Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Berry Composition (berry + composition)
Selected AbstractsImpact of insecticide-manipulated defoliation by Japanese beetle (Popillia japonica) on grapevines from vineyard establishment through productionPEST MANAGEMENT SCIENCE (FORMERLY: PESTICIDE SCIENCE), Issue 5 2010Derrick L Hammons Abstract BACKGROUND: Japanese beetle (JB), Popillia japonica Newman, is a severe pest of grapes in the southeastern USA where viticulture is a growing industry. This study evaluated the impact of foliar injury from JB field populations on growth, fruit ripening, berry composition and yield of young vines of six cultivars from vineyard establishment through the first year of production. Three spray regimes, carbaryl applied every 7 or 14 days, or no insecticide, were used to manipulate levels of defoliation by JB. RESULTS: Cultivars varied in susceptibility and response to defoliation by JB. Some (e.g. Norton) showed reduced vine growth and delayed post-veraison increase in total soluble sugars and pH, as well as reduced cluster number and weight, berries per cluster and yield. Others (e.g. Concord) showed little or no measurable impact from JB. Notably, the biweekly spray regime was as effective as weekly sprays in mitigating the impacts of defoliation. CONCLUSION: Foliar loss from JB feeding can set back establishment and productivity of young grapevines. Nevertheless, many growers can reduce spray frequency without compromising the benefits of JB management. Even susceptible cultivars can tolerate low to moderate (<20%) levels of defoliation, and some are resistant enough to be grown without treating for JB. Copyright © 2010 Society of Chemical Industry [source] Relationships between wine phenolic composition and wine sensory properties for Cabernet Sauvignon (Vitis vinifera L.)AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF GRAPE AND WINE RESEARCH, Issue 3 2008H.E. HOLT Abstract Background and Aims:, Winemakers from a commercial winery observed sensory differences in Cabernet Sauvignon wines made from three pruning treatments in a single vineyard, particularly in mouthfeel characteristics. This study examined the relationships between wine composition and wine sensory characteristics, then related these to berry weight and composition and wine quality scores. Methods and Results:, Cabernet Sauvignon from three pruning treatments , Machine, Cane and Spur , was harvested at commercial harvest date, and replicate wines were made from each for three vintages. The composition of the wines from all three pruning systems was generally similar. Differences in individual descriptive attributes did not separate the wines from the three treatments, or across vintages, despite differences in overall quality scores. Principal component analysis (PCA) could separate the wines by pruning and by vintage using wine composition or sensory parameters. Higher concentrations of anthocyanins, tannins and phenolics in berries did not always result in higher concentrations in wines. Conclusions:, In this study, higher wine tannin or wine phenolic concentrations did not result in higher wine astringency, and wine colour measures and phenolic composition were not good indicators of individual wine sensory properties or wine quality. Wine composition was not necessarily directly influenced by berry composition. Significance of the Study:, Few studies focus on the berry to wine to sensory continuum, particularly over more than one vintage or in a commercial context. This study highlighted how complex the relationships among berries, wine sensory properties and wine quality can be, particularly within a single vineyard. [source] Effects of partial rootzone drying on yield, ripening and berry ABA in potted Tempranillo grapevines with split rootsAUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF GRAPE AND WINE RESEARCH, Issue 1 2006M. CARMEN ANTOLÍN Abstract Our objective was to investigate whether grape berry growth and colour development is associated with variation in abscisic acid (ABA) levels during ripening under an irrigation regime of partial rootzone drying (PRD). The study was carried out using container-grown Tempranillo grapevines (established as fruit-bearing cuttings) with a split root system (occupying two contiguous pots) and grown under controlled conditions. Three irrigation treatments were imposed , a control (well watered), and two forms of deficit irrigation, viz. partial rootzone drying (PRD), and sustained deficit irrigation (SDI). Under SDI, a given volume of irrigation water was applied uniformly and simultaneously to both sides of the split roots of each vine. Under the PRD regime, the same total volume of irrigation was applied, but as separate allocations to each side of the split root system in turn, and alternating on a 10-day cycle. Because both deficit treatments received the same total amount of irrigation water (about 50% of the volume applied to controls), we were able to distinguish between the effects of deficit irrigation per se, versus any specific impact PRD might be having on vine performance. Outcomes were as follows. Compared to well-watered control vines, yield per plant, and weight per bunch were both reduced significantly under SDI, but were sustained close to control values under the PRD regime. SDI and PRD thus differed significantly in their respective impacts on vine performance, and comparing just these two forms of deficit irrigation, PRD resulted in greater yield, higher bunch weight, bigger leaf area and increased berry weight compared with the SDI treatment. Moreover, PRD also induced greater accumulation of skin anthocyanins at harvest, compared to SDI. Berry ABA concentration increased continuously throughout veraison, achieving a maximum at the end of this period. The increase of berry ABA concentration was earlier and faster in PRD than in SDI, which exhibited only a slight increase in berry ABA by the end of veraison. These distinctive responses to PRD compared to SDI imply that the alternating wet-dry cycles of PRD, rather than simply a deficit irrigation, as in SDI, had a distinctive effect on growth, ripening and berry composition. Our data imply that these different responses might be related to ABA physiology, and especially to ABA levels in berries during ripening. [source] From bud to berry, with special reference to inflorescence and bunch morphology in Vitis vinifera L.AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF GRAPE AND WINE RESEARCH, Issue 2 2000PETER MAY Abstract A brief review of the reproductive system of the grapevine is presented. Phases discussed include floral induction and initiation during early spring, inflorescence primordium growth during summer to dormancy, flower formation at budburst in the subsequent growing season, and finally flowering and berry development. Difficulties in clearly defining and describing some of these developmental stages will be outlined, especially the complex bud system, the morphology of buds at budburst, and the course of flowering. The course of floral development during dormancy and at the time of budburst requires further attention, especially the reported effect that low temperature at budburst leads to increased numbers of flowers. Also, the recent finding that ,intercarpellar' floral organs can be induced by applying auxin is of particular interest and will be described. Case studies from Burgundy vineyards with Chardonnay, Pinot Noir and Gamay ovaries and berries will be included. A detailed analysis of what constitutes a grape bunch will be presented from observations of Chardonnay inflorescences and bunches collected at random after set and at harvest in two seasons from spur-pruned, cane-pruned and hedged vines growing on two sites varying in climate and productivity (Adelaide Hills and Southern Vales of South Australia). This analysis covered variability in numbers of branches and flowers and in per cent berry set, as well as relationships between branch numbers and flower numbers. Relationships between flower numbers and per cent set, per cent set and berry size along the inflorescence, and berry size and seed complement are outlined. Likely implications of inter-bunch and intra-bunch variability for bunch compactness, berry composition and yield components are discussed. [source] | ||||||||||