Terroir 2010 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Successive surveys to define practices and decision process of winegrowers to produce “Vins de Pays Charentais” in the Cognac firewater vineyard area

Successive surveys to define practices and decision process of winegrowers to produce “Vins de Pays Charentais” in the Cognac firewater vineyard area

Abstract

[English version below]

Le vin est un des produits finis que l’on obtient à partir de raisins. La vigne réagit à de nombreux facteurs environnementaux et son comportement est directement influencé par les pratiques culturales. L’expression du terroir dans les vins résulte de ces interactions, à la fois au cours du cycle végétal et au cours de la vinification. Pour identifier les pratiques agricoles, viticoles et œnologiques des viticulteurs et pour classer leurs effets sur les vins d’Anjou l’UMT Vinitera a proposé une méthode basée sur des enquêtes successives. Cet article vise à expliquer comment la méthodologie mise au point par l’équipe de l’UMT Vinitera sur le vignoble Anjou Village Brissac (AVB) a été transférée dans le vignoble Cognaçais.
En effet, le vignoble des Charentes est une aire de production d’eau-de-vie de Cognac très étendue : près de 80 000 hectares de vignes parmi lesquels seules quelques parcelles (environ 2000 hectares) sont destinées à la production de vin sous appellation Vin de Pays Charentais (VPC). Les itinéraires techniques spécifiquement pratiqués sur le vignoble VPC n’avaient jamais été étudiés jusqu’à présent et demeuraient méconnus. La première partie du travail a consisté à échantillonner environ 50 des 800 producteurs de VPC sur le vignoble Cognaçais. Ensuite un questionnaire a été élaboré pour recenser les différentes pratiques employées en viticulture et en œnologie ainsi que les motivations des agriculteurs pour produire du vin dans la région. Les résultats de cette première enquête démontrent que la structure d’exploitation et le traitement de la vendange sont des critères distinguant 3 groupes de vignerons VPC, avec différents niveaux d’implication technique sur leurs vignes et leur terroir.
Une seconde enquête est ensuite réalisée et chacun des ces groupes s’est vu adresser un questionnaire spécifique. L’objectif est de distinguer les pratiques agronomiques employées d’une part pour le VPC et d’autre part pour l’eau-de-vie de Cognac. Par des séries de questions fermées successives les producteurs sont amenés à expliquer pourquoi leurs itinéraires techniques varient d’un produit à l’autre et d’un terroir à l’autre (processus dichotomique). Ainsi cette enquête nous permet de comprendre comment un vigneron structure l’arbre de décision qui définit ses pratiques agronomiques et œnologiques pour le Vin de Pays Charentais.

Wine is one of the final products made from grapes. Vine reacts to numerous environmental factors and its behavior is directly modified by winegrower actions. Terroir expression in wines ensues from those interactions during both agronomical and enological process. To identify winegrowers’ agricultural, viticultural and enological practices and to classify their effects on wines in the French region of Anjou, UMT Vinitera suggested a method based on successive surveys. This paper aims at showing how the methodology submitted by UMT Vinitera team on Anjou Village Brissac (AVB) vineyard has been transferred to the Cognac area.
Actually, the Charentes vineyard is a huge Cognac firewater production area : almost 80000 hectares of vine among which only few plots (about 2000 hectares) are set aside for growing wine, named “Vin de Pays Charentais” (VPC). Technical itineraries specifically practiced on VPC vineyard had never been studied before and were quite little-known in this region.
First part of the work consisted in sampling 50 of nearly 800 farmers who are producing VPC in the Cognac vineyard. This wine is making barely always up a smaller part of the income than the Cognac eau-de-vie. Then a questionnaire was built to register the various cultural methods used to grow vine and wine (both for Cognac firewater and VPC) and also farmer motivations to produce specifically VPC in the area. Results of this first stage of surveys show that farm structure and grape harvest treatment are criteria that distinguish 3 groups of VPC winegrowers, with different level of technical influence on their vineyards and terroir.
In a second stage of surveys, each of these groups was addressed a specific questionnaire. The objective was to segregate agronomical practices used on one hand for the VPC and on the other hand for the Cognac firewater. Afterwards, by sensible series of closed questions (dichotomous process), farmers were lead to explain why their technical itineraries change from one product to the other and from one terroir to the other. This survey so allows us to understand how a winegrower builds the decision tree which defines his specific agronomical and enological actions for the VPC.

 

DOI:

Publication date: December 3, 2021

Issue: Terroir 2010

Type: Article

Authors

BERNARD F.M. (1), WINTERHOLER R. (1) & THIOLLET-SCHOLTUS M. (2)

(1) IFV, Institut Français de la Vigne et du vin, 15, Rue Pierre Viala, 16130, Segonzac, France
(2) INRA UEVV, UMT Vinitera, 42, Rue Georges Morel, BP 60057, 49071 Beaucouzé, France

Contact the author

Keywords

Vin de Pays Charentais, Itinéraire technique, Enquêtes, Processus dichotomique
Vin de Pays Charentais, Technical itinerary, Surveys, Dichotomous process

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2010

Citation

Related articles…

Making sense of available information for climate change adaptation and building resilience into wine production systems across the world

Effects of climate change on viticulture systems and winemaking processes are being felt across the world. The IPCC 6thAssessment Report concluded widespread and rapid changes have occurred, the scale of recent changes being unprecedented over many centuries to many thousands of years. These changes will continue under all emission scenarios considered, including increases in frequency and intensity of hot extremes, heatwaves, heavy precipitation and droughts. Wine companies need tools and models allowing to peer into the future and identify the moment for intervention and measures for mitigation and/or avoidance. Previously, we presented conceptual guidelines for a 5-stage framework for defining adaptation strategies for wine businesses. That framework allows for direct comparison of different solutions to mitigate perceived climate change risks. Recent global climatic evolution and multiple reports of severe events since then (smoke taint, heatwave and droughts, frost, hail and floods, rising sea levels) imply urgency in providing effective tools to tackle the multiple perceived risks. A coordinated drive towards a higher level of resilience is therefore required. Recent publications such as the Australian Wine Future Climate Atlas and results from projects such as H2020 MED-GOLD inform on expected climate change impacts to the wine sector, foreseeing the climate to expect at regional and vineyard scale in coming decades. We present examples of practical application of the Climate Change Adaptation Framework (CCAF) to impacts affecting wine production in two wine regions: Barossa (Australia) and Douro (Portugal). We demonstrate feasibility of the framework for climate adaptation from available data and tools to estimate historical climate-induced profitability loss, to project it in the future and to identify critical moments when disruptions may occur if timely measures are not implemented. Finally, we discuss adaptation measures and respective timeframes for successful mitigation of disruptive risk while enhancing resilience of wine systems.

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"...

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.

Late frost protection in Champagne

Probably one of the most counterintuitive impacts of climate change on vine is the increased frequency of late frost. Champagne, due to its septentrional position is historically and regularly affected by this meteorological hazard. Champagne has therefore developed a strong experience in frost protection with first experiments dating from the end of 19th century. Frost protection can be divided in two parts: passive and active. Passive protection includes all the methods that do not seek to modify the vine’s environment or resistance at the time of frost. The most iconic passive protection in Champagne is the establishment of the individual reserve. This reserve allows to stock a certain quantity of clear wine during a surplus year to compensate a meteorological hazard like frost during the following years. Other common passive methods are the control of planting area (walls, bushes, topography), the choice of grape variety, late pruning, or the impact of grass cover and tillage. Active frost protection is also divided in two parts. Most of the existing techniques tend to modify vine’s environment. Most of the time they provide warmth (candles, heaters, windmills, heating cables…), or stabilise bud’s temperature above a lethal threshold (water sprinkling). The other way to actively fight is to enhance the resistance of buds to frost (elicitors). The Comité Champagne evaluates frost protection methods following three main axes: the efficiency, the profitability, and the environmental impact through a lifecycle assessment. This study will present the results on both passive and active protection following these three axes.

The potential of multispectral/hyperspectral technologies for early detection of “flavescence dorée” in a Portuguese vineyard

“Flavescence dorée” (FD) is a grapevine quarantine disease associated with phytoplasmas and transmitted to healthy plants by insect vectors, mainly Scaphoideus titanus. Infected plants usually develop symptoms of stunted growth, unripe cane wood, leaf rolling, leaf yellowing or reddening, and shrivelled berries. Since plants can remain symptomless up to four years, they may act as reservoirs of FD contributing to the spread of the disease. So far, conventional management strategies rely mainly on the insecticide treatments, uprooting of infected plants and use of phytoplasma-free propagation material. However, these strategies are costly and could have undesirable environmental impacts. Thus, the development of sustainable and noninvasive approaches for early detection of FD and its management are of great importance to reduce disease spread and select the best cultural practices and treatments. The present study aimed to evaluate if multispectral/hyperspectral technologies can be used to detect FD before the appearance of the first symptoms and if infected grapevines display a spectral imaging fingerprint. To that end, physiological parameters (leaf area, chlorophyll content and photosynthetic rate) were collected in concomitance to the measurements of plant reflectance (using both a portable apparatus and a remote sensing drone). Measurements were performed in two leaves of 8 healthy and 8 FD-infected grapevines, at four timepoints: before the development of disease symptoms (21st June); and after symptoms appearance (ii) at veraison (2nd August); at post-veraison (11th September); and at harvest (25th September). At all timepoints, FD infected plants revealed a significant decrease in the studied physiological parameters, with a positive correlation with drone imaging data and portable apparatus analyses. Moreover, spectra of either drone imaging and portable apparatus showed clear differences between healthy and FD-infected grapevines, validating multispectral/ hyperspectral technology as a potential tool for the early detection of FD or other grapevine-associated diseases.