Terroir 2016 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Ten grapevine rootstocks: effects on vegetative development, production and grape quality of cv. Mencia in the d.o. Bierzo (Spain)

Ten grapevine rootstocks: effects on vegetative development, production and grape quality of cv. Mencia in the d.o. Bierzo (Spain)

Abstract

Grapevine rootstock is basic to achieve good adaptation of the vine to ground and environment. Given the low knowledge of the effects of different rootstocks in the agronomic behavior of cv. Mencia, an experimental trial was developed in the D.O. Bierzo during the period of 2009-2012, on a vineyard planted in 2002 in Pieros (Leon).

The vines were trained with vertical trellis, by means of bilateral Royat cordon pruning, to 3 two-bud spurs per arm, for a total of 12 buds per vine. Vine distances were of 3.0 m x 1.0 m (3,333 vines/ha) and row orientation is East-NE to West-SW. The rootstocks to study are: 110R, 140Ru, 1103P, 101-14M, 420A, 5BB, 41B, 161-49C, 333EM, SO4. The experimental design consisted of 4 randomized blocks, with an elemental plot of 30 vines.

The results showed a tendency of rootstocks SO4 and 420A to increase grape yield, and 101-14M and 5BB to reduce it, through the variation of number of clusters per vine and cluster weight. The vegetative development was clearly favored by rootstocks 5BB and 1103P, and reduced by 101-14M and 110R, which became the weakest rootstocks, mainly due to the variation of individual shoot vigor. The Ravaz index was higher in 110R, 41B and SO4 and lower in 5BB and 1103P.

The influence of the rootstock varied on several parameters of grape quality, which was partially dependent on the level of vegetative growth and grape yield achieved by each rootstock. Thus, 5BB, 101-14M and 1103P, the less productive rootstocks, increased the sugar concentration, whereas 41B and 110R reduced it. The acidity increased with 110R and 1103P, and was reduced with 333EM and 101-14M, whereas the pH value of 5BB, of highest sugar concentration, stood out from the rest. The tartaric acid in 41B and SO4 was the highest, and decreased in 333EM and 140Ru, whereas the malic acid got the highest values in 5BB and 1103P, the rootstocks of highest vegetative growth, and decreased in 101-14 M, as well as in 41B and 110R, the rootstocks of lower sugar concentration. The potassium concentration clearly increased in 5BB, a rootstock of very low production and high sugar content, and decreased in 41B, the rootstock of lowest sugar concentration, and 101-14M, whereas the total phenols index did not shown statistically significant differences between rootstocks

DOI:

Publication date: June 23, 2020

Issue: Terroir 2016

Type: Article

Authors

Jesús YUSTE (1), Ramón YUSTE (2), María V. ALBURQUERQUE (2)

(1) Instituto Tecnológico Agrario de Castilla y León Ctra. Burgos km 119. 47071 Valladolid, Spain
(2) At present: external viticulture activity

Contact the author

Keywords

acidity, berry, grape yield, pruning weight, sugar

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.

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.

Climate, Viticulture, and Wine … my how things have changed!

The planet is warmer than at any time in our recorded past and increasing greenhouse emissions and persistence in the climate system means that continued warming is highly likely. Climate change has already altered the basic framework of growing grapes for wine production worldwide and will likely continue to do so for years to come. The wine sector can continue to play an important role in leading the agricultural sector in addressing climate change. From developing on…

Short-term relationships between climate and grapevine trunk diseases in southern French vineyards

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.19.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

Low-cost sensors as a support tool to monitor soil-plant heat exchanges in a Mediterranean vineyard

Mediterranean viticulture is increasingly exposed to more frequent extreme conditions such as heat waves. These extreme events co-occur with low soil water content, high air vapor pressure deficit and high solar radiant energy fluxes and result in leaf and berry sunburn, lower yield, and berry quality, which is a major constraint for the sustainability of the sector. Grape growers must find ways to proper and effectively manage heat waves and extreme canopy and berry temperatures. Irrigation to keep soil moisture levels and enable adequate plant turgor, and convective and evaporative cooling emerged as a key tool to overcome this major challenge. The effects of irrigation on soil and plant water status are easily quantifiable but the impact of irrigation on soil and canopy temperature and on heat convection from soil to cluster zone remain less characterized. Therefore, a more detailed quantification of vineyard heat fluxes is highly relevant to better understand and implement strategies to limit the effects of extreme weather events on grapevine leaf and berry physiology and vineyards performance. Low-cost sensor technologies emerge as an opportunity to improve monitoring and support decision making in viticulture. However, validation of low-cost sensors is mandatory for practical applicability. A two-year study was carried in a vineyard in Alentejo, south of Portugal, using low-cost thermal cameras (FLIR One, 80×60 pixels and FLIR C5, 160×120 pixels, 8-14 µm, FLIR systems, USA) and pocket thermohygrometers (Extech RHT30, EXTECH instruments, USA) to monitor grapevine and soil temperatures. Preliminary results show that low-cost cameras can detect severe water stress and support the evaluation of vertical canopy temperature variability, providing information on soil surface temperature. All these thermal parameters can be relevant for soil and crop management and be used in decision support systems.