Terroir 2010 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Long-term vineyard sustainability index

Long-term vineyard sustainability index

Abstract

The impact of viticulture on soil can be determined by comparing the biophysical properties that represent soil health at a particular site and depth with those same properties in soil considered to represent the ‘pre-vineyard’ state (the headland). Information gathered by this method shows the changes in soil properties following the change to viticulture depend on individual vineyard management and environment. Relative changes can be used for comparisons within regions. Our research took place over three years on soils of vineyards of different ages and under different management, in both the Awatere and the Wairau Valleys in Marlborough, New Zealand. Soil properties investigated were: pH (optimal value 5.5-7.0); organic carbon (OC, 3-5%); carbon/nitrogen ratio (C/N,10-20); bulk density (BD, 0.9-1.3 t/m3); macro-porosity (MP, 8-30%); microbial biomass (MB-C, g C/m2 in 15 cm of soil); basal respiration (BR-C, 1.5-4.5 g CO2-C/m2/day), respiration quotient (qCO2, 0.5-1.5 mg CO2-C/g MB-C) and kg carbon/m2 for 15 cm of soil (4.5-9.0 kg-C). Objective descriptions of vineyard soil quality would assist growers to apply and monitor sustainable vineyard management practices. This data set indicates changes in sustainability that can be expected after a change of land-use to grape growing.
Under average vineyard management, soil carbon declined rapidly during the first few years but reached a plateau after two or more years. Soil depth was shown to be influential, with soils below 15 cm much less affected by land use changes, but scoring lower for all soil carbon parameters (except for qCO2). Soils at this depth also scored lower for soil physical properties; they generally had a very high BD, low MP and low pH. These trends for the 15-30 cm layer are typical soil properties – they don’t imply that soil depth is a factor in sustainability indices per se.
The high variability and generally reduced levels of under-vine soil carbon compared with headland soil carbon, suggest the need to increase vineyard soil carbon content and thereby potentially sequestrate carbon.

DOI:

Publication date: December 3, 2021

Issue: Terroir 2010

Type: Article

Authors

Marc Greven (1), Victoria Raw (1), Colin Gray (2), Markus Deurer (3), Bruce West (1), Claire Grose (1)

(1) The New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Limited, Marlborough, PO Box 845, Blenheim 7240,
New Zealand
(2) Marlborough District Council, 15 Seymour Street, Blenheim 7201, New Zealand
(3) The New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Limited, Private Bag 11600, Palmerston North 4442,
New Zealand

Contact the author

Keywords

vineyard, grape, soil biophysical properties, organic carbon, microbial biomass, basal respiration, macro-porosity

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2010

Citation

Related articles…

Deconstructing the soil component of terroir: from controversy to consensus

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.

Analysis of some environmental factors and cultural practices that affect the production and quality of the Manto Negro, Callet and Prensal Blanc varieties

45 non irrigated vineyards distributed in the DO (Denomination) Pla i Llevant de Mallorca and the DO Binissalem Mallorca were used to investigate the characteristics of production and quality and their relationships certain environmental factors and cultural practices. The grape varieties investigated are autochthonous to the island of Mallorca, Manto Negro and Callet as red and Prensal Blanc as white. All plants were measured for four consecutive years in the main production and quality parameters. Among the environmental factors, the type of soil has been studied, more specifically its water retention capacity, the planting density, the age of the vineyard and the level of viral infection. The presence or absence of virus seems to have no effect on any component studied in the varieties studied. For the white variety Prensal Blanc age is negatively correlated with production and the number of bunches, nevertheless it does not cause any effect on the required quality parameters. However, for the red varieties Callet and Manto Negro, the age of the plantation is the variable that best correlates with the quality parameters, therefore the old vines should be the object of preservation by the viticulturists and winemakers in order to guarantee its contribution to the quality of the wines made with these varieties.

Genotypic variability in root architectural traits and putative implications for water uptake in grafted grapevine

Root system architecture (RSA) is important for soil exploration and edaphic resources acquisition by the plant, and thus contributes largely to its productivity and adaptation to environmental stresses, particularly soil water deficit. In grafted grapevine, while the degree of drought tolerance induced by the rootstock has been well documented in the vineyard, information about the underlying physiological processes, particularly at the root level, is scarce, due to the inherent difficulties in observing large root systems in situ. The objectives of this study were to determine genetic differences in the root architectural traits and their relationships to water uptake in two Vitis rootstocks genotypes (RGM, 140Ru) differing in their adaptation to drought. Young rootstocks grafted upon the Riesling variety were transplanted into cylindrical tubes and in 2D rhizotrons under two conditions, well watered and moderate water stress. Root traits were analyzed by digital imaging and the amount of transpired water was measured gravimetrically twice a week. Root phenotyping after 30 days reveal substantial variation in RSA traits between genotypes despite similar total root mass; the drought-tolerant 140Ru showed higher root length density in the deep layer, while the drought-sensitive RGM was characterised by shallow-angled root system development with more basal roots and a larger proportion of fine roots in the upper half of the tube. Water deficit affected canopy size and shoot mass to a greater extent than root development and architectural-related traits for both 140Ru and RGM, suggesting vertical distribution of roots was controlled by genotype rather than plasticity to soil water regime. The deeper root system of 140Ru as compared to RGM correlated with greater daily water uptake and sustained stomata opening under water-limited conditions but had little effect on above-ground growth. Our results highlight that grapevine rootstocks have constitutively distinct RSA phenotypes and that, in the context of climate change, those that develop an extensive root network at depth may provide a desirable advantage to the plant in coping with reduced water resources.

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.

Grapevine yield-gap: identification of environmental limitations by soil and climate zoning in Languedoc-Roussillon region (south of France)

Grapevine yield has been historically overlooked, assuming a strong trade-off between grape yield and wine quality. At present, menaced by climate change, many vineyards in Southern France are far from the quality label threshold, becoming grapevine yield-gaps a major subject of concern. Although yield-gaps are well studied in arable crops, we know very little about grapevine yield-gaps. In the present study, we analysed the environmental component of grapevine yield-gaps linked to climate and soil resources in the Languedoc Roussillon. We used SAFRAN data and IGP Pays d’Oc wine yields from 2010 to 2018. We selected climate and soil indicators proving to have a significant effect on average wine yield-gaps at the municipality scale. The most significant factors of grapevine yield were the Soil Available Water Capacity; followed by the Huglin Index and the Climatic Dryness Index. The Days of Frost; the Soil pH; and the Very Hot Days were also significant. Then, we clustered geographical zones presenting similar indicators, facilitating the identification of resources yield-gaps. We discussed the number of zones with the experts of IGP Pays d’Oc label, obtaining 7 zones with similar limitations for grapevine yield. Finally, we analysed the main resources causing yield-gaps and the grapevine varieties planted on each zone. Mapping grapevine resource yield-gaps are the first stage for understanding grapevine yield-gaps at the regional scale.