Background and Aims: Higher temperature during the season is forcing growers in Central Italy to explore ways to reliably control vine yield and grape ripening, while maintaining grape composition. The most common approaches include altering winter pruning, shoot thinning (St), leaf removal and bunch thinning. These studies, however, rarely evaluated these practices in concert and over multiple seasons. Methods and Results: From 2009 to 2013, five treatments were applied to Vitis vinifera L. cv. Montepulciano: winter pruning only (Wp, Control); Wp plus St; St plus pre-flowering defoliation (St + Dpa); St plus pre-veraison defoliation (St + Dpv); and St + Dpv plus bunch thinning (St + Dpv + Bt) applied prior to veraison. Effects on canopy architecture, yield, ripening and berry composition were measured. Compared to Wp, St, St + Dpv and St + Dpv + Bt treatments reduced leaf area and leaf layer number in the fruiting zone, while St + Dpv + Bt reduced yield. No treatment slowed ripening. The treatment St + Dpa reduced yield and the incidence of Botrytis cinerea, and improved fruit composition, but increased TSS in berries. All treatments were ceased after 2013 and the vines were pruned in winter only. The treatment St + Dpa imposed in 2013 had a strong carry-over effect on yield but not TSS in 2014. Conclusions: Shoot thinning alone reduced canopy density but failed to reduce yield or improve fruit composition. Both the St + Dpv and St + Dpv + Ct treatments provided a more open fruit zone, had no effect on yield and increased TSS in fruit at harvest. Shoot thinning plus pre-flowering defoliation decreased yield and improved berry composition in a Mediterranean climate; however, given its observed carry-over effects on yield this approach should be applied only in alternate years, suggesting the need for further research exploring additional viticultural practices. Significance of the Study: Despite some benefits of St, defoliation and bunch thinning on their own or even in concert, no combination tested was consistently effective for controlling vine yield and grape ripening, while maintaining grape composition
Canopy management strategies to control yield and grape composition of Montepulciano grapevines / Silvestroni, O.; Lanari, V.; Lattanzi, T.; Palliotti, A.; Vanderweide, J.; Sabbatini, P.. - In: AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF GRAPE AND WINE RESEARCH. - ISSN 1322-7130. - STAMPA. - 25:1(2019), pp. 30-42. [10.1111/ajgw.12367]
Canopy management strategies to control yield and grape composition of Montepulciano grapevines
Silvestroni O.;Lanari V.;Lattanzi T.;Palliotti A.;Sabbatini P.
2019-01-01
Abstract
Background and Aims: Higher temperature during the season is forcing growers in Central Italy to explore ways to reliably control vine yield and grape ripening, while maintaining grape composition. The most common approaches include altering winter pruning, shoot thinning (St), leaf removal and bunch thinning. These studies, however, rarely evaluated these practices in concert and over multiple seasons. Methods and Results: From 2009 to 2013, five treatments were applied to Vitis vinifera L. cv. Montepulciano: winter pruning only (Wp, Control); Wp plus St; St plus pre-flowering defoliation (St + Dpa); St plus pre-veraison defoliation (St + Dpv); and St + Dpv plus bunch thinning (St + Dpv + Bt) applied prior to veraison. Effects on canopy architecture, yield, ripening and berry composition were measured. Compared to Wp, St, St + Dpv and St + Dpv + Bt treatments reduced leaf area and leaf layer number in the fruiting zone, while St + Dpv + Bt reduced yield. No treatment slowed ripening. The treatment St + Dpa reduced yield and the incidence of Botrytis cinerea, and improved fruit composition, but increased TSS in berries. All treatments were ceased after 2013 and the vines were pruned in winter only. The treatment St + Dpa imposed in 2013 had a strong carry-over effect on yield but not TSS in 2014. Conclusions: Shoot thinning alone reduced canopy density but failed to reduce yield or improve fruit composition. Both the St + Dpv and St + Dpv + Ct treatments provided a more open fruit zone, had no effect on yield and increased TSS in fruit at harvest. Shoot thinning plus pre-flowering defoliation decreased yield and improved berry composition in a Mediterranean climate; however, given its observed carry-over effects on yield this approach should be applied only in alternate years, suggesting the need for further research exploring additional viticultural practices. Significance of the Study: Despite some benefits of St, defoliation and bunch thinning on their own or even in concert, no combination tested was consistently effective for controlling vine yield and grape ripening, while maintaining grape composition| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
6. Silvetroni et al. (2019) Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research (4).pdf
accesso aperto
Descrizione: This is the peer reviewed version of the following article:Silvestroni, O., Lanari, V., Lattanzi, T., Palliotti, A., Vanderweide, J. and Sabbatini, P. (2019), Canopy management strategies to control yield and grape composition of Montepulciano grapevines. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 25: 30-42, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/ajgw.12367. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions. This article may not be enhanced, enriched or otherwise transformed into a derivative work, without express permission from Wiley or by statutory rights under applicable legislation. Copyright notices must not be removed, obscured or modified. The article must be linked to Wiley’s version of record on Wiley Online Library and any embedding, framing or otherwise making available the article or pages thereof by third parties from platforms, services and websites other than Wiley Online Library must be prohibited.
Tipologia:
Documento in post-print (versione successiva alla peer review e accettata per la pubblicazione)
Licenza d'uso:
Licenza specifica dell’editore
Dimensione
559.13 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
559.13 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
