AJEV AJEV Best Papers - Free Access
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 59:1:11-21 (2008)
Copyright © 2008 by the American Society for Enology and Viticulture.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zoecklein, B. W.
Right arrow Articles by Birkenmaier, S. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Zoecklein, B. W.
Right arrow Articles by Birkenmaier, S. S.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Zoecklein, B. W.
Right arrow Articles by Birkenmaier, S. S.

Effect of Vertical Shoot-Positioned, Smart-Dyson, and Geneva Double-Curtain Training Systems on Viognier Grape and Wine Composition

Bruce W. Zoecklein1,*, Tony K. Wolf2, Lisa Pélanne1, M. Kay Miller2 and Sandy S. Birkenmaier1

1 Enology-Grape Chemistry Group, Department of Food Science and Technology, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061; 2 AHS Jr. Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Virginia Tech, Winchester, VA 22602.

* Corresponding author (email: bzoeckle{at}vt.edu)

Viognier grapes grown in northern Virginia and resultant wines were evaluated as a function of training system. Treatments included vertical shoot-positioned (VSP), Smart-Dyson (SD), and Geneva double curtain (GDC), with vines of all treatments spaced 2.4 m apart in 3.0 m wide rows. In addition to increased cluster numbers and crop yield, GDC training generally increased fruit zone sunlight interception and fruit exposure, while it decreased cane pruning weights per meter of cordon, compared with SD and VSP. Crop adjustments were made between bloom and veraison in six seasons, to result in average yields of 10.5 kg/vine (GDC), 9.9 kg/vine (SD), and 6.0 kg/vine (VSP), with the lower SD canopy bearing 30 to 40% less crop than the corresponding upper SD canopy. Crop loads (yield/cane pruning weight) were generally between 4 and 12; GDC crop load approached 20 in three seasons, while SD approached 14 in one. Leaf area per crop ratio was determined one season and exceeded 1.8 m2/kg of fruit for all systems. Fruit was harvested at similar Brix values, with differences in berry weight, pH, titratable acidity, and malic and tartaric acids among treatments generally not significant. Volatile compounds were analyzed using headspace solid-phase microextraction GC-MS. Fruit showed consistent differences in linalool, {alpha}-terpineol, β-damascenone, and n-hexanol concentrations among training systems. SD had the highest concentration of most free volatiles quantified in both juice and wines, while GDC wines frequently had the highest concentration of phenol-free glycosides. Triangle difference sensory testing demonstrated differences between GDC and SD in wine aroma and flavor and between VSP and SD in flavor. GDC wines generally had higher fruity and floral aromas compared with the other systems.

Key words: Viognier, training system, volatile compounds, glycosides, wines






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the American Society for Enology and Viticulture.