Terroir 2010 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Terroir characterization from cv. Merlot and Sauvignon plots follow-up within the scope of wine-production : “Vins de Pays Charentais” in the Cognac eaux-de-vie vineyard area

Terroir characterization from cv. Merlot and Sauvignon plots follow-up within the scope of wine-production : “Vins de Pays Charentais” in the Cognac eaux-de-vie vineyard area

Abstract

[English version below]

Dans les études des terroirs, il est souvent délicat d’établir des zonages et de mesurer les effets de l’environnement sur les vins. Avec plus d’un million d’hectares dans l’aire d’appellation délimitée, le terroir du célèbre vignoble de Cognac est bien connu pour ces eaux-de-vie et ainsi divisé en 6 crus.
Cette étude vise à décrire le terroir des Vins de Pays Charentais (VPC) produits dans le vignoble Cognaçais. Les principaux cépages spécifiquement destinés à la production de VPC (Merlot et Sauvignon blanc) ont été étudiés en collectant de nombreuses données sur 5 millésimes et 35 parcelles représentant la diversité agro-pédo-climatique de la région. Comme souvent dans les essais au champ les expérimentateurs ont été confrontés à de multiples facteurs croisés et de nombreux paramètres ont été suivis. A ce stade, peu de données climatiques ont été introduites et les données de dégustation n’ont pas été incluses.
Une expertise préliminaire a permis de sélectionner certaines variables, classées en 4 groupes distincts : données climatiques et pédologiques, matériel végétal, phénologie et vinification.
L’analyse statistique exploratoire a fait ressortir certaines variables influentes, par exemple l’ère géologique et le type de sol, qui distinguent des unités cohérentes d’un point de vue géographique notamment les îles de Ré et d’Oléron. Le comportement des vignes VPC est ensuite étudié sur chacune de ces unités afin de définir ces terroirs viticoles.
Les groupes de parcelles destinées à la production de vin semblent concorder pour une bonne part aux crus des eaux de vie de Cognac même si le cépage et le type de produit diffèrent. Ces résultats vont permettre de réfléchir sur différents moyens d’optimiser l’effet terroir par les pratiques des producteurs de VPC sur les différents terroirs.

Zoning and understanding the effects of the environment expressed in vine products has always been a difficult work to start off with terroir. Thus, with more than one million hectares in the delimited appellation area, the famous Cognac vineyard terroir is well-known for eaux-de-vie and divided in 6 vintages areas since the beginning of the 20th century.
This project aims at describing the terroir for wines named “Vins de Pays Charentais” (VPC) produced in the Cognac vineyard. Main cultivars specifically used to produce VPC (Merlot and Sauvignon Blanc) were studied by collecting a set of data, using 6 years and 35 plots to represent the diversity of environmental and cultural situations in the area. As often in field trials, experimenters were confronted with many crossed factors and numerous variables were measured. At this stage, only few climatic data is available. A preliminary expertise allowed to choose some of the variables sorted in 4 distinctive groups : soil and climate data, plant material, vine cycle and grapes and then wine-making process. Tasting data was not taken into account regarding as its robustness.
The statistical exploratory analysis brought out some influential variables, as for example geological era and soil type, that clearly segregate coherent geographic units, notably Ré and Oléron islands which are breaking away. From then on, to define various “wine-terroirs” these clusters should each correspond to consistent VPC grapevine behavior and wines.
Most climatic data still has to be crossed with the plots groups sorted, but the clusters of wine producing plots already appears to tally, at least partly, Cognac firewater vineyards classification even if cultivars and type of product differ. These results allow to consider various means to optimize terroir effect by VPC winegrowers’ practices on each plot, depending on its cluster.

DOI:

Publication date: December 3, 2021

Issue: Terroir 2010

Type: Article

Authors

BERNARD F.M. (1), PREYS S. (2), GIRARD M. (3) & MORNET L. (4)

(1) IFV, Institut Français de la Vigne et du vin, 15 Rue Pierre Viala, 16130, Segonzac, France
(2) Ondalys, 385 Avenue des Baronnes, 34730, Prades-Le-Lez, France
(3) Chambre d’Agriculture de Charente-Maritime, 3 Boulevard Vladimir, 17100, Saintes, France
(4) Chambre d’Agriculture de Charente, 25 Rue de Cagouillet, 16100, Cognac, France

Contact the author

Keywords

Vins de Pays Charentais, Merlot, Sauvignon, Terroir viticole, Sol, Millésime
Vins de Pays Charentais, Merlot, Sauvignon, Wine-terroir, Soil, Vintage

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2010

Citation

Related articles…

Influence of agronomic practices in soil water content in mid-mountain vineyards

In the context of LIFE project MIDMACC (LIFE18 CCA/ES/001099), several pilots have been installed in vineyards in mid mountain areas of Catalonia (NE Spain) to test well stablished agronomic practices to increase the adaptation of Mediterranean mid mountain to climate change. Soil water content (SWC) at three different depths (15, 30 and 45cm) was measured in continuum from August 2020. One pilot (WC) included a well-established green cover (GC), a new GC (NC) and a conventional soil management (CM, tilling+herbicides). NC presented an intermediate state between WC and CM, responding similarly to CM in autumn but quickly reaching similar SWC to WC, then following the same evolution till next spring, with CM presenting lower values along autumn and winter. Then vegetation activation decreased SWC in all plots, (much slower in CM, lacking GC). Sensibility to spring rains is again intermediate for NC, which joins SWC evolution of CM by the end of spring till next autumn. It is expected that NC will resemble WC more and more as its GC develops. In the pilot combining vine training (VSP vs Gobelet) and hillside management (slope vs terrace), no clear pattern could be related with these conditions. However, both terraces seem to be more sensitive to spring rains. A third pilot included new vineyards (7 and 1 year old). In the new vineyard (N), higher canopy development, a spontaneous green cover and row straw resulted in a slower SWC dynamic, not so sensitive to rains but conserving more soil water in spring and most of summer, even with presumably a higher water extraction by vines. In the newest vineyard (VN) the deepest sensor is still sensitive to rain events all over the year and SWC is always highest at this depth, revealing small water capture by vines.

Protected Designation of Origin (D.P.O.) Valdepeñas: classification and map of soils

The objective of the work described here is the elaboration of a map of the different types of vineyard soils that to guide the famers in the choice of the most productive vine rootstocks and varieties. 90 vineyard soils profiles were analysed in the entire territory of the Origen Denominations of Valdepeñas. The sampling was carried out in 2018 (June to October) by making a sampling grid, followed by photointerpretation and control in the field. The studied soils can be grouped into 9 different soil types (according to FAO 2006 classification): Leptosols, Regosols, Fluvisols, Gleysols, Cambisols, Calcisols, Luvisols and Anthrosols. A map showing the soil distribution with different type of soils has been made with the ArcGIS program. Regarding to the choice of rootstock, Calcisoles are soils with a high active limestone content, so the rootstocks used in these soils must be resistant to this parameter; Luvisols are deep soils with high clay content, so they will support vigorous rootstocks. Because the cartographic units are composed of two or more subgroups, with are associated in variable proportions, 9 different soil associations have been established; Unit 1: Leptosols, Cambisols and Luvisols (80%, 15% and 5% respectively); Unit 2: Cambisols with Regosols and Luvisols (40%, 30% and 30% respectively); Unit 3: Cambisols and Gleysols with Regosols (40%, 40% and 20% respectively); Unit 4: Regosols with Cambisols, Leptosols and Calcisols (40%, 30%, 15% and 15% respectively); Unit 5: Cambisols, Leptosols, Calcisols and Regosols (25% each of them); Unit 6: Luvisols with Cambisol and Calcisols (80%, 10% and 10% respectively); Unit 7: Luvisols and Calcisols with Cambisols (40%, 40% and 20% respectively); Unit 8: Calcisols with, Cambisols and Luvisols (80%, 10% and 10% respectively); Unit 9: Anthrosols. These study allow to elaborate the first map of vineyard soils of this Protected Designation of Origin in Castilla-La Mancha.

Optimizing stomatal traits for future climates

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.

Under-vine management effects on grapevine production, soil properties and plant communities in South Australia

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.

Copper contamination in vineyard soils of Bordeaux: spatial risk assessment for the replanting of vines and crops

Copper (Cu) is widely and historically used in viticulture as a fungicide against mildew. Cu has a strong affinity for soil organic matter and accumulates in topsoil horizons. Thus, Cu may negatively affect soil organisms and plants, consequently reducing soil fertility and productivity. The Bordeaux vineyards have the largest vineyard surfaces (26%) within French controlled appellation and a great proportion of French wine production (around 5 million hl per year). Considering the local context of vineyard surfaces decreasing (vine uprooting) and possible new crop plantation, the issue of Cu potential toxicity rises. Therefore, the aims of this work are firstly to evaluate the Cu contamination in vineyard soils of Bordeaux, secondly to produce a risk assessment map for new vine or crop plantation. We used soil analyses from several local studies to build a database with 4496 soil horizon samples. The database was enhanced by means of pedotransfer functions in order to estimate the bioaccessible (EDTA-extractable) Cu in soils of samples without measurements. From this database, 1797 georeferenced samples with CuEDTA concentrations in the topsoil (0-50 cm depth) were used for kriging interpolation in order to produce the spatial distribution map of CuEDTA in vineyard soils. Then, the spatial distribution of Cu was crossed with vine uprooting surfaces and municipality boundaries. CuEDTAconcentrations ranged from 0.52 to 459 mg/kg and showed clear anomalies. Our results from spatial analysis showed that almost 50% of vineyard soil surfaces have CuEDTA concentrations higher than 30 mg/kg (moderate risk for new plantation) and 20% with concentrations higher than 50 mg/kg (high risk for new plantation). A decision-support map based on municipalities was realised to provide a simple tool to stakeholders concerned by land use management.