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…

Effects of organic mulches on the soil environment and yield of grapevine

Farming management practices aiming at conserving soil moisture have been developed in arid and semiarid-areas facing water scarcity problems. Organic mulching is an effective method to manipulate the crop-growing microclimate increasing crop yield by controlling soil temperature, and retaining soil moisture by reducing soil evaporation. In this sense, the effectiveness of different organic mulching materials (straw mulch and grapevine pruning debris) applied within the row of a vineyard was evaluated on the soil and on the vine in a Tempranillo vineyard located in La Rioja (Spain). Organic mulches were compared with a traditional bare soil management technique (based on the use of herbicides to avoid weed incidence). Mulching coverages favourably influenced the soil water retention throughout all the grapevine vegetative cycle. However, the soil-moisture variation was not the same under different mulching materials, being the straw mulch (SM) the one that retained more water in comparison with grapevine pruning debris (GPD) based-cover. The changes of soil moisture in the upper surface layer (0–10 cm) were highly dynamic, probably due to water vapour fluxes across the soil-atmospheric interface. However, both, SM and GPD reduced these fluctuations as compared with bare soils. A similar trend occurred with soil temperature. Both organic mulches altered soil temperature in comparison with bare soil by reducing soil temperature in summer and raising it in winter. Moreover, the same buffering effect for the temperature on the covered soil also remains in the deeper layers. To conclude, we could see that organic mulching had a positive impact on soil-moisture storage and soil temperature and the extent of this effect depends on the type of mulching materials. These changes led to higher rates of photosynthesis and stomatal conductivity compared to bare soils, also favouring crop growth and grape yields.

Ecophysiological performance of Vitis rootstocks under water stress

The use of rootstocks tolerant to soil water deficit is an interesting strategy to cope with limited water availability. Currently, several nurseries are breeding new genotypes, but the physiological basis of its responses under water stress are largely unknown. To this end, an ecophysiological assessment of the conventional 110-Richter (110R) and SO4, and the new M1 and M4 rootstocks was carried out in potted ungrafted plants. During one season, these Vitis genotypes were grown under greenhouse conditions and subjected to two water regimes, well-watered and water deficit. Water potentials of plants under water deficit down to < -1.4 MPa, and net photosynthesis (AN) <5 μmol m-2 s-1 did not cause leaf oxidative stress damage compared to well-watered conditions in any of the genotypes. The antioxidant capacity was sufficient to neutralize the mild oxidative stress suffered. Under both treatments, gravimetric differences in daily water use were observed among genotypes, leading to differences in the biomass of root, shoot and leaf. Under well-watered conditions, SO4 and 110R were the most vigorous and M1 and M4 the least. However, under water stress, SO4 exhibited the greatest reduction in biomass while M4 showed the lowest. Remarkably, under these conditions, SO4 reached the least negative stem water potential (Ψstem), while M1 reduced stomatal conductance (gs) and AN the most. In addition, SO4 and M1 genotypes also showed the highest and lowest hydraulic conductance values, respectively. Our results suggest that there are differences in water use regulation among genotypes, not only attributed to differences in stomatal regulation or intrinsic water use efficiency at the leaf level. Therefore, because no differences in canopy-to-root ratio were achieved, it is hypothesized that xylem vessel anatomical differences may be driving the reported differences among rootstocks performance. Results demonstrate that each Vitis rootstock differs in its ecophysiological responses under water stress.

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.

Simulating climate change impact on viticultural systems in historical and emergent vineyards

Global climate change affects regional climates and hold implications for wine growing regions worldwide. Although winegrowers are constantly adapting to internal and external factors, it seems relevant to develop tools, which will allow them to better define actual and future agro-climatic potentials. Within this context, we develop a modelling approach, able to simulate the impact of environmental conditions and constraints on vine behaviour and to highlight potential adaptation strategies according to different climate change scenarios. Our modeling approach, named SEVE (Simulating Environmental impacts on Viticultural Ecosystems), provides a generic modeling framework for simulating grapevine growth and berry ripening under different conditions and constraints (slope, aspect, soil type, climate variability…) as well as production strategies and adaptation rules according to climate change scenarios. Each activity is represented by an autonomous agent able to react and adapt its reaction to the variability of environmental constraints. Using this model, we have recently analyzed the evolution of vineyards’ exposure to climatic risks (frost, pathogen risk, heat wave) and the adaptation strategies potentially implemented by the winegrowers. This approach, implemented for two climate change scenarios, has been initiated in France on traditional (Loire Valley) and emerging (Brittany) vineyards. The objective is to identify the time horizons of adaptations and new opportunities in these two regions. Carried out in collaboration with wine growers, this approach aims to better understand the variability of climate change impacts at local scale in the medium and long term.

Extreme canopy management for vineyard adaptation to climate change: is it a good idea?

Climate change constitutes an enormous challenge for humankind and for all human activities, viticulture not being an exception. Long-term strategic changes are probably needed the most, but growers also need to deal with short-term changes: summers that are getting progressively warmer, earlier harvest dates and higher pH in musts and wines. In the last 10-15 years, a relevant corpus of research is being developed worldwide in order to evaluate to which extent extreme canopy management operations, aimed at reducing leaf area and, thus, limiting the source to sink ratio, could be useful to delay ripening. Although extreme canopy management can result in relevant delays in harvest dates, longer term studies, as well as detailed analysis of their implications on carbohydrate reserves, bud fertility and future yield are desirable before these practices can be recommended.