Terroir 2020 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Relationships between vineyard soil physiochemical properties and under-vine soil cover as potential drivers of terroir in the Barossa

Relationships between vineyard soil physiochemical properties and under-vine soil cover as potential drivers of terroir in the Barossa

Abstract

Aims: Soils are an intrinsic feature of the landscape and have influenced culturally and economically important terroir delineation in many wine-producing regions of the world. Soil physiochemical properties govern a wide array of ecosystem services, and can therefore affect grapevine health and fruit development. These physiochemical properties can reflect a combination of factors, including geology and environmental conditions, as well as soil management. In order to evaluate to what extent each of these factors contribute to the soil-driven aspect of terroir, this study examines soil properties and under-vine soil cover of twenty-four vineyard sites located in six sub-regions within the Barossa Geographical Indication (GI) Zone in South Australia. The aims of this study are to investigate relationships between soil properties and soil management as potential features that shape sub-regional variation in terroir characteristics that may eventuate in the development of smaller, distinctive sub-regional GI’s within the Barossa GI Zone.

Methods and Results: Soil samples were collected from the under-vine rows of twenty-four vineyard sites, with four sites located in each of the six Barossa sub-regions of Central Grounds, Southern Grounds, Northern Grounds, Western Ridge, Eastern Ridge and Eden Valley. Soil physiochemical properties such as texture (% sand, % silt, and % clay), total carbon (TC), total nitrogen (TN), plant-available (Colwell) phosphorus (P), pH, electrical conductivity (EC), and gravimetric water content (GWC) were measured at each site. Under-vine soil cover at each vineyard site was then assessed by using 1m2 quadrat surveys to categorise the under-vine zone based on the dominant plant species (perennial grasses or broadleaf weeds) or soil cover (bare soil or mulch). Results indicated that the Eden Valley had lower P than the Eastern Ridge and lower % clay than the Eastern Ridge and Central Grounds. The other measured soil properties were not different between the sub-regions. Under-vine floor cover did not play a significant role in shaping the measured soil properties in this study, instead it appears that soil texture was the main driver that explains these relationships. 

Conclusions:

Sub-regional variation in soil properties in the Barossa GI Zone was most strongly influenced by soil texture, which was variable at the sub-regional level in most of the sub-regions, however differences were found between the Eden Valley, Central Grounds and Eastern Ridge with the latter two sub-regions being characterised by soils with higher clay contents. Plant-available P was lowest in the Eden Valley, which could be explained by the higher sand content and therefore higher P leachability of soils in this sub-region. Under-vine soil cover did not have any effects on soil physiochemical properties between the vineyard sites, also likely because of the variability of soil texture between sites. The next steps in this study are to characterise the structure of soil microbial communities (i.e. microbiomes) in these six sub-regions to gain insight on how soil biogeography changes over an Australian wine-producing landscape. 

Significance and Impact of the Study: This study provides insights as to the main drivers of soil sub-regional variation in the Barossa GI Zone and indicates that soils are highly variable even at the sub-regional level. 

DOI:

Publication date: March 17, 2021

Issue: Terroir 2020

Type: Video

Authors

Merek Kesser*, Timothy Cavagnaro, Roberta De Bei and Cassandra Collins

School of Agriculture, Food and Wine, Waite Research Institute, The University of Adelaide, PMB 1, Glen Osmond, South Australia 5064, Australia

Contact the author

Keywords

Terroir, sub-regions, soil physiochemistry, under-vine soil cover

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2020

Citation

Related articles…

Panorama des actions d’amélioration variétale face aux challenges d’aujourd’hui et de demain, le rôle de l’IFV

In April 2024, the French official catalog includes 449 grape varieties and rootstocks. In 10 years it has been enriched with 70 varieties. It is an indisputable marker of the interest of professionals in genetic resources of all origins and the expectations they have to prepare the viticulture of the future. The scientific community has now put all irons in the fire and is not neglecting any avenue of adaptation. The regular decline in the use of phytosanitary products and the already marked effects of climate change are the targets of varietal improvement.

A NEW STRATEGY AND METHODOLOGY FOR THE CHARACTERIZATION OF POLYPHENOLS IN FINING PRECIPITATE

Polyphenols are secondary metabolite widely distributed in plant kingdom such as in fruits, in grapes and in wine. During the winemaking process, polyphenols are extract from the skin and seed of the berries. Fining is an important winemaking step just before bottling which has an impact on wine stabilization and clarification. Most the time, fining agent are animal or vegetal protein while some of them can be synthetic polymer like PVPP or natural origin like bentonite.

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.

New food trend ahead? Highlighting the nutritional benefits of grapevine leaves

The wine industry produces an enormous amount of waste every year. A wider inclusion of disregarded by-products in the human diet or its use as a source of bioactive compounds is a good strategy for reducing waste. It will not only introduce an added value to a waste product but also come upon the European Union and United Nations’ demands towards more sustainable agricultural approaches and circular economy.

Arsenic in berries and its correlation with natural soil content: experience in Trentino (Italy)

l lavoro presenta l’evoluzione dei contenuti di arsenico nelle uve durante lo sviluppo e la maturazione, e la sua distribuzione nell’acino; verifica inoltre la relazione tra i contenuti di As nelle uve