Lamp – a modern tool for the detection of fungal infections in the vineyard

The main innovation in the VINIoT service is the joint use of two technologies that are currently used separately: vineyard monitoring using multispectral imaging and deployed terrain sensors. One part of the system is based on the development of artificial intelligence algorithms that are feed on the images of the multispectral camera and IoT sensors, high-level information on water stress, grape ripening status and the presence of diseases. In order to obtain algorithms to determine the state of ripening of the grapes and avoid losing information due to the diversity of the grape berries, it was decided to work along the first year 2020 at berry scale in the laboratory, during the second year at the cluster scale and on the last year at plot scale. Different varieties of white and red grapes were used; in the case of Galicia we worked with the white grape variety Treixadura and the red variety Mencía. During the 2020 and 2021 campaigns, multispectral images were taken in the visible and infrared range of: 1) sets of 100 grapes classifying them by means of densimetric baths, 2) individual bunches. The images taken with the laboratory analysis of the ripening stage were correlated. Technological maturity, pH, probable degree, malic acid content, tartaric acid content and parameters for assessing phenolic maturity, IPT, anthocyanin content were determined. It has been calculated for each single image the mean value of each spectral band (only taking into account the pixels of interest) and a correlation study of these values with laboratory data has been carried out. These studies are still provisional and it will be necessary to continue with them, jointly with the training of the machine learning algorithms. Processed data will allow to determine the sensitivity of the multispectral images and select bands of interest in maturation.

Sixty five % of the agricultural area of the Basque Country located in the DO Ca Rioja corresponds to vineyards. More than 40% of it has an average slope greater than 10%, which makes it sensitive to erosive processes. Furthermore, it is foreseeable that extreme weather events (storms, hail, extreme heat and cold, etc.) will be favored due to climate change. Cover cropping can mitigate this risk, and therefore the objective of this work is to evaluate the impact that a vegetable cover has on the agronomic behavior of the vineyard, the quality of the grape and soil erosion. For this, a trial has been carried out with a Graciano variety vineyard with a slope between 10% -20% during the years 2020 and 2021. Conventional tillage management in the area has been compared (4-6 passes per year of tillage machinery) versus spontaneous vegetation cover management in the vineyard. This implies not tilling and allowing the grass of the land to colonize the range between the lines of vines, controlling their height through 1-3 mowing passes per year, always trying to affect the surface of the land as little as possible. The vegetative growth, yield and quality of the grape and wine was measured. Furthermore, erosion has been measured using Gerlasch boxes. The yield was lower in the second year of the trial in the cover crop treatment, but erosion was significantly reduced.

Wine terroir describes the collectively recognized relation between a geographical area and the distinctive organoleptic characteristics of the wines produced in it. The overriding objective in terroir studies is therefore to provide scientific proof relating the properties of terroir components to wine quality and typicity. In scientific circles, the role of climate (macro-, meso- and micro-) on grape and wine characteristics is well documented and accepted as the most critical. Moreover, there has been increasing interest in recent years about new elements with possible importance in shaping wine terroir like berry/leaf/soil microbiology or even aromatic plants in proximity to the vineyard conferring flavors to the grapes. However, the actual effect of these factors is also dependent on complex interactions with plant material (variety/clone, rootstock, vine age) and with human factors.
The contribution of soil, although a fundamental component of terroir and extremely popular among wine enthusiasts, remains a much-debated issue among researchers. The role of geology is probably the one mostly associated by consumers with the notion of terroir with different parent rocks considered to give birth to different wine styles. However, the relationship between wine properties and the underlying parent material raises a lot of controversy especially regarding the actual existence of rock-derived flavors in the wine (e.g. minerality). As far as the actual soil properties are concerned, the effect of soil physical properties is generally regarded as the most significant (e.g sandy soils being associated with lighter wines while those on clay with colored and tannic ones) mostly through control of water availability which ultimately modifies berry ripening conditions either directly by triggering biosynthetic pathways, or indirectly by altering vigor and yield components. The role of soil chemistry seems to be weakly associated to wine sensory characteristic, although N, K, S and Ca, but also soil pH, are often considered important in the overall soil effect.
Recently, in the light of evidence provided by precision agriculture studies reporting a high variability of vineyard soils, the spatial scale should also be taken into consideration in the evaluation of the soil effects on wines. While it is accepted that soil effects become more significant than climate on a local level, it is not clear whether these micro-variations of vineyard soils are determining in the terroir effect. Moreover, as terroir is not a set of only natural factors, the magnitude of the contribution of human-related factors (irrigation, fertilization, soil management) to the soil effect still remains ambiguous. Lastly, a major shortcoming of the majority of works about soil effects on wine characteristics is the absence of connection with actual vine physiological processes since all soil effects on grape and wine chemistry and sensorial properties are ultimately mediated through vine responses.
This article attempts to breakdown the main soil attributes involved in the terroir effect to suggest an improved understanding about soil’s true contribution to wine sensory characteristics. It is proposed that soil parameters per se are not as significant determining factors in the terroir effect but rather their mutual interactions as well as with other natural and human factors included in the terroir concept. Consequently, similarly to bioclimatic indices, composite soil indices (i.e. soil depth, water holding capacity, fertility, temperature etc), incorporating multiple soil parameters, might provide a more accurate and quantifiable means to assess the relative weight of the soil component in the terroir effect.

Under-vine (UV) management has traditionally consisted of synthetic herbicide use to limit competition between weeds and grapevines. With growing global interest towards non-synthetic chemical use, this study aimed to capture the effects of alternative UV management at two commercial Shiraz vineyards in South Australia, where the sole management variables were UV management since 2016. In adjacent treatment blocks, cultivation (CU) was compared to spontaneous vegetation (SV) in McLaren Vale (MV), and herbicide was compared to SV in Eden Valley (EV). Soil water infiltration rates were slower and grapevine stem water potential was lower in CU compared to SV in MV, with the latter having a plant community dominated by soursob (Oxalis pes-caprae) during winter; while in EV, there was little separation between the treatments. Yields were affected at both sites, with SV being higher in MV and HE being higher in EV. In MV, the only effect on grape must was a lower 13C:12C isotope ratio in CU, indicating greater grapevine water stress. In the grape must at EV, SV had higher total soluble solids, total phenolics, anthocyanins, and yeast available nitrogen; and lower pH and titratable acidity. Pruning weights were not affected by the treatments in MV, while they were higher in HE at EV. Assessments revealed that the differing soil types at the two sites were likely the main determinants of the opposing production outcomes associated with UV management. In the silty loam soil of MV, the higher yields in SV were likely due to more plant-available water, as a potential result of the continuous soil bio-pores formed by winter UV vegetation. Conversely, in the loamy sand soils of EV with a lower cation exchange capacity, the lower yields and pruning weights in SV suggest the UV vegetation competed significantly with the grapevines for available water and nutrients.

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.