AJEV
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 55:1:96-103 (2004)
Copyright © 2004 by the American Society for Enology and Viticulture.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Reynolds, A. G.
Right arrow Articles by King, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Reynolds, A. G.
Right arrow Articles by King, M.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Reynolds, A. G.
Right arrow Articles by King, M.

Impact of Training System and Vine Spacing on Vine Performance, Berry Composition, and Wine Sensory Attributes of Riesling

Andrew G. Reynolds 1, Douglas A. Wardle 1, Margaret A. Cliff 2, and Marjorie King 2

1 Horticulture and Basic Studies Program, Pacific Agriculture Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Research Centre, Summerland, BC, V0H 1Z0, Canada
2 Food Research Program, Pacific Agriculture Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Research Centre, Summerland, BC, V0H 1Z0, Canada.

Corresponding author [Present address: Cool Climate Oenology & Viticulture Institute, Brock University, St. Catharines, ON L2S 3A1, Canada; email: areynold{at}spartan.ac.brocku.ca]

Own-rooted Riesling vines were subjected over a four-year-period to five training treatments (alternate double crossarm, ADC; Lenz Moser, LM; low cordon, LC; low-V, LV; and pendelbogen, PB) and three vine spacings (1.4, 1.8, and 2.4 m). Divided canopies led to weights of cane prunings (vine size) and mean cane weights that were optimal (0.32 to 0.65 kg/m canopy; 15.4 to 34.5 g/cane). Yields were consistently highest for divided canopies as well. Crop loads (ratio of yield: weight of cane prunings) of divided canopies exceeded the presently accepted level (10 to 12) beyond which wine quality could be compromised, but berry, must, and wine composition (Brix, titratable acidity, and pH) were not strongly impacted by training system. Increasing vine spacing led to lower vine size (per m row), cane weights, and occasionally reduced Brix. Riesling wines were also not strongly influenced by training system, except for higher vegetative aroma in the ADC wines. These data strongly suggest that high wine quality may be obtained from divided canopies despite large crop size and high crop loads.

Note:
Acknowledgments: We wish to thank the following members of the taste panel: Mike Bernardy, Mike Bouthillier, Tony Cottrell, Pascal Delaquis, Kimberly Dever, Horst Donner, Benoit Girard, Hilary Graham, Linda Herbert, Judy Harrison, Tom Kopp, Linda Jensen, Heather McBrien, Sandra Stewart, Laszlo Veto, and Jim Wild.

Key words: canopy management, trellising, canopy division, fruit composition, sensory evaluation




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Enol. Vitic.Home page
B. P. Bordelon, P. A. Skinkis, and P. H. Howard
Impact of Training System on Vine Performance and Fruit Composition of Traminette
Am. J. Enol. Vitic., March 1, 2008; 59(1): 39 - 46.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Enol. Vitic.Home page
M. Keller, L. J. Mills, R. L. Wample, and S. E. Spayd
Cluster Thinning Effects on Three Deficit-Irrigated Vitis vinifera Cultivars
Am. J. Enol. Vitic., June 1, 2005; 56(2): 91 - 103.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 by the American Society for Enology and Viticulture.