The partial rootzone drying (PRD) of Merlot in the Breede River Valley (Part 2): Yield, water use efficiency and wine quality by Vink Lategan & Carolyn Howell / Winetech Technical Yearbook /2010
South Africa as a country has limited water resources for agricultural use. It is therefore crucial to find ways in which acceptable yields and quality may be produced despite using less irrigation water. In this regard the benefits of partial rootzone drying (PRD) mean that more or the same amount of grapes may be produced with less water (Dry et al., 1996; Dry & Loveys, 1999; Du Toit et al., 2003; Santos et al., 2003; Du Toit et al., 2004). Consequently it is possible to obtain a higher yield and greater water use efficiency (WUEP) with PRD compared to conventional drip irrigation. This concept entails that one half of a grapevine’s roots be irrigated at a high frequency, while the other half dries out. After an interval of 7, 14 or 21 days, depending on the water retention capacity of the soil, the half that was previously irrigated is dried out and vice versa. It was found, however, that PRD did not impact on the plant water status or vegetative growth of Merlot/Ramsey on fertile, alluvial soil compared to conventional drip irrigation (Lategan & Howell, 2010). The objective of the study was to determine whether the PRD strategy may be successfully applied under South African conditions to improve yield, WUEP and quality. MATERIAL AND METHODS The study was done on fiveyearold Merlot/Ramsey during the 2004/05, 2005/06 and 2006/07 seasons, near Ashton in the Breede River valley. The trial design, soil characteristics, irrigation and trellis system, as well as the viticultural and soil management practices were previously discussed (Lategan & Howell, 2010). Five irrigation strategies were applied. The control treatment (T1) received conventional irrigation in the grapevine row. Irrigations were given every third day from the middle of November until after the harvest (end of February). A continuous deficit irrigation strategy (T2) was applied by giving the grapevine row more or less than half the water received by the control. Three PRD strategies were implemented by installing the drip lines ca. 20 cm below the surface in the middle of the work rows and by irrigating in alternating work rows, while the rest dried out. The switch between irrigation sides was made every 7 days (T3), 14 days (T4) and 21 days (T5). During the switch between irrigation sides, the previously unirrigated work rows were again irrigated to field capacity. During the first two seasons switches at fixed intervals did not allow the soil in the unirrigated work row to dry out sufficiently and during the 2006/07 season the switches were only made once the soil had reached a matrix potential of 60 kPa (T3), 100 kPa (T4) and 150 kPa (T5) in the dry work rows. An attempt was made to harvest the grapes as closely as possible to 24B. During the harvest 20 berries from ten bunches per site were cut off to determine the berry mass (Van Schalkwyk, 2004). All the bunches on each trial site were counted and weighed to determine the yield (t/ha). The bunch mass was obtained by dividing the number of bunches per site by the total crop mass per site. The yield (kg/ha) was divided by the amount of irrigation water (m3/ha) to obtain the WUEP. The sugar and acidity concentrations as well as pH were determined using standard procedures at the Nietvoorbij
cellar. Experimental wines were made from 40 kg grapes from each site according to the standard method for red wine at the Nietvoorbij cellar. The colour, berry, spice and vegetative characters as well as overall wine quality were sensorially judged by a panel of experts according to an unstructured line scale. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Yield and water consumption effectiveness The respective irrigation strategies did not impact on berry mass compared to the control (Table 1). The same trend was obtained from Cabernet Sauvignon, Shiraz and Mourvdre (Dry et al., 1996; Du Toit et al., 2003; De La Hera et al., 2007). In the PRD strategy where the switch was made every 14 days, the bunch mass increased compared to conventional drip irrigation. Compared to B1 the continuous deficit irrigation reduced yield. The PRD strategies had no effect on yield, however. This concurs with previous findings (Dry et al., 1996; Du Toit et al., 2003; Santos et al., 2003; Du Toit et al., 2004; De La Hera et al., 2007). Under the given circumstances the yield increased with seasonal precipitation (irrigation and rain) of ca. 300 mm (Fig. 1). The continuous deficit irrigation increased the WUEP compared to the control, while the respective PRD strategies reduced it (Table 1). The latter result is contrary to previous findings (Dry et al., 1996; Du Toit et al., 2003; Santos et al., 2003; Toit et al., 2004). In most studies the PRD strategy was compared to a relatively wet control (Sadras, 2009). A metaanalysis showed that an improvement in WUEP may be expected when using controlled deficit irrigation strategies instead of a PRD strategy (Sadras, 2009).
Wynboer December 2010 The partial rootzone drying (PRD) of Merlot in the Breede River Valley (Part 2): Yield, water use efficiency and wine quality Juice composition and sensorial wine characteristics For logistical reasons all sites had to be harvested on the same day. The continuous deficit irrigation increased sugar content compared to the control, while the PRD strategies had no effect. The various irrigation strategies had no effect on the total titratable acid and potassium concentrations or pH in the grape juice compared to the control (Table 1). This trend concurs with previous results (Du Toit et al., 2003; De La Hera et al., 2007; Bindon et al., 2008). The continuous deficit irrigation strategy improved the wine colour compared to the control (Table 1). With the exception of a more pronounced berry character, where the PRD was switched every 21 days, none of the irrigation strategies impacted on the respective wine
Wynboer December 2010 The partial rootzone drying (PRD) of Merlot in the Breede River Valley (Part 2): Yield, water use efficiency and wine quality
characters. The continuous deficit irrigation produced better overall wine quality compared to the control. The PRD strategies also produced better overall wine quality than the control. CONCLUSIONS While the PRD strategies did not impact on the yield, WUEP, juice composition or wine characteristics compared to conventional drip irrigation (control), they did result in improved overall quality. The different switching frequencies of the various PRD strategies had no impact on the abovementioned character intensities. If the primary objective of the producer is to obtain improved wine colour and overall wine quality, continuous deficit irrigation strategies are recommended rather than a PRD strategy. With conventional or deficit irrigation strategies improved WUEP may be expected compared to PRD strategies. Due to the high cost and intensive management inputs required by a PRD strategy and the fact that a lower WUEP may be expected, controlled conventional drip irrigation is recommended if the objective is to increase yield. In view of the abovementioned results and the fact that PRD did not cause a reduction in vegetative growth or higher plant water stress or required less irrigation volume (Lategan & Howell, 2010), a PRD strategy is not recommended on alluvial soils. SUMMARY Merlot/Ramsey grapevines, growing in alluvial soil in the Breede River Valley, were subjected to five different irrigation strategies during the 2004/05, 2005/06 and 2006/07 growing seasons. Grapevines of the control were irrigated at 40% readily available water depletion from bud break to harvest in late February. A continuous deficit irrigation (CDI) strategy was applied by irrigating grapevines with approximately half of the volume of water applied to the control treatment. Three partial rootzone drying (PRD) treatments were induced by irrigating grapevines only on one side of the grapevine row. Alternating rows were irrigated at the same frequency as the grapevines of the control and by switching the irrigation sides every 7, 14 and 21 days. The soil of the side that had been allowed to dry was irrigated to soil field water capacity after a switch had been made. No differences in berry and bunch mass of the different PRD treatments were recorded. However, where PRD irrigation sides were switched every 14 days, bunches were bigger than those of the control and CDI. Continuous deficit irrigated grapevines produced the least grapes, while there were no differences found between the yield of the control and PRD treatments that were measured. Contrary to other PRD research results, PRD treatments had lower yield water use efficiencies (WUEY) than the control treatment. The sugar content of grapes of the control and PRD treatments that were switched at more frequent intervals tended to be lower than the CDI, and PRD treatment that was switched every 21 days. Continuous deficit irrigated grapevines produced wine that had the best colour and overall wine quality. Although the wine colour and overall quality of the PRD treatment that was switched every 21 days did not differ from that of the CDI or other two PRD treatments, all of these treatments produced wine with significantly better wine sensory characteristics and quality than that of the control. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The Agricultural Research Council (ARC) for infrastructure and other resources, Winetech for partial funding, Johan and Pierre Bruwer for the use of their vineyard and the Soil and Water Science personnel at ARC Infruitec Nietvoorbij for technical assistance. For more information contact Vink Lategan at
[email protected].
LITERATURE REFERENCES Bindon, K., Dry, P.R. & Loveys, B.R., 2008. Influence of partial rootzone drying on the composition and accumulation of antocyanins in grape berries (Vitis vinifera cv. Cabernet Sauvignon). Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 14, 91 103. De La Hera, M.L., Romero, P., GomezPlaza, E. & Martinez, A., 2007. Is partial rootzone drying an effective irrigation technique to improve water use efficiency and fruit quality in fieldgrown wine grapes under semiarid conditions Agriculture Water Management 87, 261 274. Dry, P.R. & Loveys, B.R., 1999. Grapevine shoot growth and stomatal conductance are reduced when part of the root system is dried. Vitis 38, 151 156. Dry, P.R., Loveys, B.R., During, H. & Botting, D.G., 1996. Effects of partial rootzone drying on grapevine vigour, yield composition of fruit and use of water. In: C.S. Stockley, A.N. Sas, R.S. Johnstone & T.H. Lee, eds. Proceedings 9th Australian Wine Industry Technical Conference. Adelaide, Australia, Winetitles. 126 131. Du Toit, P.G., Dry, P.R. & Loveys, B.R., 2003. A Preliminary Investigation on Partial Rootzone Drying (PRD) Effects on Grapevine Performance, Nitrogen Assimilastion and Berry Composition. S. Afr. J. Enol. Vitic. 24 (2), 43 54. Du Toit, P.G., Dry, P.R. & Loveys, B.R., 2004. Partial Rootzone Drying (PRD): Irrigation technique for sustainable viticulture and premium quality grapes. WineLand, April 2004, 84 87. Lategan, E.L. & Howell, C.L., 2010. Die gedeeltelike wortelsone uitdroging (PRD) van Merlot in die Breederivier vallei (Deel 1): Besproeiingshoeveelhede, plantwaterspanning en groeikragtigheid. WineLand, November 2010, 96 98. Sadras, V.O., 2009. Does partial rootzone drying improve irrigation water productivity in the field A metaanalysis. Irrig. Sci. (2009) 27, 183 190. Santos, T.P., Lopez, C.M., Rodrigues, M.L., Souza, C.R., Maroco, J.P., Pereira, J.S., Silva, J.R. & Chaves, M.M., 2003. Partial rootzone drying: effects on growth and fruit quality of fieldgrown grapevines (Vitis vinifera). Funct. Plant Biol. 30, 663 671. Van Schalkwyk, D., 2004. Methods to determine berry mass, berry volume and bunch mass. WineLand, September 2004, 111 112.