Grapegrowing soils

Results indicated that cross-flow microfiltration removed similarly to fining treatments the most astringent tannins, but cross-flow microfiltration also removed up to 14 % more colour. RP-HPLC and spectrophotometric results showed that egg albumin is a softer fining treatment compared to gelatine and cross-flow microfiltration.

One of the major challenges for food security and sovereignty is to produce stress-tolerant plants without introducing foreign DNA, because the legislative process, that bans transgenics, challenges us to find new solutions for producing plants that can survive the drought. To achieve this goal, we need to identify genes that can be modified to improve stress tolerance in plants. In this work, we present an online tool for exploring the transcriptome of grapevines under water stress, which is one of the most important abiotic stresses affecting viticulture. The tool is based on a comprehensive collection of rna-seq data from 997 experiments, covering four different tissues (leaf, root, berry, and shoot), various levels of water stress, and diverse genetic backgrounds (cultivars and rootstocks) with different levels of tolerance to water stress.

Filtration is a critical step in ensuring the clarity and microbial stability of wine prior to bottling. However the process of filtering potentially reduces red wine quality by removing some of the macromolecules that contribute to the texture of the wine. Commercial red wines, Cabernet Sauvignon (CAS) and Shiraz (SHZ), of two vintages and two grades (premium grade wines from the older vintage: CAS13 and SHZ13; and standard grade wines from a younger vintage: CAS14 and SHZ14) were filtered through industrial-scale commercial filtration units prior to bottling. Samples were taken before and after cross-flow filtration, lenticular filters, 0.65 µm and 0.45 µm pore size nylon membrane filters. The concentration and composition of macromolecules, including tannins and polysaccharides, were measured in all samples as well as particle size distribution and wine colour.

The postharvest dehydration of grapes is a traditional practice to obtain wines with unique traits (e.g., sweet, dry/reinforced).

Stomatal traits determine grapevine water use, carbon supply, and water stress, which directly impact yield and berry chemistry. Breeding for stomatal traits has the strong potential to improve grapevine performance under future, drier conditions, but the trait values that breeders should target are unknown. We used a functional-structural plant model developed for grapevine (HydroShoot) to determine how stomatal traits impact canopy gas exchange, water potential, and temperature under historical and future conditions in high-quality and hot-climate California wine regions (Napa and the Central Valley). Historical climate (1990-2010) was collected from weather stations and future climate (2079-99) was projected from 4 representative climate models for California, assuming medium- and high-emissions (RCP 4.5 and 8.5). Five trait parameterizations, representing mean and extreme values for the maximum stomatal conductance (gmax) and leaf water potential threshold for stomatal closure (Ψsc), were defined from meta-analyses. Compared to mean trait values, the water-spending extremes (highest gmax or most negative Ysc) had negligible benefits for carbon gain and canopy cooling, but exacerbated vine water use and stress, for both sites and climate scenarios. These traits increased cumulative transpiration by 8 – 17%, changed cumulative carbon gain by -4 – 3%, and reduced minimum water potentials by 10 – 18%. Conversely, the water-saving extremes (lowest gmax or least negative Ψsc) strongly reduced water use and stress, but potentially compromised the carbon supply for ripening. Under RCP 8.5 conditions, these traits reduced transpiration by 22 – 35% and carbon gain by 9 – 16% and increased minimum water potentials by 20 – 28%, compared to mean values. Overall, selecting for more water-saving stomatal traits could improve water-use efficiency and avoid the detrimental effects of highly negative canopy water potentials on yield and quality, but more work is needed to evaluate whether these benefits outweigh the consequences of minor declines in carbon gain for fruit production.