Terroir in Slovak viticulture area

Grapevine is subject to multiple stresses, either biotic or abiotic, frequently in combination. These stresses may negatively impact the health status of plants and reduce yields. For biotic stress, grapevine is affected by numerous pest and diseases such as downy and powdery mildews, grey mold, black rot, grapevine fanleaf virus and trunk diseases (namely GTDs). The interaction between grapevine and pathogens is relatively complex and linked to various pathogenicity factors including cell-wall-degrading enzymes (especially CAZymes) and phytotoxic secondary metabolites, growth regulators, effectors proteins, and fungal viruses.

Context and purpose of the study. The vine nursery sector is undergoing a transformation to meet growing environmental and sanitary demands.

As the climate warms, the focus of concern in viticulture often turns to how higher temperatures may shift growing regions, change the character of AVAs, and alter fruit quality. However, climate warming is increasing most quickly during the winter dormancy cycle, a critical and often underappreciated portion of the grapevine life cycle. In response to decreasing temperatures and decreasing daylength, grapes initiate a series of physiological changes to enter dormancy, acquire freeze resistance, and time spring phenology such that the growing season begins after threat of frost.

Water deficit profoundly impacts the quality of grapes and results in considerable reductions in crop yield. First symptoms manifest with reduced stomatal conductance and transpiration, accompanied by the wilting of apical leaves and tendrils. So far, there is no available data on the water stress response in Croatian grapevine germplasm. Therefore, objective of this study was to determine influence of genotype and treatment on stomatal conductance (gsw), transpiration (E), electron transport rate (ETR), and quantum efficiency in light (PhiPS2).

Global warming is accelerating grape ripening, leading to unbalanced wines from fruit with high sugar content but poor aroma and colour development. Reducing the size of the photosynthetic apparatus after veraison has been shown to delay technological ripeness in cool climates, but methods have not been tested in areas with high irradiance and temperature where fruit exposure could have disastrous effects on berry composition. In this Cabernet-Sauvignon trial, we compared the application of an antitranspirant (pinolene), to severe canopy topping and above bunch zone leaf removal, all performed at mid-ripening, with an untouched control. We monitored the vines weekly by measuring stem water potential, gas exchange, fruit zone light exposure. We sampled berries to measure berry weight, total soluble solids, pH, titratable acidity, and the anthocyanin profile. At harvest, we assessed yield components, measured carbon isotope discrimination, rated sunburn on clusters, and produced experimental wines. We submitted harvest samples to metabolomic profiling through PFP-Q Exactive MS/MS and wines to sensory analysis. Application of the antitranspirant significantly reduced stomatal conductance and assimilation rate but did not affect the stem water potential. Inversely, leaf removal and topping increased water potential but did not affect leaf gas exchange. The late topping was the only treatment able to decrease sugar content (up to 2Bx), increase titratable acidity and pH, and improve anthocyanin content because of lower degradation of di-hydroxylated forms. Late leaf removal above the bunch zone increased lightning conditions in the canopy and produced the most significant damage on fruits. Yield components were not affected. This work suggests that late-season canopy management can effectively control ripening speeds and improve grapes and wines. Still, the effect on grape exposure in a critical time must be well balanced to avoid problems with the appropriate technique.