Terroir 2008 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Implications of grapevine row orientation in South Africa

Implications of grapevine row orientation in South Africa

Abstract

Row orientation is a critical long-term viticulture practice, which may have a determining effect on grape and wine quality as well as cost efficiency on a specific terroir selected for cultivation. In the Southern Hemisphere in particular, little information is available upon which recommendations on the orientation of rows within a particular terroir, can be based. Shiraz(clone SH 9C)/101-14 Mgt was planted during 2003 to four orientations, i.e. North-South, East-West, North-East-South-West, and North-West-South-East, in the Breede River Region at the Robertson experiment farm of ARC Infruitec-Nietvoorbij, Robertson, South Africa. Vines are spaced 1.8 x 2.7 m. Photosynthetic active radiation patterns showed highest values in January. Largest differences occurred during grape ripening with the EW orientation maintaining stable, low interior canopy interception, the NS orientation displaying two clear peaks each in the morning and in the afternoon, and the NE-SW and NW-SE orientations showing peaks in the afternoon and morning, respectively. The EW orientation induced higher water retention in the canopy. Naturally higher water deficits were induced by the other row orientations, NE-SW and NW-SE orientations resulting in lowest overall leaf water potential. In line with the movement of the sun, W, SW, S, and SE canopy sides displayed lower average photosynthetic activity. Primary shoot lengths of the treatments were similar, reaching approximately 120 cm. Similar leaf area and leaf mass were found. Longer secondary shoots with higher total leaf area were found for the EW row orientation, resulting in highest secondary leaf area as percentage of primary leaf area.
Berry temperatures increased during the day, generally being 3.5 – 6 0C higher in the afternoon than in the morning. Lowest average berry temperatures for the day were found for EW orientated rows, followed by NS, NW-SE, and NE-SW orientated rows. The latter three treatments had similar berry temperatures that were approximately 1 0C higher than those of the EW row orientation. No large differences in berry temperature between canopy sides were found for any of the row orientations.
Reproductive growth parameters seem to indicate highest fertility for the NS rows and lowest for the EW rows. The lowest number of berries, but largest berries, per bunch was found for EW rows and highest number of berries, but smallest berries, for NS rows. The NE-SW and NW-SE orientations had similar berry number and size. Rot and sunburn differences were small.
The EW row orientation resulted in must soluble solid contents being higher than those of the other treatments. The pH of the treatments was similar. Highest titratable acidity was found for EW and NW-SE row orientations. Slight differences in grape skin colour occurred. Best 0B:TA ratio was found for NS rows and worst ratios for EW and NW-SE rows. Wines of the different row orientations had similar anthocyanin and phenolic concentrations, although slightly lower phenolic contents seemed to occur for the EW row orientation. Preliminary wine evaluation showed good, medium intensity colour with lively fruit for all wines, but particularly for wines made from NS and NE-SW orientations. Vegetative character was perceived for the EW orientation. Data point to different styles of wine, not only in terms of taste and aroma profiles, but also in terms of alcohol content, that may be expected when a particular row orientation is selected. Results are preliminary

DOI:

Publication date: December 8, 2021

Issue: Terroir 2008

Type : Article

Authors

J.J. Hunter & C.G. Volschenk

ARC Infruitec-Nietvoorbij, Private Bag X5026, 7599 Stellenbosch, South Africa

Contact the author

Keywords

Grapevine row orientation, growth, microclimate, grape composition, wine quality 

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2008

Citation

Related articles…

Climate change impacts: a multi-stress issue

With the aim of producing premium wines, it is admitted that moderate environmental stresses may contribute to the accumulation of compounds of interest in grapes. However the ongoing climate change, with the appearance of more limiting conditions of production is a major concern for the wine industry economic. Will it be possible to maintain the vineyards in place, to preserve the current grape varieties and how should we anticipate the adaptation measures to ensure the sustainability of vineyards? In this context, the question of the responses and adaptation of grapevine to abiotic stresses becomes a major scientific issue to tackle. An abiotic stress can be defined as the effect of a specific factor of the physico-chemical environment of the plants (temperature, availability of water and minerals, light, etc.) which reduces growth, and for a crop such as the vine, the yield, the composition of the fruits and the sustainability of the plants. Water stress is in many minds, but a systemic vision is essential for at least two reasons. The first reason is that in natural environments, a single factor is rarely limiting, and plants have to deal with a combination of constraints, as for example heat and drought, both in time and at a given time. The second reason is that plants, including grapevine, have central mechanisms of stress responses, as redox regulatory pathways, that play an important role in adaptation and survival. Here we will review the most recent studies dealing with this issue to provide a better understanding of the grapevine responses to a combination of environmental constraints and of the underlying regulatory pathways, which may be very helpful to design more adapted solutions to cope with climate change.

Aromatic maturity is a cornerstone of terroir expression in red wine

Harvesting grapes at adequate maturity is key to the production of high-quality red wines. Enologists and wine makers define several types of maturity, including technical maturity, phenolic maturity and aromatic maturity. Technical maturity and phenolic maturity are relatively well documented in the scientific literature, while articles on aromatic maturity are scarcer. This is surprising, because aromatic maturity is, without a doubt, the most important of the three in determining wine quality and typicity (including terroir expression). Optimal terroir expression can be obtained when the different types of maturity are reached at the same time, or within a short time frame. This is more likely to occur when the ripening takes place under mild temperatures, neither too cool, nor too hot. Aromatic expression in wine can be driven, from low to high maturity, by green, herbal, fresh fruit, ripe fruit, jammy fruit, candied fruit or cooked fruit aromas. Green and cooked fruit aromas are not desirable in red wines, while the levels of other aromatic compounds contribute to the typicity of the wine in relation to its origin. Wines produced in cool climates, or on cool soils in temperate climates, are likely to express herbal or fresh fruit aromas; while wines produced under warm climates, or on warm soils in temperate climates, may express ripe fruit, jammy fruit or candied fruit aromas. Growers can optimize terroir expression through their choice of grapevine variety. Early ripening varieties perform better in cool climates and late ripening varieties in warm climates. Additionally, maturity can be advanced or delayed by different canopy management practices or training systems.

Extreme canopy management for vineyard adaptation to climate change: is it a good idea?

Climate change constitutes an enormous challenge for humankind and for all human activities, viticulture not being an exception. Long-term strategic changes are probably needed the most, but growers also need to deal with short-term changes: summers that are getting progressively warmer, earlier harvest dates and higher pH in musts and wines. In the last 10-15 years, a relevant corpus of research is being developed worldwide in order to evaluate to which extent extreme canopy management operations, aimed at reducing leaf area and, thus, limiting the source to sink ratio, could be useful to delay ripening. Although extreme canopy management can result in relevant delays in harvest dates, longer term studies, as well as detailed analysis of their implications on carbohydrate reserves, bud fertility and future yield are desirable before these practices can be recommended.

Climate change projections to support the transition to climate-smart viticulture

The Earth’s system is undergoing major changes through a wide range of spatial and temporal scales as a response to growing anthropogenic radiative forcing, which is pushing the whole system far beyond its natural variability. Sources of greenhouse gases largely exceed their sinks, thus leading to a strengthened greenhouse effect. More energy is thereby being supplied to the system, with inevitable shifts in climatic patterns and weather regimes. Over the last decades, these modifications have been manifested in the full statistical distributions of the atmospheric variables, with dramatic changes in the frequency and intensity of extremes. Natural hazards, such as severe droughts, floods, forest fires, or heatwaves, are being triggered by extreme atmospheric events worldwide, thus threatening human activities. Viticultculture is not only exposed to changing climates but is also highly vulnerable, as grapevine phenology and physiological development are strongly controlled by atmospheric conditions. Therefore, the assessment of climate change projections for a given region is critical for climate change adaptation and risk reduction in viticulture. By adopting timely and suitable measures, the future sustainability and resiliency of the sector can be fostered. Climate-grapevine chain modelling is an essential tool for better planning and management. However, the accuracy of the resulting projections is limited by many uncertainties that must be duly taken into account when transferring knowledge to stakeholders and decision-makers. Climate-smart viticulture will comprise ensembles of locally tuned strategies, envisioning both adaptation and mitigation, assisted by emerging technologies and decision-support systems.

An analytical framework to site-specifically study climate influence on grapevine involving the functional and Bayesian exploration of farm data time series synchronized using an eGDD thermal index

Climate influence on grapevine physiology is prevalent and this influence is only expected to increase with climate change. Although governed by a general determinism, climate influence on grapevine physiology may present variations according to the terroir. In addition, these site-specific differences are likely to be enhanced when climate influence is studied using farm data. Indeed, farm data integrate additional sources of variation such as a varying representativity of the conditions actually experienced in the field. Nevertheless, there is a real challenge in valuing farm data to enable grape growers to understand their own terroir and consequently adapt their practices to the local conditions. In such a context, this article proposes a framework to site-specifically study climate influence on grapevine physiology using farm data. It focuses on improving the analysis of time series of weather data. The analytical framework includes the synchronization of time series using site-specific thermal indices computed with an original method called Extended Growing Degree Days (eGDD). Synchronized time series are then analyzed using a Bayesian functional Linear regression with Sparse Steps functions (BLiSS) in order to detect site-specific periods of strong climate influence on yield development. The article focuses on temperature and rain influence on grape yield development as a case study. It uses data from three commercial vineyards respectively situated in the Bordeaux region (France), California (USA) and Israel. For all vineyards, common periods of climate influence on yield development were found. They corresponded to already known periods, for example around veraison of the year before harvest. However, the periods differed in their precise timing (e.g. before, around or after veraison), duration and correlation direction with yield. Other periods were found for only one or two vineyards and/or were not referred to in literature, for example during the winter before harvest.