Multidisciplinary strategies for understanding ill-defined concepts

When to initiate irrigation is a critical annual management decision that has cascading effects on grapevine productivity and wine quality in the context of climate change. A multi-site trial was begun in 2021 to optimize irrigation initiation timing using midday stem water potential (ψstem) thresholds characterized as departures from non-stressed baseline ψstemvalues (Δψstem). Plant material, vine and row spacing, and trellising systems were concomitant among sites, while vine age, soil type, and pruning systems varied. Five target Δψstem thresholds were arranged in an RCBD and replicated eight times at each site: 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, and 1.0 MPa (T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively). When thresholds were reached, plots were irrigated weekly at 70% ETc. Yield components and berry composition were quantified at harvest. To better generalize inferences across sites, data were analyzed by ANOVA using a mixed model including site as a random factor. Across sites, irrigation was initiated at Δψstem = 0.24, 0.50, 0.65, 0.93, and 0.98 MPa for T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively. Consistent significant negative linear trends were found for several key yield and berry composition variables. Yield decreased by 12.9, 15.9, 19.5, and 27.4% for T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively, compared to T1 (p < 0.0001) across sites that were driven by similarly linear reductions in berry weight (p < 0.0001). Comparatively, berry composition varied little among treatments. Juice total soluble solids decreased linearly from T1 to T5 – though only ranged 0.9 Brix (p = 0.012). Because producers are paid by the ton, and contracts simply stipulate a target maturity level, first-year results suggest that there is no economic incentive to induce moderate water deficits before irrigation initiation, regardless of vineyard site. Subsequent years will further elucidate the carryover effects of delaying irrigation initiation on productivity over the long term.

Developing a tractable genetic engineering and gene editing system is an essential tool for grapevine. We initiated a plant transformation and biotechnology program at Oregon State University using the grape microvine system (V. vinifera) in 2018 to interrogate gene-to-trait relationships using traditional genetic engineering and gene editing. The microvine model is also used for nanomaterial-assisted RNP, DNA, and RNA delivery. Most reference genomes and annotations for grapevine are collapsed assemblies of homologous chromosomes and do not represent the specific microvine cultivar ‘043023V004’ under study at our institution.

In this video recording of the IVES science meeting 2023, Hans Reiner Schultz (Hochschule Geisenheim University, Germany) speaks about soil carbon changes and greenhouse gas emissions in vineyards – is the 4 per 1000 goal realistic?. This presentation is based on an original article accessible for free on OENO One.

Two of the most harmful microbial metabolites for human health that can be present in wines and either fermented or raw foods are biogenic amines (BA) and ochratoxine A (OTA). Winemakers are aware of the need to avoid their presence in wine by using different strategies, one of them is the use of enzymes. Some recombinant laccases have been characterized and revealed as potential tools to degrade these toxic compounds in wine[1], specifically biogenic amines[2].

Climate change could put at risk viticultural areas situated at the hotter margins of Vitis vinifera growth climatic range. We focus on two such regions with a Mediterranean climate