Terroir 2016 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Regenerative agricultural winegrowing systems play a role in refining the expression of terroir in the pacific coast region of United States and Canada

Regenerative agricultural winegrowing systems play a role in refining the expression of terroir in the pacific coast region of United States and Canada

Abstract

By definition, Regenerative Agricultural Systems seek to promote soil and plant health by using photosynthesis for the removal and retention of atmospheric carbon dioxide into stable soil carbon. Documented additional benefits include improved water infiltration and storage in the soil;reduced soil erosion; improved water quality in agricultural watersheds; an increase in the number and biodiversity of soil organisms; the reduction of petrochemical inputs and elimination of substances that disrupt soil biota. Many winegrowers embracing these practices are doing so as a way to personally address climate change and to improve the resilience of their vineyards to water stress.

Many winegrowers committed to the concept of Sustainable Viticulture utilize management practices that are consistent with Regenerative Agriculture. To become certified, Organic and Biodynamic vineyard farming systems are required to use Regenerative Agricultural practices. These include the use cover crops, composts and naturally occurring minerals and processed animal and plant byproducts for fertilizers to create healthy rooting environments and plant nutrition for vines. Irrigation strategies (if irrigation is needed) promote vine balance and appropriate yields for optimum wine quality. Integrated pest management is used, with the goal of enhancing a diverse self-regulating population of insect and mitepredators and parasitoids to control vineyard arthropod pests. Disease management relies both on naturally occurring fungicides and cultural practicesto minimize disease incidence and severity. Weed control is done both with grazing animals and under the vine cultivation equipment. The immediate goal of these farming systems is to create wines that are of the highest quality and expressive of the terroir of the vineyard site. Creating habitat that supports biodiversity of pollinators, vertebrates and other beneficial organisms is also important for many vineyards, especially thosethat are farmed biodynamically. There may be additional benefits of creating unique wines that fit specific market niches, and a vineyard environment that is always safe from pesticide exposure to work and live in for the owner and the employees.

In this presentation, metrics for soil health; farming practices including disease and pest management; and vineyard design and organization are discussed for both organic and biodynamic winegrowing in the west coast of the United States and Canada (San Diego, California to the Okanagan Valley of British Columbia and points in between).

DOI:

Publication date: June 23, 2020

Issue: Terroir 2016

Type: Article

Authors

Glenn McGourty

UCCE-Mendocino County, 890 N. Bush Street, Ukiah, California, USA

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Bioclimatic shifts and land use options for Viticulture in Portugal

Land use, plays a relevant role in the climatic system. It endows means for agriculture practices thus contributing to the food supply. Since climate and land are closely intertwined through multiple interface processes, climate change may lead to significant impacts in land use. In this study, 1-km observational gridded datasets are used to assess changes in the Köppen–Geiger and Worldwide Bioclimatic (WBCS)

Assessment of climate change impacts on water needs and growing cycle on grapevine in three DOs of NE Spain

This study assessed the suitability of grapevine growing in three DOs (Empordà, Pla de Bages and Penedès) of Catalonia (NE Spain) over the 21st century. For this purpose, an estimation of water needs and agroclimatic and phenological indicators was made. Climate change impacts were estimated at 1 km pixel resolution using temperature and precipitation projections from several general circulation models (GCM) and two climate change scenarios: RCP 4.5 (stabilization scenario) and RCP 8.5 (worst-case scenario). Potential crop evapotranspiration (following FAO procedure) and a daily water balance considering soil water holding capacity were used to estimate actual evapotranspiration of vines and, finally, water needs. Dynamics would be similar in the three DOs studied although the magnitude of impact differs. Water needs would be 2 and 3 times greater (ranging from 0 to more than 1500 m3/ha) than current water needs at both climate change scenarios. Moreover, blooming date would advance from 3 to 6 weeks, harvest date from 1 to 2.5 months, resulting in growing cycles from 10 to 80 days shorter. It should also be noted that frost risk would decrease from 6 to 76%, the number of days with temperatures above 30ºC during ripening would rise from 48 to 500% and tropical nights (minimum temperature >20ºC) at ripening would increase from 28 to 150%, depending on the scenario and the DOs. The impacts of climate change in the three DOs could result in significant limitations for grapevine cultivation and wine production if adaptive strategies are not applied. This result could serve as a basis for the design of specific and particular adaptation strategies to improve and maintain vineyards in the DOs studied and could be extrapolated to similar DOs and regions.

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.

Elucidating vineyard site contributions to key sensory molecules: Identification of correlations between elemental composition and volatile aroma profile of site-specific Pinot noir wines

The reproducibility of elemental profile in wines produced across multiple vintages has been previously reported using grapes from a single scion clone of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Pinot noir. The grapevines were grown on fourteen different vineyard sites, from Oregon to southern California in the U.S.A., which span distances from approximately hundreds of meters to 1450 km, while elevations range from near sea level to nearly 500 m. In addition, sensorial (i.e. aroma, taste, and mouthfeel) and chemical (i.e. polyphenolic and volatile) differences across the different vineyard sites have also been observed among these wines at two aging time points. While strong evidence exists to support that grapes grown in different regions can produce wines with unique chemical and sensorial profiles, even when a single clone is used, the understanding of growing site characteristics that result in this reproducible differentiation continues to emerge. One hypothesis is that the elemental profile that a vineyard site imparts to the grape berries and the resulting wine is an important contributor to this differentiation in chemistry and sensory of wines. For example, various classes of enzymes that catalyze the formation of key aroma compounds or their precursors require specific metals. In this work, we begin to report correlations between elemental and volatile aroma profiles of site-specific Pinot noir wines, made under standardized winemaking conditions, that have been previously shown to be distinguished separately by these chemical analyses.

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.