Measured effects of elevated temperature on vine phenology, yield, berry and wine attributes Victor Sadras, Martin Moran & Paul Petrie South Australian R&D Institute, Treasury Wine Estates Vintage 2030 - Melbourne, 19 th June 2013 Funded by Grape and Wine R&D Corporation State NRM Program Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
43
Embed
Measured effects of elevated temperature on vine … · Victor Sadras, Martin Moran & Paul Petrie South Australian R&D Institute, Treasury Wine Estates Vintage 2030 - Melbourne, 19th
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Measured effects of elevated temperature on vine
phenology, yield, berry and wine attributes
Victor Sadras, Martin Moran & Paul Petrie South Australian R&D Institute, Treasury Wine Estates
Vintage 2030 - Melbourne, 19th June 2013
Funded by
Grape and Wine R&D Corporation
State NRM Program
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
Methods, data sources and reliability
Measured effects of elevated temperature on:
time of harvest
yield
berry traits
juice and wine attributes
Aims
Papers retrieved searching
“temperature” + “grapevine” (Web of Science)
Year
1920 1940 1960 1980 2000
Num
ber
of
public
ations
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
1940
1960
1980
2000
2020
Nu
mb
er
of
cita
tio
ns
0
350
700
1050
1400
Indirect methods
comparison between regions, vintages, row orientation…
large confounded effects
Direct methods
side-by-side experimental comparison of treatments
involving different temperatures
large to small confounded effects
Effect of temperature on vines and wines: indirect vs direct methods
Large scale open-top heating systems (9 vines per rep x 3 reps + buffers)
Passive, daytime +2 to 4 oC Active/Passive, day & night +2 oC
Experiments 1 and 2 Experiment 3
Spring
1/10/10 10/10/10 19/10/10 28/10/10
0
1
2
3
4control
heated
1/1/11 10/1/11 19/1/11 28/1/11
0
2
4
6
8
10
1/3/11 10/3/11 19/3/11 28/3/11
Va
po
r pre
ssu
re d
efic
it (kP
a)
0
1
2
3
4
Date
1/6/11 10/6/11 19/6/11 28/6/11
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
1/10/10 10/10/10 19/10/10 28/10/10
0
10
20
30
Summer
1/1/11 10/1/11 19/1/11 28/1/11
10
20
30
40
Autumn
1/3/11 10/3/11 19/3/11 28/3/11
Te
mp
era
ture
(ºC
)
10
20
30
Winter
1/6/11 10/6/11 19/6/11 28/6/11
0
10
20
1. Reproduces the daily and seasonal cycles of temperature and vapour pressure deficit.
2. Does not increase relative humidity, hence allowing for increased vapour pressure deficit.
3. Minimises biologically important secondary effects.
4. Has structural strength to withstand the weather (particularly wind) to ensure a reasonable longevity.
5. Allows for number and size of replicates required for statistical resolution and viticultural needs, including sufficient fruit for meaningful wine production.
Design Criteria
Probing for
experimental artefacts
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 50 100 150
Control
Heated
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 500 1000 1500 2000 Mali
c a
cid
(m
g g
fw
t-1)
Time after anthesis
(d)
Thermal time after anthesis
(oC d)
Sweetman et al (unpublished)
Days after anthesis
20 40 60 80 100 120
Liv
ing tis
sue (
%)
50
60
70
80
90
100
Thermal time after anthesis (oCd)
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
control
heated
Bondada et al 2013 Austr J Grape Wine Res 19: 97
Exp 1 2 temperatures (high, control) x 4 varieties x 3 seasons
Exp 2 (Shiraz) 2 temperatures x 2 fruit loads (thinned, control) x 2 seasons
Exp 3 (Shiraz) 2 temperatures x 2 water regimes (irrigated, deficit) x 2 seasons
Experiments
experiments explored a good range of Barossa seasonal variation
Month
SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR
Tem
pera
ture
(oC
)
10
15
20
25
30
352009
2010
2011
2012
10th
90th
Traits
Phenology Yield and components Pruning weight and components Starch reserves in trunk and roots Stomatal conductance, density and size Photosynthesis Leaf chlorophyll Pre-dawn and mid-day leaf water potential Canopy and bunch temperature Sap flow Berry: dynamics of TA, pH, TSS and anthocyanins Berry progression of cell death Sensory traits in berries and wines
Indirect methods 6.6 ± 0.92 d oC-1 (Petrie and Sadras 2008)
8 d oC-1 (Tomasi et al 2011)
9.8 ± 0.94 d oC-1 (Sadras and Petrie 2011)
smaller than expected effect of temperature on maturity (21.6 oBrix)
Sadras & Moran 2013 Agric Forest Meteorol 173:107
Traits
Phenology Yield and components Pruning weight and components Starch reserves in trunk and roots Stomatal conductance, density and size Photosynthesis Leaf chlorophyll Pre-dawn and mid-day leaf water potential Canopy and bunch temperature Sap flow Berry: dynamics of TA, pH, TSS and anthocyanins Berry progression of cell death Sensory traits in berries and wines
asymmetric effect of warming on yield 46% reduction to 177% increase
Yield control (kg per vine)
0 4 8 12
Yie
ld h
eate
d (
kg p
er
vin
e)
0
4
8
12
Cab Franc 2010
Cab Franc 2011
Cab Franc 2012
Chardonnay 2010
Chardonnay 2011
Chardonnay 2012
Semillon 2010
Semillon 2011
Semillon 2012
Shiraz 2010
Shiraz 2011
Shiraz 2012
Shiraz, thinned 2011
Shiraz, unthinned 2011
Shiraz, thinned 2012
Shiraz, unthinned 2012
Shiraz, irigated 2011
Shiraz, deficit 2011
Shiraz, irrigated 2012
Shiraz, deficit 2012
exp. 1
exp. 2
exp. 3
y= x
Sadras & Moran 2013 Agric Forest Meteorol 173:116
(a)
Temperature effect on bunch number (%)
-50 0 50 100
Tem
pera
ture
eff
ect
on
yie
ld (
%)
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
no temperature effect
significant interaction
significant temperature effect
r2 = 0.92
P < 0.0001
(b)
Temperature effect on berries per bunch (%)
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Resid
uals
(%
)
-40
-20
0
20
40
r2 = 0.28
P = 0.01
(c)
Bunch number in control (vine-1
)
0 40 80 120
Tem
pera
ture
eff
ect
on
bu
nch
nu
mb
er
(%)
-40
0
40
80
120 r2 = 0.32
P = 0.03
(a)
Temperature effect on bunch number (%)
-50 0 50 100
Tem
pera
ture
eff
ect
on
yie
ld (
%)
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
no temperature effect
significant interaction
significant temperature effect
r2 = 0.92
P < 0.0001
(b)
Temperature effect on berries per bunch (%)
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Resid
uals
(%
)
-40
-20
0
20
40
r2 = 0.28
P = 0.01
(c)
Bunch number in control (vine-1
)
0 40 80 120
Tem
pera
ture
eff
ect
on
bu
nch
nu
mb
er
(%)
-40
0
40
80
120 r2 = 0.32
P = 0.03
(a) root
Starch concentration in control (%)
0 5 10 15 20 25
Sta
rch
con
cen
tration
in
heate
d (
%)
0
5
10
15
20
25 (b) trunk
0 5 10 15
0
5
10
15
P = 0.0005P = 0.32
y = xy = x
elevated temperature reduced starch concentration in trunk
Sadras & Moran 2013 Agric Forest Meteorol 173:116
Stomata lenght ( m)
0 10 20 30 40
Fre
qu
en
cy (
%)
0
10
20
30control (n = 1025)
heated (n = 886)
P < 0.0001
leaves formed under high temperature had larger stomata
Sadras et al. 2012 Agric Forest Meteorol 165:35
Traits
Phenology Yield and components Pruning weight and components Starch reserves in trunk and roots Stomatal conductance, density and size Photosynthesis Leaf chlorophyll Pre-dawn and mid-day leaf water potential Canopy and bunch temperature Sap flow Berry: dynamics of TA, pH, TSS and anthocyanins Berry progression of cell death Sensory traits in berries and wines
temperature effect on TA and pH is strongly dependent on variety