Terroir 2016 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Impact of defoliation on leaf and berry compounds of Vitis vinifera L. Cv. Riesling investigated using non-destructive methods)

Impact of defoliation on leaf and berry compounds of Vitis vinifera L. Cv. Riesling investigated using non-destructive methods)

Abstract

Climate change has a strong impact on the earlier onset of important phenological stages and plant development in viticulture. Hence, the adaptation of plant management is important to reply to climate related changes on a seasonal or long-term scale. In particular, a change in precipitation and higher temperatures entails the risk negatively impacting on fruit quality. An experiment was conducted where different canopy management strategies were applied to Riesling grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Riesling) planted in Winkel (Rheingau, Germany). Leaf removal at different canopy positions using various methods (e.g. manual vs. mechanical defoliation practices) led to a reduced photosynthetic active leaf area. Through modifications of the leaf area to fruit weight ratio, the berry ripening can be altered. Leaf removal of the bunch zone impacts fruit parameter and most importantly fruit health. Four different defoliation practices within a VSP trellis system were compared to a non-defoliated control during three growing seasons in an organic treated site: mechanical defoliation above the canopy (MDC); manually defoliation prior to flowering (DpF); defoliation of the bunch zone past flowering: Bunch zone defoliation (BZD) either suction fan plucking (EB490® Binger Seilzug, Germany) and mechanical defoliation or pulsation jetting of compressed air (DmS) (Siegwald®, Germany). Non-destructive measurements using a polyphenolmeter (Multiplex®3, Force-A, Orsay, France) were performed on leaves and berries to estimate the nutrition and ripening stage.

The chlorophyll index showed the lowest values for BZD and highest for control leaves. Additionally, on-the-go measurements were established to determine leaf components achieving vineyard maps in response to nitrogen or chlorophyll index. Furthermore, the data can be used for zoning the vineyard and harvest based on such mapping. When the severity of Botrytis cinerea was compared to control all treatments showed lower disease pressure (BZD -5.3 %, DpF -3.0 % and DmS -2.3 % respectively). Yield differed between -16 % (MDC), -8% DpF, -1 % (DmS) and +1 % (BZD) compared to the control having the highest (1.4 g) and BZD the lowest (1.1 g) single berry weight with a lower bunch compactness in 2014. Defoliation treatments influence the number of cluster per vine, where the lowest were found for DpF plants, accompanied with the lowest yield per single vine. These results help understanding the canopy characteristics and offer an opportunity to adapt the vineyard management strategies to seasonal changes.

DOI:

Publication date: June 23, 2020

Issue: Terroir 2016

Type: Article

Authors

Susanne TITTMANN, Vanessa STOEBER, Manfred STOLL

Geisenheim University, Department of general and organic viticulture, Von – Lade – Str. 1 D-65366 Geisenheim

Contact the author

Keywords

defoliation, non-invasive determination of leaf components, Multiplex, Plasmopara viticola, Vitis vinifera

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Impact of climate change on the viticultural climate of the Protected Designation of Origin “Jumilla” (SE Spain)

Protected Designation of Origin “Jumilla” (PDO Jumilla) is located in the Spanish provinces of Albacete and Murcia, in the South-eastern part of the Iberian Peninsula, where most of the models predict a severe impact of climate change in next decades. PDO Jumilla covers an area of 247,054 hectares, of which more than 22,000 hectares

The use of rootstock as a lever in the face of climate change and dieback of vineyard

As viticulture faces challenges such as climate change or vineyard dieback, the choice of the variety and rootstock becomes more and more crucial. To study rootstock levers in the Bordeaux region, a parcel of Cabernet Sauvignon (CS) was planted with four rootstocks in 2014. Twenty repetitions of each of the following four rootstocks were set up: 101-14 MGt, Nemadex AB, 420A MGt and Gravesac. The number of bunches, yields and pruning weights of the vine shoots were measured individually on 240 vines from 2017 to 2021. Since 2020, nitrogen status assessed by assimilable nitrogen level, hydric status assessed by δ13C and berry maturity were measured on 80 samples taken from 20 repetitions of the four rootstocks. A lower yield was measured for CS grafted onto Nemadex AB due to the lower number of bunches and the lower weight of berries. The differences between the other three rootstocks are small, but CS grafted onto 420A MGt was the most productive. The CS grafted onto Nemadex AB had the lowest pruning weight while 101-14 MGt had the highest. In 2020, δ13C showed a more moderate water stress with 101-14 MGt and 420A MGt than with Nemadex AB. Surprisingly, the Gravesac was under more stress than the 101-14 MGt. The nitrogen status in the berries was better for Nemadex AB but this was perhaps due to the significantly lower weight of the berries.Rootstock 101-14 MGt attained the highest accumulation of sugars in the berries while 420A MGt allows to preserve higher acidity. The parcel is still young which may explain some of the results. These measures must therefore be continued over the next several years to fully assess the effects of these rootstocks on the development of the vines and the quality of the production under new climatic conditions.

Climate change impacts: a multi-stress issue

With the aim of producing premium wines, it is admitted that moderate environmental stresses may contribute to the accumulation of compounds of interest in grapes. However the ongoing climate change, with the appearance of more limiting conditions of production is a major concern for the wine industry economic. Will it be possible to maintain the vineyards in place, to preserve the current grape varieties and how should we anticipate the adaptation measures to ensure the sustainability of vineyards? In this context, the question of the responses and adaptation of grapevine to abiotic stresses becomes a major scientific issue to tackle. An abiotic stress can be defined as the effect of a specific factor of the physico-chemical environment of the plants (temperature, availability of water and minerals, light, etc.) which reduces growth, and for a crop such as the vine, the yield, the composition of the fruits and the sustainability of the plants. Water stress is in many minds, but a systemic vision is essential for at least two reasons. The first reason is that in natural environments, a single factor is rarely limiting, and plants have to deal with a combination of constraints, as for example heat and drought, both in time and at a given time. The second reason is that plants, including grapevine, have central mechanisms of stress responses, as redox regulatory pathways, that play an important role in adaptation and survival. Here we will review the most recent studies dealing with this issue to provide a better understanding of the grapevine responses to a combination of environmental constraints and of the underlying regulatory pathways, which may be very helpful to design more adapted solutions to cope with climate change.

Co-design and evaluation of spatially explicit strategies of adaptation to climate change in a Mediterranean watershed

Climate change challenges differently wine growing systems, depending on their biophysical, sociological and economic features. Therefore, there is a need to locally design and evaluate adaptation strategies combining several technical options, and considering the local opportunities and constraints (e.g. water access, wine typicity). The case study took place in a typical and heterogeneous Mediterranean vineyard of 1,500 ha in the South of France. We developed a participatory modeling approach to (1) conceptualize local climate change issues and design spatially explicit adaptation strategies with stakeholders, (2) numerically evaluate their effects on phenology, yield and irrigation needs under the high-emissions climate change scenario RCP 8.5, and (3) collectively discuss simulation results. We organized five sets of workshops, with in-between modeling phases. A process-based model was developed that allowed to evaluate the effects of six technical options (late varieties, irrigation, water saving by reducing canopy size, adjusting cover cropping, reducing density, and shading) with various distributions in the watershed, as well as vineyard relocation. Overall, we co-designed three adaptation strategies. Delay harvest strategy with late varieties showed little effects on decreasing air temperature during ripening. Water constraint limitation strategy would compensate for production losses if disruptive adaptations (e.g. reduced density) were adopted, and more land got access to irrigation. Relocation strategy would foster high premium wine production in the constrained mountainous areas where grapevine is less impacted by climate change. This research shows that a spatial distribution of technical changes gives room for adaptation to climate change, and that the collaboration with local stakeholders is a key to the identification of relevant adaptation. Further research should explore the potential of adaptation strategies based on soil quality improvement and on water stress tolerant varieties.

Climate ethnography and wine environmental futures

Globalisation and climate change have radically transformed world wine production upsetting the established order of wine ecologies. Ecological risks and the future of traditional agricultural systems are widely debated in anthropology, but very little is understood of the particular challenges posed by climate change to viticulture which is seen by many as the canary in the coalmine of global agriculture. Moreover, wine as a globalised embedded commodity provides a particularly telling example for the study of climate change having already attracted early scientific attention. Studies of climate change in viticulture have focused primarily on the production of systematic models of adaptation and vulnerability, while the human and cultural factors, which are key to adaptation and sustainable futures, are largely missing. Climate experts have been unanimous in recognising the urgent need for a better understanding of the complex dynamics that shape how climate change is experienced and responded to by human systems. Yet this call has not yet been addressed. Climate ethnography, coined by the anthropologist Susan Crate (2011), aims to bridge this growing disjuncture between climate science and everyday life through the exploration of the social meaning of climate change. It seeks to investigate the confrontation of its social salience in different locations and under different environmental guises (Goodman 2018: 340). By understanding how wine producers make sense of the world (and the environment) and act in it, it proposes to focus on the co-production of interdisciplinary knowledge by identifying and foreshadowing problems (Goodman 2018: 342; Goodman & Marshall 2018). It seeks to offer an original, transformative and contrasted perspective to climate change scenarios by investigating human agency -individual or collective- in all its social, political and cultural diversity. An anthropological approach founded on detailed ethnographies of wine production is ideally placed to address economic, social and cultural disruptions caused by the emergence of these new environmental challenges. Indeed, the community of experts in environmental change have recently called for research that will encompass the human dimension and for more broad-based, integrated through interdisciplinarity, useful knowledge (Castree & al 2014). My paper seeks to engage with climate ethnography and discuss what it brings to the study of wine environmental futures while exploring the limitations of the anthropological environmental approach.