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…

Evolution of the amino acids content through grape ripening: Effect of foliar application of methyl jasmonate with or without urea

The parameters that determine the grape quality, and therefore the optimal harvest time, suffer variations during berry ripening, related to climate change, with the widely known problem of the gap between technological and phenolic maturities. However, there are few studies about its incidence on grape nitrogen composition. For this reason, the use of an elicitor, methyl jasmonate (MeJ), alone or with urea, is proposed as a tool to reduce climatic decoupling, allowing to establish the harvest time in order to achieve the optimum grape quality. The aim was to study the effect of MeJ and MeJ+Urea foliar applications on the evolution of Tempranillo amino acids content throughout the grape maturation. Three treatments were foliarly applied, at veraison and 7 days later: control (water), MeJ (10 mM) and MeJ+Urea (10 mM+6 kg N/ha). Grape samples were taken at five stages of maturation: day before the first and second applications, 15 days after the second application (pre-harvest), harvest day, and 15 days after harvest (post-harvest). The amino acids analysis of the samples was carried out by HPLC. Results showed that the evolution of amino acids was similar regardless of the treatment; however, foliar applications influenced the nitrogen compounds content, i.e., there was no qualitative effect but quantitative one. Most of the amino acids reached their maximum concentration in pre-harvest, being higher in grapes from the treatments than in the control. In general, no differences in grape amino acids content were observed between MeJ and MeJ+Urea treatments. Foliar applications with MeJ and MeJ+Urea enhanced the grape amino acids content, without affecting their profile, helping to optimize their quality and allowing to establish a more complete grape ripening standard. Therefore, MeJ and MeJ+Urea foliar applications can be a simple agronomic practice, which has shown promising results in order to enhance the grape quality.

The concept of terroir: what place for microbiota?

Microbes play key roles on crop nutrient availability via biogeochemical cycles, rhizosphere interactions with roots as well as on plant growth and health. Recent advances in technologies, such as High Throughput Sequencing Techniques, allowed to gain deeper insight on the structure of bacterial and fungal communities associated with soil, rhizosphere and plant phyllosphere. Over the past 10 years, numerous scientific studies have been carried out on the microbial component of the vineyard. Whether the soil or grape compartments have been taken into account, many studies agree on the evidence of regional delineations of microbial communities, that may contribute to regional wine characteristics and typicity. Some authors proposed the term “microbial terroir” including “yeast terroir” for grapes to describe the connection between microbial biogeography and regional wine characteristics. Many factors are involved in terroir including climate, soil, cultivar and human practices as well as their interactions. Studies considering “microbial terroir” greatly contributed to improve our knowledge on factors that shape the vineyard microbial structure and diversity. However, the potential impact of “microbial terroir” on wine composition has yet not received strong scientific evidence and many questions remain to be addressed, related to the functional characterization of the microbial community and its impact on plant physiology and grape composition, the origins and interannual stability of vineyard microbiota, as well as their impact on wine sensorial attributes. The presentation will give an overview on the role of microbiota as a terroir component and will highlight future perspectives and challenges on this key subject for the wine industry.

The impact of leaf canopy management on eco-physiology, wood chemical properties and microbial communities in root, trunk and cordon of Riesling grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.)

In the last decades, climate change required already adaptation of vineyard management. Increase in temperature and unexpected weather events cause changes in all phenological stages requiring new management tools. For example, defoliation can be a useful tool to reduce the sugar content in the berries creating differences in the wine profiles. In a ten-year field experiment using Riesling (Vitis vinifera L, planted 1986, Geisenheim, Germany), various mechanical defoliation strategies and different intensities were trialed until 2016 before the vineyard was uprooted. Wood was sampled from the plant compartments root, trunk, cordon and shoot for analyses of physicochemical properties (e.g. lignin and element content, pH, diameter), nonstructural carbohydrates and the microbial communities. The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of reduced canopy leaf area on the sink-source allocation into different compartments and potential changes of the fungal and prokaryotic wood-inhabiting community using a metabarcoding approach. Severe summer pruning (SSP) of the canopy and mechanical defoliation (MDC) above the bunch zone decreased the leaf area by 50% compared to control (C). SSP reduced the photosynthetic capacity, which resulted in an altered source-sink allocation and carbohydrate storage. With lower leaf area, less carbohydrates are allocated. This for example resulted in a decreased trunk diameter. Further, it affected the composition of the grapevine wood microbiota. SSP and MDC management changed significantly the prokaryotic community composition in wood of the root samples, but had no effect in other compartments. In general, this study found strong compartment and less management effects of the microbial community composition and associated physicochemical properties. The highest microbial diversities were identified in the wood of the trunk, and several species were recorded the first time in grapevine.

A predictive model of spatial Eca variability in the vineyard to support the monitoring of plant status

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.19.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

Use of multispectral satellite for monitoring vine water status in mediterranean areas

The development of new generations of multispectral satellites such as Sentinel-2 opens possibilities as to vine water status assessment (Cohen et al., 2019). Based on a three years field campaign, a model of Stem Water Potential (SWP) estimation on vine using four satellite bands in Red, Red-Edge, NIR and SWIR domains was developed (Laroche-Pinel et al., 2021). The model relies on SWP field measures done using a pressure chamber (Scholander et al., 1965), which is a common, robust and precise method to assess vine water status (Acevedo-Opazo et al., 2008). The model was mainly developed from from SWP measures on Syrah N (Laroche Pinel E., 2021).

A large scale monitoring was organized in different vineyards in the Mediterranean region in 2021. 10 varieties amongst the most represented in this area were monitored (Cabernet sauvignon N, Chardonnay B, Cinsault N, Grenache N, Merlot N, Mourvèdre N, Sauvignon B, Syrah N, Vermentino B, Viognier B). The model was used to produce water status maps from Sentinel-2 images, starting from the beginning of June (fruit set) up to September (harvest). The average estimated SWP for each vine was compared to actual field SWP measures done by wine growers or technicians during usual monitoring of irrigation programs. The correlations between mean estimated SWP and mean measured SWP were at the same level than expected by the model. (Laroche Pinel, 2021) The general SWP kinetics were comparable. The estimated SWP would have led to same irrigation decisions concerning the date of first irrigation in comparison with measured SWP.

Acevedo-Opazo, C., Tisseyre, B., Ojeda, H., Ortega-Farias, S., Guillaume, S. (2008). Is it possible to assess the spatial variability of vine water status? OENO One, 42(4), 203.
Cohen, Y., Gogumalla, P., Bahat, I., Netzer, Y., Ben-Gal, A., Lenski, I., … Helman, D. (2019). Can time series of multispectral satellite images be used to estimate stem water potential in vineyards? In Precision agriculture ’19, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers, pp. 445–451.
Laroche-Pinel, E., Duthoit, S., Albughdadi, M., Costard, A. D., Rousseau, J., Chéret, V., & Clenet, H. (2021). Towards vine water status monitoring on a large scale using sentinel-2 images. remote sensing, 13(9), 1837.
Laroche-Pinel,E. (2021). Suivi du statut hydrique de la vigne par télédétection hyper et multispectrale. Thèse INP Toulouse, France.
Scholander, P.F., Bradstreet, E.D., Hemmingsen, E.A., & Hammel, H.T. (1965). Sap pressure in vascular plants: Negative hydrostatic pressure can be measured in plants. Science, 148(3668), 339–346.