Indices of light microclimate and canopy structure of grapevines determined by 3D digitising and image analysis, and their relationship to grape quality

A new method combining 3D digitising of plants in the field, creation of virtual pictures of the foliage canopy and spectral analysis of the resulting images was applied in a vineyard near Montpellier, France, to the canopies of grapevines (cv. Merlot, Vitis vinifera L.) trained on four trellis systems and separated into two vigour classes. Virtual images of the canopy were suitable for calculating viticultural indices which describe canopy structure as well as some attributes of the light microclimate. Values of the computed variables were in good agreement with the same variables obtained by traditional means and reported in the literature. Structure indices were correlated among themselves and with indices related to radiation variables. The data confirm that division of the canopy is the major distinguishing factor for canopy structure and light microclimate while shoot orientation is the main determinant for bunch exposure. Grape composition was related to both structure indices and indices related to radiation variables. Thus, sugar content was related to the amount of functional leaf area supplying the fruit and to the light environment of leaves. In contrast, titratable acidity and pH were not related to any of these variables. The concentration of anthocyanins and phenolics appeared to be related directly to leaf exposure to light and to interactions between light and temperature effects on bunches. The usefulness of using digitising and imaging is discussed.

[1]  R. Smart,et al.  Light Quality and Quantity Effects on Fruit Ripening for Cabernet Sauvignon , 1988, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[2]  P. B. Lombard,et al.  Environmental and Management Practices Affecting Grape Composition and Wine Quality - A Review , 1993, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[3]  Janice C. Morrison,et al.  The Effects of Sun Exposure on the Compositional Development of Cabernet Sauvignon Berries , 1986, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[4]  Hervé Sinoquet,et al.  Leaf orientation and sunlit leaf area distribution in cotton , 1997 .

[5]  W. Kliewer,et al.  The Light Environment Within Grapevine Canopies. II. Influence of Leaf Area Density on Fruit Zone Light Environment and Some Canopy Assessment Parameters , 1995, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[6]  W. Kliewer,et al.  Influence of Cluster Exposure to the Sun on the Composition of Thompson Seedless Fruit , 1968, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[7]  A. Noble,et al.  The Effects of Leaf and Cluster Shading on the Composition of Cabernet Sauvignon Grapes and on Fruit and Wine Sensory Properties , 1990, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[8]  A. Reynolds,et al.  Impact of Training System, Vine Spacing, and Basal Leaf Removal on Riesling. Vine Performance, Berry Composition, Canopy Microclimate, and Vineyard Labor Requirements , 1996, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[9]  R. Smart Photosynthesis by Grapevine Canopies , 1974 .

[10]  W. Kliewer Influence of Temperature, Solar Radiation and Nitrogen on Coloration and Composition of Emperor Grapes , 1977, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[11]  W. Kliewer,et al.  Effect of Crop Level and Leaf Area on Growth, Composition, and Coloration of `Tokay' Grapes , 1971, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[12]  R. Smart INFLUENCE OF LIGHT ON COMPOSITION AND QUALITY OF GRAPES , 1987 .

[13]  C. Cocito,et al.  Influence of Clarification and Suspended Grape Solid Materials on Sterol Content of Free Run and Pressed Grape Musts in the Presence of Growing Yeast Cells , 1993 .

[14]  C. Riou,et al.  Un modèle simple d'interception du rayonnement solaire par la vigne - vérification expérimentale , 1989 .

[15]  P. Clingeleffer,et al.  The response of the grape cultivar Crouchen (Australian syn. Clare Riesling) to various trellis and pruning treatments , 1976 .

[16]  A. Reynolds,et al.  Impact of Training System and Vine Spacing on Vine Performance and Berry Composition of Chancellor , 1995, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[17]  R. Smart,et al.  Principles of Grapevine Canopy Microclimate Manipulation with Implications for Yield and Quality. A Review , 1985, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[18]  F. Raab,et al.  Magnetic Position and Orientation Tracking System , 1979, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems.

[19]  L. Williams,et al.  Effect of Interior Canopy Defoliation on Berry Composition and Potassium Distribution in Thompson Seedless Grapevines , 1987, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[20]  E. Lemon,et al.  The Effect of Concord Vineyard Microclimate on Yield. I. The Effects of Pruning, Training, and Shoot Positioning on Radiation Microclimate , 1982, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[21]  W. Kliewer,et al.  The Light Environment Within Grapevine Canopies. I. Description and Seasonal Changes During Fruit Development , 1995, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[22]  R. Smart Shoot Spacing and Canopy Light Microclimate , 1988, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[23]  A. Matthias,et al.  Type of trellis affects radiation absorption and must composition but not yield of Petite Sirah' grapes , 1992 .

[24]  W. Kliewer,et al.  Influence of Light on Grape Berry Growth and Composition Varies during Fruit Development , 1996 .