GiESCO 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 GiESCO 9 GiESCO 2019 9 Grape ripening and wine style: synchronized evolution of aromatic composition of shiraz wines from hot and temperate climates of Australia

Grape ripening and wine style: synchronized evolution of aromatic composition of shiraz wines from hot and temperate climates of Australia

Abstract

Context and purpose of the study ‐ Grape ripening is a process driven by the interactions between grapevine genotypes and environmental factors. Grape composition is largely responsible for the production and final concentrations of most wine aroma compounds even though many compounds in wines (aromatic and non‐aromatic) are substantially transformed during fermentation and wine ageing. The aim of this study was to investigate if a common pattern in grape/wine flavour plasticity related to ripening exists irrespective of a grape growing region. A further aim was to identify and highlight compounds present in Shiraz grapes and wines in which plasticity is directly related to grape ripening and is consistent over several vintages.

Material and methods ‐ Commercial vineyards of Shiraz were chosen in two Australian wine geographical indication (GI) regions: Griffith (warm to hot climate) and Orange (temperate to temperate‐warm climate). In these vineyards, own rooted vines were grown under drip irrigation, and trellised to a sprawling training system and in vertical shoot positioning for Orange. Sequential harvests were performed using berry sugar accumulation as a physiological indicator of grape maturity. At each harvest date, triplicates of 100 berries were collected and frozen in liquid nitrogen in the field for later chemical analyses. Approximately 60 kg of grape per replicate were randomly harvested at each harvest date and small scale vinifications carried out. Amino acids in grapes were analysed by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) coupled to fluorescence detector. Grape volatiles analyses were performed with gas chromatography coupled to mass detection (GC‐MS). Juice was analysed for set of parameters relating to the technical maturity of grapes (total soluble solids, titratable acidity and pH) and yeast assimilable nitrogen was measured. Wine aromatic compounds were quantitated by HS‐SPME‐GC‐MS. Descriptive sensory evaluation with predefined descriptors was conducted approximately six months after bottling.

Results ‐ Irrespective of the macro and meso climates, differences in both grape and wine chemical analyses and wine sensory description produced a clear separation of samples according to the harvest stage. Shiraz wines from the first harvest (H1) were associated with red fruit descriptors and higher perception of acidity. Wines from the third harvest (H3) were correlated with dark fruit characters and a higher alcohol. Later harvest dates resulted in higher concentrations of some amino acids in the Shiraz grapes, with higher alcohol acetates, ethyl esters (ethyl propanoate and ethyl butyrate) of short chain fatty acids and dimethyl sulphide in the wines. Conversely, concentrations of (Z)-3‐hexenol, ethyl isobutyrate, ethyl leucate and ethyl dihydrocinammate were lower in these wines compared to earlier harvest dates. Observed trends were significant and consistent across two vintages and two different GIs. From the plateau of berry sugar accumulation, no direct nexus was observed between berry sugar concentration and grape and wine flavour evolution. This study also demonstrated a common evolution of Shiraz grapes, influencing the chemical and sensory properties of the subsequent wine.

DOI:

Publication date: June 19, 2020

Issue: GiESCO 2019

Type: Article

Authors

Katja ŠUKLJE (1,3), Guillaume ANTALICK (1,4), Campbell MEEKS (1), John BLACKMAN (1,2), Alain DELOIRE (1,5), Leigh SCHMIDTKE (1,2)

(1) National Wine and Grape Industry Centre, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 588, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2678, Australia
(2) School of Agricultural and Wine Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 588, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2678, Australia
Present addresses: 3 Hacquetova 17, 1000 Ljubljana,
(4) Wine research centre, University of Nova Gorica, Glavni trg 8, 5271 Vipava, Slovenia
(5) Montpellier SupAgro‐IHEV‐BE, 2 Place Pierre Viala, 34060 Montpellier, France

Contact the author

Keywords

Grapevine, Australia, Shiraz, warm and temperate climates, sequential harvests, fruit and wine composition, sensory analyses

Tags

GiESCO 2019 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Mapping and tracking canopy size with VitiCanopy

Understanding vineyard variability to target management strategies, apply inputs efficiently and deliver consistent grape quality to the winery is essential. However, despite inherent vineyard variability, the majority are managed as if they are uniform. VitiCanopy is a simple, grower-friendly tool for precision/digital viticulture that allows users to collect and interpret objective spatial information about vineyard performance. After four years of field and market research, an upgraded VitiCanopy has been created to achieve a more streamlined, technology-assisted vine monitoring tool that provides users with a set of superior new features, which could significantly improve the way users monitor their grapevines. These new features include:
• New user interface
• User authentication
• Batch analysis of multiple images
• Ease the learning curve through enhanced help features
• Reporting via the creation of colour maps that will allow users to assess the spatial differences in canopies within a vineyard.
Use-case examples are presented to demonstrate the quantification and mapping of vineyard variability through objective canopy measurements, ground-truthing of remotely sensed measurements, monitoring of crop conditions, implementation of disease and water management decisions as well as creating a history of each site to forecast quality. This intelligent tool allows users to manage grapevines and make informed management choices to achieve the desired production targets and remain profitable.

Postveraison shoot trimming in Tannat and Merlot: preliminary results on yield components, plant balance and berry composition

There is currently a trend towards the production of wines with low alcohol content. To achieve this, grapes with low sugar content must be used. There are techniques at the vineyard level that can delay ripening and avoid excessive sugar accumulation without, a priori, affecting the final polyphenol content. Postveraison shoot trimming (PVST) is experimentally evaluated for these purposes, but its impact under Uruguayan climatic conditions with high interannual variability is not known. The aim of this work is to assess the PVST in Tannat and Merlot cultivars and their impact on yield components, plant balance and berry primary composition. In this study, two commercial vineyards of 10 years old Tannat and Merlot (grafted on SO4) at Canelones Department were selected. During the 2020-201 growing season, grapevines were submitted to PVST when grapes reached 15º Brix. In a randomized block, trimmed (T) and control (C) plants were evaluated with three repetitions each cultivar. Evaluation of the evolution of primary berry composition during ripening, measurement of yield components and plant balance were performed. For both cultivars, PVST did not affect yield components. Merlot reached 5.4 kg per plant and Tannat 7.1 kg, with not statistical significance between treatments. However, statistical differences were observed in terms of plant balance. In Merlot Ravaz Index reached a difference of 5.3 (12.0 in T and 6.7 in C) meanwhile Tannat reached 3.5 of statistical difference (13.7 in T and 10.2 in C). The tendency to imbalance for the treated plants had an impact on the final grape composition. Merlot grapes showed statistical difference in final total acidity (0.3 g of difference between treatments) while treatments impact final sugar content on Tannat grapes (10.0 g of difference between treatments). Further studies are needed to assess the impact of different canopy management techniques in our conditions.

Climate ethnography and wine environmental futures

Globalisation and climate change have radically transformed world wine production upsetting the established order of wine ecologies. Ecological risks and the future of traditional agricultural systems are widely debated in anthropology, but very little is understood of the particular challenges posed by climate change to viticulture which is seen by many as the canary in the coalmine of global agriculture. Moreover, wine as a globalised embedded commodity provides a particularly telling example for the study of climate change having already attracted early scientific attention. Studies of climate change in viticulture have focused primarily on the production of systematic models of adaptation and vulnerability, while the human and cultural factors, which are key to adaptation and sustainable futures, are largely missing. Climate experts have been unanimous in recognising the urgent need for a better understanding of the complex dynamics that shape how climate change is experienced and responded to by human systems. Yet this call has not yet been addressed. Climate ethnography, coined by the anthropologist Susan Crate (2011), aims to bridge this growing disjuncture between climate science and everyday life through the exploration of the social meaning of climate change. It seeks to investigate the confrontation of its social salience in different locations and under different environmental guises (Goodman 2018: 340). By understanding how wine producers make sense of the world (and the environment) and act in it, it proposes to focus on the co-production of interdisciplinary knowledge by identifying and foreshadowing problems (Goodman 2018: 342; Goodman & Marshall 2018). It seeks to offer an original, transformative and contrasted perspective to climate change scenarios by investigating human agency -individual or collective- in all its social, political and cultural diversity. An anthropological approach founded on detailed ethnographies of wine production is ideally placed to address economic, social and cultural disruptions caused by the emergence of these new environmental challenges. Indeed, the community of experts in environmental change have recently called for research that will encompass the human dimension and for more broad-based, integrated through interdisciplinarity, useful knowledge (Castree & al 2014). My paper seeks to engage with climate ethnography and discuss what it brings to the study of wine environmental futures while exploring the limitations of the anthropological environmental approach.

Assessing the climate change vulnerability of European winegrowing regions by combining exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity indicators

Winegrowing regions recognized as protected designations of origin (PDOs) are closely tied to well defined geographic locations with a specific set of pedoclimatic attributes and strictly regulated by legal specifications. However, climate change is increasingly threatening these regions by changing local conditions and altering winegrowing processes. The vulnerability to these changes is largely heterogenous across different winegrowing regions because it is determined by individual characteristics of each region, including the capacity to adapt to new climatic conditions and the sensitivity to climate change, which depend not only on natural, but also socioeconomic and legal factors. Accurate vulnerability assessments therefore need to combine information about adaptive capacity and climate change sensitivity with projected exposure to new climatic conditions. However, most existing studies focus on specific impacts neglecting important interactions between the different factors that determine climate change vulnerability. Here, we present the first comprehensive vulnerability assessment of European wine PDOs that spatially combines multiple indicators of adaptive capacity and climate change sensitivity with high-resolution climate projections. We found that the climate change vulnerability of PDO areas largely depends on the complex interactions between physical and socioeconomic factors. Homogenous topographic conditions and a narrow varietal spectrum increase climate change vulnerability, while the skills and education of farmers, together with a good economic situation, decrease their vulnerability. Assessments of climate change consequences therefore need to consider multiple variables as well as their interrelations to provide a comprehensive understanding of the expected impacts of climate change on European PDOs. Our results provide the first vulnerability assessment for European winegrowing regions at high spatiotemporal resolution that includes multiple factors related to climate exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity on the level of single winegrowing regions. They will therefore help to identify hot spots of climate change vulnerability among European PDOs and efficiently direct adaptation strategies.

Influence of agronomic practices in soil water content in mid-mountain vineyards

In the context of LIFE project MIDMACC (LIFE18 CCA/ES/001099), several pilots have been installed in vineyards in mid mountain areas of Catalonia (NE Spain) to test well stablished agronomic practices to increase the adaptation of Mediterranean mid mountain to climate change. Soil water content (SWC) at three different depths (15, 30 and 45cm) was measured in continuum from August 2020. One pilot (WC) included a well-established green cover (GC), a new GC (NC) and a conventional soil management (CM, tilling+herbicides). NC presented an intermediate state between WC and CM, responding similarly to CM in autumn but quickly reaching similar SWC to WC, then following the same evolution till next spring, with CM presenting lower values along autumn and winter. Then vegetation activation decreased SWC in all plots, (much slower in CM, lacking GC). Sensibility to spring rains is again intermediate for NC, which joins SWC evolution of CM by the end of spring till next autumn. It is expected that NC will resemble WC more and more as its GC develops. In the pilot combining vine training (VSP vs Gobelet) and hillside management (slope vs terrace), no clear pattern could be related with these conditions. However, both terraces seem to be more sensitive to spring rains. A third pilot included new vineyards (7 and 1 year old). In the new vineyard (N), higher canopy development, a spontaneous green cover and row straw resulted in a slower SWC dynamic, not so sensitive to rains but conserving more soil water in spring and most of summer, even with presumably a higher water extraction by vines. In the newest vineyard (VN) the deepest sensor is still sensitive to rain events all over the year and SWC is always highest at this depth, revealing small water capture by vines.