and satellite remote sensing made it possible to show that a multispectral index of vegetation, computed from measurements of reflectances (red and near infrared), the « Normalised Difference Vegetation Index » (NDVI), is well correlated to the « Leaf Area Index » (leaf area per unit of ground) of the vine. Nevertheless these methods of acquisition and processing data are rather constraining and complex.

The use of oenological additives is becoming a common practice due to the technological and sensory properties they provide to the wines. However, the number of studies focused on the impact that these additives might induce on wine flavor perception during wine tasting is still quite scarce. The aim of this work was to evaluate the effect of three different types of common oenological additives: two oenotannins (ellagitannin and gallotannin) and a commercial preparation of yeast mannoproteins on the long-lasting flavor perception (aroma and astringency).

Wine is one of the most consumed and appreciated beverages in the world. Due to the growing attention paid to consumer health, there is a continuous search for sustainable alternatives to common additives (such as sulfur dioxide) used to preserve wine. An example is represented by chitosan, the main derivative of chitin, approved for the treatment of must and wine since 2009 by the “international organization of vine and wine” (OIV/OENO 338a/2009) and by the european commission (EC Reg. No. 606/2009).

I performed my PhD in grapevine physiology under the supervision of Dr. H. Medrano, standing in the vineyards from pre-dawn to sunrise during many hot, wet and sunny days with my colleagues J.M.E. and J.B. I also spent many days and nights facing ticks year-round working in Mediterranean macchias with J.Gu. and M.M. Later I was able to supervise PhD students on grapevines – like A.P. and M.T. – and on Mediterranean vegetation – like J.Gal. With the incorporation to the group of M.R.-C. ‘the puzzle’ was completed and, combining the aforementioned studies, we could conclude (more than 20 years ago) things like: (1) stomatal conductance is the best proxy for ‘water stress’ in studies on photosynthesis; (2) steady-state chlorophyll fluorescence retrieves photosynthesis under saturating light; (3) photoinhibition is not a major photosynthetic limitation under water stress; (4) mesophyll conductance instead is; and (5) mesophyll conductance is a major driver of leaf water use efficiency.