Terroir 2014 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Berry carbon (δ13C) and nitrogen (δ15N) isotopic ratio reflects within farm terroir diffferences

Berry carbon (δ13C) and nitrogen (δ15N) isotopic ratio reflects within farm terroir diffferences

Abstract

ÂThe natural abundance of carbon stable isotopes has been reported to be related to water availability in grapevines quite widely. In the case of nitrogen, the natural abundance of its stable isotopes is mainly affected by the nature of the source of nitrogen (organic vs. inorganic) used by the plant, though the bibliography available for grapevine is very scarce. The aim of this work was to evaluate the effect of terroir on carbon and nitrogen stable isotope natural abundance within a single grape growing farm. Three vineyards representative of three terroirs within a grape growing farm were selected. The mesoclimatic differences between them can be considered negligible, and crop management was in general terms the same. Therefore, the differences in plant behaviour should be majorly a consequence of soil characteristics (deep gravely vs. shallower loamy soil, cover crop vs. bare soil). During five consecutive seasons, plant vegetative growth and stem water potential (Ψs) were monitored throughout the growing season and, at harvest, yield and grape composition were determined including carbon (δ13C) and nitrogen (δ15N) isotopic ratios. Consistent differences for both δ13C and δ15N were found when the three terroirs were compared. On the one hand, δ13C reflected well the differences in water availability arising from either soil characteristics (deep gravelly vs. shallower loamy soil) and from the presence of a cover crop. On the other hand, δ15N was clearly higher in the gravelly soil area, possibly indicating nitrate leakage, since soil organic matter is known to have higher δ15N than inorganic fertilizers. The competition the cover crop exerted for N was reflected in berry nitrogen content but, on the contrary, did not affect δ15N.

DOI:

Publication date: July 31, 2020

Issue: Terroir 2014

Type: Article

Authors

Luis G. SANTESTEBAN, Carlos MIRANDA, Izaskun BARBARIN, José B. ROYO

Dpto. Prod. Agraria, Univ. P. Navarra, 31006 Pamplona, NA, Spain. 

Contact the author

Keywords

natural isotope abundance, water use efficiency, water status, nutrition, nitrogen sources, Vitis vinifera L.

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2014

Citation

Related articles…

Phytosterols and ergosterol role during wine alcoholic fermentation for 27 Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains

Sterols are a class of the eukaryotic lipidome that is essential for the maintenance of the cell membrane integrity and their good functionality (Daum et al., 1998).

Exploring typicity in Nebbiolo wines across different areas through chemical analysis

“Nebbiolo” is a red winegrape variety well known to produce monovarietal wines in Piemonte, Valle d’Aosta, and Lombardia regions, taking part to 7 DOCG (Denominazione di Origine Controllata e Garantita) and 22 DOC (Denominazione di Origine Controllata) protected designations of origin (PDO) [1,2].

Vineyard nutrient budget and sampling protocols

Vineyard nutrient management is crucial for reaching production-specific quality standards, yet timely evaluation of nutrient status remains challenging. The existing sampling protocol of collecting vine tissue (leaves and/or petioles) at bloom or veraison is time-consuming. Additionally, this sampling practice is too late for in-season fertilizer applications (e.g. N is applied well before bloom). Therefore alternative early-season protocols are necessary to predict the vine nutrient demand for the upcoming season. The main goals of this project are to 1) optimize existing tissue sampling protocols; 2) determine the amount of nutrients removed at the end of the growing season.

Optimised extraction and preliminary characterisation of mannoproteins from non-Saccharomyces wine yeasts

The use of non-Saccharomyces yeast species for the improvement of wine technological and oenological properties is a topic that has gained much interest in recent years [1]. Their application as co-starter cultures sequential to the inoculation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and in aging on the lees has been shown to improve aspects such as protein stability and mouthfeel [2].

The impact of sustainable management regimes on amino acid profiles in grape juice, grape skin flavonoids, and hydroxycinnamic acids

One of the biggest challenges of agriculture today is maintaining food safety and food quality while providing ecosystem services such as biodiversity conservation, pest and disease control, ensuring water quality and supply, and climate regulation. Organic farming was shown to promote biodiversity and carbon sequestration, and is therefore seen as one possibility of environmentally friendly production. Consumers expect organically grown crops to be free from chemical pesticides and mineral fertilizers and often presume that the quality of organically grown crops is different or higher compared to conventionally grown crops. Integrated, organic, and biodynamic viticulture were compared in a replicated field trial in Geisenheim, Germany (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Riesling). Amino acid profiles in juice, grape skin flavonoids, and hydroxycinnamic acids were monitored over three consecutive seasons beginning 7 years after conversion to organic and biodynamic viticulture, respectively. In addition, parameters such as soil nutrient status, yield, vigor, canopy temperature, and water stress were monitored to draw conclusions on reasons for the observed changes. Results revealed that the different sustainable management regimes highly differed in their amino acid profiles in juice and also in their skin flavonol content, whereas differences in the flavanol and hydroxycinnamic acid content were less pronounced. It is very likely that differences in nutrient status and yield determined amino acid profiles in juice, although all three systems showed similar amounts of mineralized nitrogen in the soil. Canopy structure and temperature in the bunch zone did not differ among treatments and therefore cannot account for the observed differences in favonols. A different light exposure of the bunches in the respective systems due to differences in vigor together with differences in berry size and a different water status of the vines might rather be responsible for the increase in flavonol content under organic and biodynamic viticulture.