Grapevine responses to site-specific spatiotemporal factors in a Mediterranean climate
Introduction
Soil water availability is a major factor in grapevine growth and productivity (Medrano et al., 2003). Water distribution in vineyards often varies in space and time (Acevedo-Opazo et al., 2008), depending on various factors. Spatial variability of water availability in the field may be governed by the spatial patterns of terrain attributes such as elevation, slope, and aspect (Ohana-Levi et al., 2019, Willwerth and Reynolds, 2020), while seasonal (temporal) dynamics in vineyard water regime depend mainly on meteorological conditions such as precipitation amounts (Wilson et al., 2020) and temperature levels (de Rességuier et al., 2020), as well as the irrigation provided to the grapevines (Ohana-Levi et al., 2020a) alongside other agrotechnical practices.
The spatial distribution of water availability is affected by multiple factors and impacts the spatial variability of the grapevines vegetative and reproductive attributes. Soil moisture varies from dry conditions in upper slopes to wet conditions in lower slopes, where upslope hydrological process affect downslope water availability (Brolsma and Bierkens, 2007). This process was found to affect the spatial patterns of vegetation performance, which rely on the distribution of soil water availability across the field. In an experiment in an “Aglianico” vineyard in Southern Italy, Basile et al. (2020) found differences in physiological and vegetative responses of grapevines to slope gradient; for example, downslope vines had lower water stress than upslope vines. Similarly, Santesteban et al. (2011a) found differences in grapevine water stress in different slope aspects in a “Tempranillo” vineyard in Southern Navarre, Spain. However, flat terrain seems to be less favorable to grapevine performance, and Irimia and Patriche (2013) reported the optimal slope range to be 5–15% (i.e., 2.85°–8.5°). Similar slope ranges were reported in a study conducted in Illinois by Kaan Kurtural et al. (2008). Ohana-Levi et al. (2020a) conducted a time-series analysis of daily images of evapotranspiration (ET) derived from remote sensing retrievals during four growing seasons in a “Pinot noir” vineyard in California. They found that soil type and elevation were the main contributors to ET spatial variability. Furthermore, topographic wetness index (TWI), a calculation of the ratio between the absolute area and slope, was found to be associated with soil moisture in a “Sangiovese” vineyard, Central Italy (Costantini et al., 2009) and with water stress and canopy cover in a “Cabernet Sauvignon” vineyard in Israel (Bahat et al., 2021). The response of grapevine attributes to water availability is commonly spatially dependent and relies on the interrelations among multiple factors such as soil characteristics, terrain, and irrigation management. These relationships among field properties are inconsistent and depend on natural and controllable factors such as the climatic region, vine variety, and rootstock (Smith and Whigham, 1999).
The temporal distribution of water availability is affected by meteorological attributes, such as precipitation and temperature, and controllable attributes, such as irrigation amounts. Precipitation has immediate influence on soil moisture, while deeper soils are more affected by low intensity rainfall events. Dry conditions lead to sharp decrease in soil moisture with low spatial variability. Occurrences of long dry periods are known to have harmful effects on yield in terms of quantity and quality (Ramos and Mulligan, 2005, Ramos and Martínez-Casasnovas, 2006). In an experiment in a California vineyard, Wilson et al. (2020) found that the main component affecting water availability early in the season was precipitation during the wet season, which had an impact on leaf area development. Furthermore, larger amounts of seasonal precipitation, leading to more stored water in the soil, were related to an extended period of canopy growth. They also showed that deficit in soil moisture was higher and dynamic during April and May, when canopy develops, and then stabilized at constant levels of water lost from the soil. Temporal effects in the seasonal scale may also be attributed to other factors such as chilling hours. A chilling requirement must be fulfilled for buds to synchronously burst and is believed to be between 0 and 7.2 °C, while grapevines typically require between 50 and 400 chilling hours during winter to satisfy endodormancy. Insufficient chilling can lead to delayed and desynchronized budding and slowing of crop development (Londo and Johnson, 2014, Fraga et al., 2019). Soil water content is also known to affect budbreak and further occurrence of phenological stages (Ramos and Martínez-Casasnovas, 2006, Van Leeuwen et al., 2009). Therefore, modeling the interactions of temporally varying components is required to fully understand between-season dynamics of grapevine vegetative and reproductive attributes.
Space-time distribution of grapevine growth and yield components can be managed during the growing season by irrigation (Bellvert et al., 2020). Irrigation practices are intended to control the water stress of the grapevines through management of soil water availability, and consequently the vegetative growth, physiological conditions, yield components, and wine quality (Santesteban et al., 2011b, Munitz et al., 2016). However, irrigation management is highly dependent on the amount, timing and intensity of precipitation. Wilson et al. (2020) reported that changes in irrigation amounts have an immediate effect on leaf area growth, and that lower levels of soil moisture due to lower amounts of precipitation are more likely to generate a stronger response of the plant to the irrigation regime. Nolz et al. (2016) showed the interactive effects of precipitation and irrigation levels on soil water content according to precipitation amounts, soil depth, and dryness of the soil prior to infiltration of precipitation/irrigation water.
Various studies illustrated the effects of the spatial factors in the field on vegetative, physiological, and reproductive attributes (Acevedo-Opazo et al., 2008, Ohana-Levi et al., 2019, Yu et al., 2021). Many works were conducted to quantify the impact of precipitation amounts, timing, and intensity on water availability in vineyards and consequently on grapevine performance (Ramos and Martínez-Casasnovas, 2009, Camps and Ramos, 2012, Ramos, 2017, Agam et al., 2019). However, to the best of our knowledge no studies focused on grapevine response to multivariate effects of spatial field attributes and temporal meteorological and controlled factors. The innovation of this present research stems from two main notions. The first focuses on generating an approach for applying an integrative space-time analysis of the response of grapevine attributes to spatially and temporally varying field properties. The second notion is to provide an overview on the interactions of factors affecting water availability, including direct water sources such as precipitation and irrigation, and indirect contributors, such as terrain properties that affect water distribution in the field. The suggested approach was established using a multivariate dataset collected during four years from a “Sauvignon Blanc” vineyard, enabling a long-term perception of processes and dynamics over space.
The main objective was to model the response of grapevine vegetative and reproductive attributes to water availability in space and time. The specific objectives were to (1) define, measure, and select the spatial and temporal variables to include in the model; (2) quantify the spatial autocorrelation of the spatial variables and grapevine vegetative and reproductive attributes; and (3) determine the relative influence (RI) of the different covariates on grapevine vegetative and reproductive attributes.
Section snippets
Study site and experimental design
The experiment took place between January 2017 and August 2020 in a vineyard located in the Gilboa Mountain region near Kibbutz Merav (32.44°N, 35.42°E) (Fig. 1). Vitis vinifera cv. “Sauvignon Blanc” vines grafted onto 1103 Paulsen rootstock were planted in a commercial vineyard during 2009, with vine spacing of 1.5 m along the rows and 3 m between rows. The vineyard is located 430 m above sea level on heavy clay soil with limestone bedrock. The region is characterized by Mediterranean climate
Results
The following results relate to the analyses conducted for the response variables and covariates in space and time.
Discussion
Soil water availability plays a major role in grapevine productivity and vegetative growth (Kizildeniz et al., 2015). This current study suggested an approach for analyzing the effect of spatial and temporal covariates on grapevine vegetative and reproductive attributes (i.e., response variables) through time. The analyses considered the entire experimental timeframe and were also conducted for each season separately, to control for intra-seasonal temporal effects. The findings show strong
Conclusions
Water availability in vineyards is dynamic in space and time. This current study explored the spatial changes between growing seasons in a four-year experiment in a Mediterranean climate. The findings show strong evidence that vineyard is affected by the local terrain and the water availability is subjected to the spatial patterns of elevation, slope, and aspect. Differential irrigation has pronounced effects when precipitation levels are low. However, when the growing season follows a winter
Funding
The field study was sponsored by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Israel (Grant No. 31-01-0010).
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Eastern R&D center and the Ministry of Science and Technology for the support. We would also like to thank Marc Perel for his assistance with the meteorological data. Our deep appreciation goes to farmer Moshe Hernik and youth group of Kibbutz Merav. We would also like to acknowledge Ben Hazut, Roni Michaelovsky, Yedidia Sweid, Matanya Harel, Yishai Ben Yakov, Hod Sayag, Itamar Netzer, and Shiloh Netzer for assisting in the field measurements. We thank the team of Sorek
References (66)
- et al.
A modelling approach to discriminate contributions of soil hydrological properties and slope gradient to water stress in Mediterranean vineyards
Agric. Water Manag.
(2020) - et al.
Surface soil moisture variation on small agricultural watersheds
J. Hydrol.
(1983) - et al.
Intra-block spatial and temporal variability of plant water status and its effect on grape and wine parameters
Agric. Water Manag.
(2021) - et al.
Effects of climate change including elevated CO2 concentration, temperature and water deficit on growth, water status, and yield quality of grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) cultivars
Agric. Water Manag.
(2015) - et al.
Variation in the chilling requirement and budburst rate of wild Vitis species
Environ. Exp. Bot.
(2014) - et al.
Water consumption, crop coefficient and leaf area relations of a Vitis vinifera cv. “Cabernet Sauvignon” vineyard
Agric. Water Manag.
(2019) - et al.
Soil water monitoring in a vineyard and assessment of unsaturated hydraulic parameters as thresholds for irrigation management
Agric. Water Manag.
(2016) - et al.
A multifunctional matching algorithm for sample design in agricultural plots
Comput. Electron. Agric.
(2021) - et al.
A weighted multivariate spatial clustering model to determine irrigation management zones
Comput. Electron. Agric.
(2019) Projection of phenology response to climate change in rainfed vineyards in north-east Spain
Agric. Meteor.
(2017)
Impact of land levelling on soil moisture and runoff variability in vineyards under different rainfall distributions in a Mediterranean climate and its influence on crop productivity
J. Hydrol.
Spatial modelling of the impact of climate variability on the annual soil moisture regime in a mechanized Mediterranean vineyard
J. Hydrol.
Regulated deficit irrigation effects on growth, yield, grape quality and individual anthocyanin composition in Vitis vinifera L. cv “Tempranillo”
Agric. Water Manag
Unravelling the effects of soil and crop management on maize productivity in smallholder agricultural systems of western Kenya-An application of classification and regression tree analysis
Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.
Effects of deficit irrigation on the performance of grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) cv. “Godello” and “Treixadura” in Ribeiro
NW Spain Agric. Water Manag.
Spatial variability of soil properties and cereal yield in a cultivated field on sandy soil
Soil Tillage Res.
Spatially-balanced complete block designs for field experiments
Geoderma
Relationships between soil water content, evapotranspiration, and irrigation measurements in a California drip-irrigated Pinot noir vineyard
Agric. Water Manag.
The potential of high spatial resolution information to define within-vineyard zones related to vine water status
Precis Agric.
Micro-scale spatial variability in soil heat flux (SHF) in a wine-grape vineyard
Irrig. Sci.
The analysis of the geomorphometric and landforms of Sarhan Basin, in Jordan
Hum. Soc. Sci.
Crop Evapotranspiration-Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements-fao Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56
Data Descriptor: a suite of global, cross-scale topographic variables for environmental and biodiversity modeling
Sci. Data
In-season interactions between vine vigor, water status and wine quality in terrain-based management-zones in a ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ vineyard
Remote Sens.
Water potential gradients for gaps and slopes in a Panamanian tropical moist forest’s dry season
J. Trop. Ecol.
Optimizing precision irrigation of a vineyard to improve water use efficiency and profitability by using a decision-oriented vine water consumption model
Precis Agric.
A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology
Hydrol. Sci. Bull.
The interactive effect of pruning level and irrigation strategy on water use efficiency of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Shiraz
South Afr. J. Enol. Vitic.
Groundwater-soil water-vegetation dynamics in a temperate forest ecosystem along a slope
Water Resour. Res.
Grape harvest and yield responses to inter-annual changes in temperature and precipitation in an area of north-east Spain with a Mediterranean climate
Int. J. Biometeorol.
Relevance of the Lin’s and Host hydropedological models to predict grape yield and wine quality
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.
Spatial and temporal distribution of soil moisture in drip-irrigated vineyards
HortScience
Crop diversification in viticulture with aromatic plants: Effects of intercropping on grapevine productivity in a steep-slope vineyard in the mosel area, germany
Agriculture
Cited by (11)
Grapevine stem water potential seasonal curves: response to meteorological conditions, and association to yield and red wine quality
2023, Agricultural and Forest MeteorologyInstantaneous and lasting effects of drought on grapevine water use
2023, Agricultural and Forest MeteorologyEffect of long-term treated wastewater irrigation on soil sodium levels and table grapevines' health
2023, Agricultural Water ManagementCitation Excerpt :Partial dependence is quantified in the model by averaging out the effects of all other covariates (Cutler et al., 2007), while all covariates except the one being examined are held constant. It is commonly presented in partial dependence plots (PDPs), which emphasize the direction of influence attributed to each covariate (Ohana-Levi et al., 2022). The visualization of the BRT results was implemented using ‘ggplot2′ package in R (Wickham, 2016).
China's sustainable development evolution and its driving mechanism
2022, Ecological IndicatorsGrapevine stem water potential estimation based on sensor fusion
2022, Computers and Electronics in AgricultureCitation Excerpt :The final set of variables included daily maximum LT, soil factors, estimated daily water input, VPD, and phenological stages. BRT was a suitable choice for the set of data, due to its ability to handle missing values and integrate categorical variables (Ohana-Levi et al., 2022). The validation shows that the estimation model was accurate (r = 0.9, RMSE = 0.15 MPa) and reliable.