Visualization of wine origin, quality level and terroir by the landscape

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 objective of these work was to demonstrate that toasted fragments of pruning vine-shoots added to the wines after fermentation provide them with differentiated aromatic notes and improve their quality.

I performed my PhD in grapevine physiology under the supervision of Dr. H. Medrano, standing in the vineyards from pre-dawn to sunrise during many hot, wet and sunny days with my colleagues J.M.E. and J.B. I also spent many days and nights facing ticks year-round working in Mediterranean macchias with J.Gu. and M.M. Later I was able to supervise PhD students on grapevines – like A.P. and M.T. – and on Mediterranean vegetation – like J.Gal. With the incorporation to the group of M.R.-C. ‘the puzzle’ was completed and, combining the aforementioned studies, we could conclude (more than 20 years ago) things like: (1) stomatal conductance is the best proxy for ‘water stress’ in studies on photosynthesis; (2) steady-state chlorophyll fluorescence retrieves photosynthesis under saturating light; (3) photoinhibition is not a major photosynthetic limitation under water stress; (4) mesophyll conductance instead is; and (5) mesophyll conductance is a major driver of leaf water use efficiency.

Aim: Global climate change affects regional climates and hold implications for wine growing regions worldwide (Jones, 2007, 2015; van Leeuwen and Darriet, 2016). The prospect of 21st century climate change consequently is one of the major challenges facing the wine industry (Keller, 2010).

The wine industry is currently shifting toward more sustainable production systems. There are many reasons for this as the interest of people over climate change and, consequently the wine consumer’s choice toward organic and biodynamic, reduced carbon-footprint, vegan and other environmentally friendly wines. While the viticultural effects of biodynamic and organic practices on wine grapes have been investigated, there is a lack in literature on the general effect on the final quality of wine