Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Volume
    • AJEV and Catalyst Archive
    • Best Papers
    • ASEV National Conference Technical Abstracts
    • Print on Demand
  • Information For
    • Authors
    • Open Access Publishing
    • AJEV Preprint and AI Software Policy
    • Submission
    • Subscribers
      • Proprietary Rights Notice for AJEV Online
    • Permissions and Reproductions
  • About Us
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • Help
  • Login
  • ASEV MEMBER LOGIN

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Enology and Viticulture
  • Log in
  • Follow ajev on Twitter
  • Follow ajev on Linkedin
American Journal of Enology and Viticulture

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Volume
    • AJEV and Catalyst Archive
    • Best Papers
    • ASEV National Conference Technical Abstracts
    • Print on Demand
  • Information For
    • Authors
    • Open Access Publishing
    • AJEV Preprint and AI Software Policy
    • Submission
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions and Reproductions
  • About Us
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • Help
  • Login
  • ASEV MEMBER LOGIN
Insight

Climate Change Impacts on Vineyards in Warm and Dry Areas: Challenges and Opportunities

From the ASEV Climate Change Symposium Part 1 – Viticulture
View ORCID ProfileMarkus Keller
Am J Enol Vitic.  2023  74: 0740033  ; DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2023.23024
Markus Keller
1Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Find this author on ADS search
  • Find this author on Agricola
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Markus Keller
  • For correspondence: mkeller@wsu.edu
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background and goals Climate change is challenging grape production everywhere, but especially in regions with warm and dry climates. Rising temperatures are increasing the plant water demand while decreasing the irrigation water supply. This overview explores how temperature and water availability impact grapevines to inform practices in warm-climate viticulture.

Methods and key findings Integrating an historical perspective with recent physiological and phenological research shows that Vitis vinifera is a rather heat- and drought-tolerant species whose cultivars differ in their adaptability to diverse climates. Water-stressed grapevines reduce canopy gas exchange and growth, leading to more sun-exposed, and hence warmer, clusters with smaller berries, which alters grape composition. Both excessive heat and drought stress limit crop yield, and drought stress may threaten plant survival. Rising temperatures accelerate vine growth and development, and may advance or delay fruit ripening, but temperature responses and thresholds remain to be quantified. Exploiting the existing genetic diversity and using mechanization to manipulate crop yields may be effective strategies to counter the trend to earlier harvests and higher wine alcohol contents and to improve vineyard water-use efficiency.

Conclusions and significance Though climate change poses challenges to the global grape and wine industries, the work reviewed here shows that grapevines are resilient and vary in their adaptability. This article encourages further research into utilizing the inherent genetic diversity of grapevines to choose or develop adapted cultivars and other mitigation strategies related to vineyard management.

  • fruit composition
  • grapevine
  • heat stress
  • Vitis
  • water stress
  • yield

Introduction

Though commonly grafted to rootstocks with different genetic backgrounds, most cultivated grapevines belong to the species Vitis vinifera L., which was domesticated from Vitis sylvestris L. in the Caucasus region and southwestern Asia (Dong et al. 2023). Climates across this region range from cool to hot and, matching its climatic diversity, the region is home to diverse wild and cultivated grape genotypes (Sargolzaei et al. 2021, Sivan et al. 2021). Therefore, at least some cultivars should be tolerant of heat and drought. Though unaware of the evolutionary history and genetic makeup of V. vinifera, the Roman author Lucius Columella (c. 4 to 70 ad) had a keen sense of the value of exploiting its intraspecific variability and the importance of climate for grape production. In Columella’s reference text on agriculture, De Re Rustica, he recommended matching cultivars to the prevailing climate and soil, and planting high-yielding cultivars in warm climates. Writing nearly 2000 years before the downy and powdery mildew pathogens and phylloxera arrived in Europe, Columella emphasized that while vineyards do not thrive in cold or overly hot climates, they prefer warm weather over cold weather, and dry soils over soils drenched by excessive rainfall.

Grapes grown in warm, dry climates are the focus of this article. Following the definition by Jones et al. (2010), warm climates for grape production have an average seven-month growing season temperature between 17 and 19°C; hot climates fall between 19 and 21°C. The seasonal growing degree day (GDD > 10°C) equivalent is roughly 1500 to 2000 for warm climates and 2000 to 2400 for hot climates. However, average temperatures do not tell the whole story. Warm climates are often characterized by experiencing hot days during the growing season. Hot days are defined as those whose daily maximum temperature (Tmax) exceeds 35°C; many physiological processes decline above this threshold (Keller 2020). While the number of hot days is projected to increase under future climate scenarios (White et al. 2006), the western United States experienced as many days with Tmax > 35°C in 2021 and 2022 as the number predicted for the end of this century.

Warmer temperatures also raise the atmosphere’s evaporative demand, estimated as vapor pressure deficit, and accelerate transpiration from plant leaves (Katul et al. 2012). But while the rising temperature is increasing the plant water demand, the irrigation water supply is declining. In many regions, including the western U.S., the water supply during the summer depends on the water stored in mountain snowpacks in spring (Elsner et al. 2010, Wagner et al. 2021). As dwindling snowpacks and earlier snowmelt are shifting peak river flows from early summer to early spring, the irrigation water availability decreases and the drought risk during the summer increases. On a worldwide scale, mountain glaciers are predicted to lose 26 to 41% of their mass by the end of this century (relative to 2015), causing most low- and mid-latitude glaciers to disappear (Rounce et al. 2023). In addition, groundwater levels are declining in many regions (Wang et al. 2022, Xanke and Liesch 2022). At the same time, the increasing frequency, severity, and duration of both extremely wet and extremely dry conditions is challenging adaptation and mitigation practices (Stevenson et al. 2022).

This Insight explores some responses of grapevines to aspects of climate change, focusing on temperature and water availability. Vineyard management practices, including the use of different rootstocks, aimed at mitigating the impact of climate change have been recently reviewed elsewhere (van Leeuwen et al. 2019, Gutiérrez-Gamboa et al. 2021, Marín et al. 2021, Naulleau et al. 2021, Romero et al. 2022, Theron and Hunter 2022). Therefore, mitigation practices are mentioned here only in passing, with the main goal of encouraging further research.

Yield: Drought and Heat May Leave Your Glass Empty

Even as the drought risk is intensifying, Charrier et al. (2018) asserted that grapevine water status, measured as predawn or midday leaf water potential (Ψl), never falls below a threshold that would trigger vine mortality because vines sacrifice their leaves under drought. That work was conducted in Bordeaux (annual precipitation [AP] ≈ 800 mm), France, and the Napa Valley (AP ≈ 700 mm) of California; recent research in Israel (AP ≈ 600 mm) reinforced that conclusion (Sorek et al. 2021). V. vinifera is indeed quite drought tolerant and, except in vineyards on very sandy soils (or in many pot experiments), Ψl declines over periods of weeks when water supply is interrupted (Romero et al. 2017, Sorek et al. 2021). Nevertheless, in dry regions such as southeastern Washington (AP ≈ 200 mm), canopy dieback does occur when irrigation is discontinued over extended periods and may result in vine mortality over successive years (Figure 1). New models predict that by the end of this century, current V. vinifera cultivars will not survive without irrigation in climates that are currently considered warm and dry (Dayer et al. 2022).

Figure 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 1

Vineyard in the Yakima Valley of southeastern Washington, a region with ~200 mm annual precipitation, in late July 2021, after two years without irrigation.

Dry soil in spring due to low winter precipitation may leave vines unable to generate sufficient root pressure to restore the functionality of their vascular system, resulting in erratic budbreak, slow shoot growth, and yield loss (Galat Giorgi et al. 2020, Keller 2020, Bonada et al. 2021; Figure 2). Once canopy transpiration begins to drive water up the vine’s xylem conduits, water deficit leads to a decline in Ψl. To protect themselves from drought stress, vines close their stomata at a higher Ψl than that which triggers leaf wilting and abscission due to xylem cavitation (Charrier et al. 2018, Sorek et al. 2021). But the stomatal closure reduces photosynthesis, limiting the amount of carbon that is available for export from the leaves. In vines on sandy soils, photosynthesis can decline within days after an irrigation event (Tarara et al. 2011).

Figure 2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 2

Effect of soil type and soil moisture on (A) time to budbreak and (B) shoot vigor of own-rooted Merlot grapevines grown in 27-L pots. Two different soils were collected at the Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center in Prosser, Washington, based on the USDA soil classification (https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov), and dried. Dormant, 2-year-old vines grown in potting mix were removed from cold storage, pruned to 10 buds, repotted in the two dry soils, moved into a greenhouse (temperature range 12 to 30°C), and irrigated daily at ~1% (v/v) target increments ranging from permanent wilting point to field capacity in each soil type. Volumetric soil moisture was measured by time-domain reflectometry (HydroSense, Campbell Scientific). Time to budbreak: days from placement in the greenhouse to appearance of green tissue on ≥5 buds. Shoot vigor: average growth rate over the first five weeks after budbreak.

Unlike mild water deficit (midday Ψl > −1 MPa), moderate water deficit may reduce yield, depending on a vine’s growth stage. Water stress before bloom may induce inflorescence abortion, during bloom it reduces fruit set, and before veraison it reduces berry size and bud fruitfulness (Hardie and Considine 1976, Matthews and Anderson 1989, Vasconcelos et al. 2009, Gambetta et al. 2020, Levin et al. 2020). As berries begin to ripen, they become such strong sinks that even severe water deficit (Ψl ≤ −1.5 MPa) will not stop berry growth, sugar accumulation, and color change (Keller et al. 2015b). Nevertheless, severe stress slows sugar accumulation and permits berry shrinkage. In dry regions, therefore, growers can manipulate berry size via preveraison irrigation water supply, while postveraison irrigation can mitigate, but not reverse, berry shrinkage (Keller et al. 2006, 2023).

Like water deficit, heat stress also compromises yield. The optimum Tmax for fruit set and subsequent berry growth may lie between 30 and 35°C (Keller 2020, Keller et al. 2022). Temperatures below 15°C and above 40°C compromise pollen viability and curtail fruit set, seed and berry growth, and bud fruitfulness (Vasconcelos et al. 2009, Gouot et al. 2019a), while sun-exposed berries heated to above ~45°C may shrivel due to sunburn injury (Gambetta et al. 2021, Müller et al. 2023). However, how water and heat stress interact quantitatively and temporally to influence yield formation in the current and subsequent cropping year remains to be determined.

Fruit Composition: Temperature Trumps Water Status

Some water deficit is advantageous for grape quality (Medrano et al. 2015), but just how vine water status alters quality traits remains unresolved. Perhaps surprisingly, changes in fruit composition seem unlikely to be mediated by abscisic acid (Castellarin et al. 2007b), and changes in gene expression in the berries cannot be taken as evidence for a direct effect of water deficit. Moreover, upregulation of genes responsible for anthocyanin and terpenoid biosynthesis in water-stressed grapevines persists long after the stress is relieved (Castellarin et al. 2007b, Palai et al. 2022a, 2023). While severe water stress induces leaf abscission, even mild to moderate stress limits shoot growth and, unless it occurs too late (e.g., postveraison), will result in smaller, more open canopies, which in turn increases the cluster sun exposure. The solar radiation that brings more light to sun-exposed berries also heats those berries, sometimes by >15°C above the ambient temperature (Spayd et al. 2002; Figure 3). Consequently, many berries on water-stressed vines are not only smaller but also warmer than berries on nonstressed vines, which has implications for fruit composition (Keller et al. 2016, Scholasch and Rienth 2019).

Figure 3
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 3

Infrared image superimposed on visible image of a Riesling canopy in the Yakima Valley of Washington in 2020. Rows are oriented north-south, and fruit-zone leaves were removed after fruit set on the east side only. The image was taken with a FLIR ONE Pro for Android camera (Teledyne FLIR). Temperatures are shown for (from top) sun-exposed leaf, shaded leaf, and sun-exposed cluster. The purple band at the bottom is the shaded vineyard floor; the white “hotspot” is the sun-exposed vineyard floor. The ambient air temperature, recorded at 1.5 m by an on-site weather station, was 24°C. For details, see Fritzke (2022). Photo courtesy of Evan Fritzke.

The lower acidity that is often observed in grapes from water-stressed vines has been attributed to greater sun exposure of the fruit (Intrigliolo and Castel 2010). Malate metabolism during ripening may be unresponsive to water deficit per se but is accelerated by higher temperatures (Sweetman et al. 2009, Hewitt et al. 2023). Measuring skin flavonoids in sun-exposed and shaded berries, or in east- and west-exposed berries, also revealed a strong exposure effect but no consistent water effect in irrigation experiments (Rocchi 2015, Zarrouk et al. 2016). The ultraviolet portion of the solar spectrum enhances flavonol accumulation, while the higher temperature in combination with visible light may favor production of flavan-3-ols, which can polymerize into tannins (Price et al. 1995, Kolb et al. 2003, Koyama and Goto-Yamamoto 2008, Gouot et al. 2019b, Torres et al. 2020). Anthocyanin accumulation requires only ~100 μmol/m2s of visible light but like flavonol accumulation, responds strongly to temperature, declining at berry temperatures above 35°C (Bergqvist et al. 2001, Spayd et al. 2002, Pastore et al. 2017). While anthocyanin biosynthesis at the onset of ripening is closely tied to sugar accumulation, temperature variation may lead to increasing variability in anthocyanins as the berries ripen (Keller et al. 2005, Zarrouk et al. 2016, Gouot et al. 2019b, Hernández-Montes et al. 2021, Kurtural and Gambetta 2021). Sadras and Moran (2012), by contrast, concluded that heat delays the onset but not the rate of anthocyanin accumulation relative to sugar accumulation. Yet across their experiments there was a threshold of ~10 Brix at which anthocyanin accumulation started, consistent with other studies (Castellarin et al. 2007a, 2007b, Hernández-Montes et al. 2021). Thus, while water deficit may sometimes advance the onset and rate of sugar and anthocyanin accumulation (Castellarin et al. 2007a), excessive berry temperatures might delay ripening in general, which can result in visible differences in berry size and color on opposite sides of a canopy or of sun-exposed clusters (Figure 4).

Figure 4
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 4

Cabernet Sauvignon clusters in a vineyard in the Yakima Valley of Washington in 2022. Rows are oriented north-south, and clusters are exposed on (A) west side of the canopy and (B) east side of the same canopy, with (C) sun-exposed side and (D) shaded side of the same cluster on the west side. All pictures were taken on the same day.

The influence of water deficit, and its interaction with light and temperature, on aroma volatiles or their bound precursors in grapes, are not well understood (Scholasch and Rienth 2019, Rienth et al. 2021). For example, though the optimum temperature for monoterpene accumulation might be <20°C, severe preveraison water stress leading to basal leaf abscission, but not postveraison water stress, may increase monoterpenes (Savoi et al. 2016, Palai et al. 2022b, 2023). In vines that had most basal leaves removed, however, monoterpenes remained largely unaltered by pre- or postveraison water deficit (Kovalenko et al. 2021). Consequently, while there is compelling evidence for an indirect effect of water deficit via its influence on canopy microclimate, a direct effect on fruit composition has yet to be conclusively demonstrated.

Growth and Physiology—But Not Phenology: Water Status Trumps Temperature

Provided chilling has been sufficient to break dormancy, the time of budbreak is driven by bud temperature (Camargo-Alvarez et al. 2020) but is rather insensitive to soil moisture; only extremely dry soil will delay budbreak (Figure 2). Though threshold temperatures remain a matter of debate, higher temperatures induce earlier budbreak, which can increase the risk for spring frost damage, especially in winter-hardy genotypes that tend to lose hardiness faster in spring, and thus grow out earlier than less hardy genotypes (Keller and Tarara 2010, Ferguson et al. 2014, Martínez-Lüscher et al. 2016, Poni et al. 2022). Higher temperatures during budswell and budbreak also increase the xylem’s transport capacity in the emerging shoots, “priming” them for greater seasonal vigor and yield (Keller and Tarara 2010, Keller et al. 2010, Galat Giorgi et al. 2020). Water deficit suppresses this temperature effect, thus limiting vigor irrespective of temperature. During the growing season, shoot growth, Ψl, and leaf photosynthesis remain much more limited by water deficit than by high temperature, even at Tmax ≥ 40°C (Galat Giorgi et al. 2019, Arrizabalaga-Arriazu et al. 2021, Lehr et al. 2022). But unless leaves have already been abscised, Ψl generally recovers within days upon water supply, while photosynthesis may take somewhat longer to recover to prestress levels (Romero et al. 2017, Galat Giorgi et al. 2019).

Unlike its dominant influence on growth and leaf physiology, the effect of water availability on phenology tends to be inconsistent, whereas rising temperatures accelerate the progression of phenological stages (however, see Figure 4). Temperature variation leads to high variability in phenology among and within regions and between years (Parker et al. 2013, de Rességuier et al. 2020). Even among eight generally warm years (2015 to 2022), the date of veraison varied by two to five weeks for 31 own-rooted grape cultivars grown in the same vineyard in southeastern Washington (Figure 5). A similar variation in veraison date (for 2012 to 2018) was observed for 50 cultivars grafted to SO4 rootstock in the somewhat cooler and considerably wetter climate of Bordeaux (van Leeuwen et al. 2019). Moreover, the cultivar rankings for veraison in Washington and Bordeaux are comparable (Spearman rank rs = 0.85, p < 0.001, n = 17 common cultivars), with Chardonnay among the earliest cultivars and Petit Verdot the latest cultivar at both sites. The Washington cultivar ranking also correlates with that based on GDD developed by Parker et al. (2013) for multiple sites (rs = 0.77, p < 0.001, n = 24 common cultivars, various rootstocks). This natural variation may be used to adjust the cultivar makeup within regions (Morales-Castilla et al. 2020); cultivars with a late veraison date may be planted in warm sites. Moreover, even if the wine industry is not ready to embrace modern molecular approaches, breeding programs could exploit the genetic variability present among existing cultivars (Duchêne et al. 2010, Parker et al. 2013) and among extant V. sylvestris or other Vitis genotypes.

Figure 5
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 5

Variation in veraison date of 31 grape cultivars grown in a vineyard in the Yakima Valley of Washington. Veraison date was recorded at 50% color change (black grapes, purple boxes) or 50% softening (white grapes, green boxes) from 2015 through 2022. Box plots show median (vertical line), lower, and upper quartiles (box), and 10th and 90th percentiles (whiskers). Cultivars are ranked by mean date with median date used as tiebreaker. Own-rooted, certified vines were planted in 2003 (Concord, in a separate block) or 2010 at the Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center in Prosser, WA. Vineyard details are provided in Groenveld et al. (2023) and Keller et al. (2023).

Nevertheless, comparing Figure 5 with Figure 7 in van Leeuwen et al. (2019) shows that some cultivars might shift in the veraison rank order between locations. A global phenology network could help to confirm whether, or to what extent, cultivars differ in their phenological response to diverse climates, and identify the genetic basis for such variability. Additionally, the correlation between the veraison ranking in Figure 5 and that for average growing season temperature by cultivar across the world (Puga et al. 2022) is relatively weak (rs = 0.58, p = 0.02, n = 17 common cultivars). Thus, while cultivars with a later veraison date tend to be grown in warmer climates, some cultivars might perform well in diverse climates. For example, a blind tasting of 30 Chardonnay wines from nine countries on five continents revealed that 12 Chardonnay experts could not reliably identify the country of origin (Vaterlaus 2013). Neither the correlation between perceived origin and actual origin (r = 0.16, p = 0.4), nor that between bottle price (>10-fold range) and tasting score (r = 0.06, p = 0.76), was significant. This outcome echoes the results from another blind tasting, where 11 expert judges could not distinguish Chardonnay wines from Burgundy (France) and California (Taber 2005). Apparently, phenotypically plastic cultivars such as Chardonnay, despite its propensity to ripen early, can produce similar wine styles across diverse climates (and soils). The date of veraison by itself is thus not a useful marker for cultivar suitability in different climates.

Crop Load: Implications for Ripening and Water-use Efficiency (WUE)

As climate change is progressing, grapes are being harvested earlier and the wine alcohol content is increasing (Petrie and Sadras 2008, Cook and Wolkovich 2016, Edwards et al. 2017). A seemingly obvious strategy to counter this trend would be to increase crop loads to delay ripening. Raising yields would also be an effective way to improve the WUE of grape production. For example, despite requiring more irrigation water, juice grapes cropped at 43 t/ha in southeastern Washington had a 2.5-fold higher irrigation WUE (6.9 t/ML) and lower total water footprint (200 m3/t) than winegrapes cropped at 8 t/ha (2.7 t/ML and 530 m3/t; Keller et al. 2016, 2023). Nevertheless, the wine industry and its regulators remain fixated on low yields as a presumed prerequisite for high quality. Reviewing viticultural practices that may improve WUE, Medrano et al. (2015) excluded yield increases, asserting that these would reduce fruit quality. In their meta-analysis of practices designed to delay grape ripening in the face of rising temperatures, Previtali et al. (2022) considered reducing leaf area (i.e., limiting source size) but not increasing yield (i.e., increasing sink size).

However, increasing yield by lowering the pruning severity resulted in Cabernet Sauvignon wines with more fruity and less vegetal aromas (Chapman et al. 2004). Similar to the water deficit effect discussed above, the pruning effect might be mediated by shoot vigor and, perhaps, berry size, as both berry and rachis methoxypyrazine concentrations correlate with vigor (Scheiner et al. 2012, Sanders et al. 2022). Because vigor and berry size tend to decrease as the shoot number or crop load increases, machine pruning could be applied to increase yield (Keller et al. 2008, 2015a, Poni et al. 2016). In unusually cool growing seasons, mechanical harvesters could be used to thin the crop (Kurtural and Fidelibus 2021). In a case study in southeastern Washington, machine-pruned, deficit-irrigated Syrah vines had 40% more but 17% lighter clusters, and hence higher yield (5-year average 15.6 t/ha), than hand-pruned vines (13.4 t/ha). Thinning the machine-pruned vines using a mechanical harvester between pea size and bunch closure effectively reduced yield (12.7 t/ha) by decreasing the cluster size further without altering the cluster number (Figure 6A). Therefore, unlike manual cluster thinning, mechanical berry thinning has the added benefit of decreasing the cluster compactness (Tardaguila et al. 2008; Figure 6B). Appropriately designed field trials could test whether vigor and canopy size are indeed more important than yield for fruit composition.

Figure 6
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 6

Machine-pruning and machine-thinning effects in a Syrah vineyard in the Columbia Valley of Washington. (A) Relationship between number of clusters per vine and average cluster weight of manually-pruned or machine-pruned vines with and without machine-thinning. Data for 2014 through 2018 were pooled. (B) Berries, cluster fragments, and leaves on the vineyard floor after machine-thinning. Own-rooted vines were planted in 2000 in a vineyard owned and operated by Ste. Michelle Wine Estates near Paterson, WA. Rows were oriented north/northwest to south/southeast and spaced at 2.74 m. Vines spaced at 1.83 m were trained to unilateral cordons at 1 m and converted from spur pruning to box pruning (10 to 12 cm on either side and above the cordon) in 2013; some rows were converted back to spur pruning in 2014 (24 to 30 buds per vine). Crop thinning was done with a machine harvester (Vinestar 990/500, ground speed 2.5 km/hr, bow-rod frequency 425 rpm) between pea size and lag phase. Treatments were applied to four replicated three-row blocks with four data vines in each middle row.

Conclusion

V. vinifera is a resilient species whose cultivars are adapted to diverse climates. Nevertheless, climate change poses challenges for grape production, especially in warm and dry regions, where rising temperatures are increasing the plant water demand, while decreasing the irrigation water supply. Both heat stress and water stress limit crop yield, and excessive water stress may threaten plant survival. Even moderate water stress limits canopy gas exchange and growth, which results in more sun-exposed and warmer clusters with smaller berries and altered fruit composition. Future experiments should disentangle the relative importance of direct versus indirect effects of water stress for fruit composition. Higher temperatures accelerate vine growth and development and may advance or delay fruit ripening. However, temperature responses of grapevine phenology, growth, productivity, and fruit composition should be quantified to determine optimum and threshold temperatures. A global network of vineyard sites across diverse climates and with diverse cultivars would facilitate this effort. In addition to improving our knowledge of the genetic and phenotypic diversity among existing V. vinifera cultivars, it might be possible to identify and preserve distinct genotypes of V. sylvestris (and other wild species) with desirable traits that could be exploited to choose or develop adapted cultivars. Research into viticultural practices aimed at mitigating the effects of climate change should include the interaction between crop load and ripening rate under different climate scenarios. Finally, investigating mechanization as a tool to manipulate crop yields could help to improve vineyard WUE and counter the trend to earlier harvests and higher wine alcohol contents.

Footnotes

  • This work was funded by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (Hatch project 1000186) and the Washington State Grape and Wine Research Program. Conference travel support was provided by the American Society for Enology and Viticulture. I thank Lynn Mills for phenology data collection and analysis, and Evan Fritzke for the photo and measurements shown in Figure 3.

  • Keller M. 2023. Climate change impacts on vineyards in warm and dry areas: Challenges and opportunities. Am J Enol Vitic 74:0740033. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2023.23024

  • By downloading and/or receiving this article, you agree to the Disclaimer of Warranties and Liability. If you do not agree to the Disclaimers, do not download and/or accept this article.

  • Received April 2023.
  • Accepted August 2023.
  • Published online October 2023

This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY 4.0 license.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Arrizabalaga-Arriazu M,
    2. Morales F,
    3. Irigoyen JJ,
    4. Hilbert G and
    5. Pascual I.
    2021. Growth and physiology of four Vitis vinifera L. cv. Tempranillo clones under future warming and water deficit regimes. Aust J Grape Wine Res 27:295-307. DOI: 10.1111/ajgw.12494
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  2. ↵
    1. Bergqvist J,
    2. Dokoozlian N and
    3. Ebisuda N.
    2001. Sunlight exposure and temperature effects on berry growth and composition of Cabernet Sauvignon and Grenache in the central San Joaquin Valley of California. Am J Enol Vitic 52:1-7. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2001.52.1.1
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Bonada M,
    2. Catania AA,
    3. Gambetta JM and
    4. Petrie PR.
    2021. Soil water availability during spring modulates canopy growth and impacts the chemical and sensory composition of Shiraz fruit and wine. Aust J Grape Wine Res 27:491-507. DOI: 10.1111/ajgw.12506
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. ↵
    1. Camargo-Alvarez H,
    2. Salazar-Gutiérrez M,
    3. Keller M and
    4. Hoogenboom G.
    2020. Modeling the effect of temperature on bud dormancy of grapevines. Agric For Meteorol 280:107782. DOI: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2019.107782
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  5. ↵
    1. Castellarin SD,
    2. Matthews MA,
    3. Di Gaspero G and
    4. Gambetta GA.
    2007a. Water deficits accelerate ripening and induce changes in gene expression regulating flavonoid biosynthesis in grape berries. Planta 227:101-112. DOI: 10.1007/s00425-007-0598-8
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Castellarin SD,
    2. Pfeiffer A,
    3. Sivilotti P,
    4. Degan M,
    5. Peterlunger E and
    6. Di Gaspero G.
    2007b. Transcriptional regulation of anthocyanin biosynthesis in ripening fruits of grapevine under seasonal water deficit. Plant Cell Environ 30:1381-1399. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2007.01716.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Chapman DM,
    2. Matthews MA and
    3. Guinard J-X.
    2004. Sensory attributes of Cabernet Sauvignon wines made from vines with different crop yields. Am J Enol Vitic 55:325-334. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2004.55.4.325
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Charrier G,
    2. Delzon S,
    3. Domec JC,
    4. Zhang L,
    5. Delmas CEL,
    6. Merlin I et al.
    2018. Drought will not leave your glass empty: Low risk of hydraulic failure revealed by long-term drought observations in world’s top wine regions. Sci Adv 4:eaao6969. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aao6969
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Cook BI and
    2. Wolkovich EM.
    2016. Climate change decouples drought from early wine grape harvests in France. Nature Clim Change 6:715-719. DOI: 10.1038/nclimate2960
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  10. ↵
    1. Dayer S,
    2. Lamarque LJ,
    3. Burlett R,
    4. Bortolami G,
    5. Delzon S,
    6. Herrera JC et al.
    2022. Model-assisted ideotyping reveals trait syndromes to adapt viticulture to a drier climate. Plant Physiol 190:1673-1686. DOI: 10.1093/plphys/kiac361
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  11. ↵
    1. de Rességuier L,
    2. Mary S,
    3. Le Roux R,
    4. Petitjean T,
    5. Quénol H and
    6. van Leeuwen C.
    2020. Temperature variability at local scale in the Bordeaux area. Relations with environmental factors and impact on vine phenology. Front Plant Sci 11:515. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2020.00515
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  12. ↵
    1. Dong Y,
    2. Duan S,
    3. Xia Q,
    4. Liang Z,
    5. Dong X,
    6. Margaryan K et al.
    2023. Dual domestications and origin of traits in grapevine evolution. Science 379:892-901. DOI: 10.1126/science.add8655
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Duchêne E,
    2. Huard F,
    3. Dumas V,
    4. Schneider C and
    5. Merdinoglu D.
    2010. The challenge of adapting grapevine varieties to climate change. Clim Res 41:193-204. DOI: 10.3354/cr00850
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  14. ↵
    1. Edwards EJ,
    2. Unwin D,
    3. Kilmister R and
    4. Treeby M.
    2017. Multi-seasonal effects of warming and elevated CO2 on the physiology, growth and production of mature, field-grown, Shiraz grapevines. OENO One 51:127-132. DOI: 10.20870/oeno-one.2016.0.0.1586
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  15. ↵
    1. Elsner MM,
    2. Cuo L,
    3. Voisin N,
    4. Deems JS,
    5. Hamlet AF,
    6. Vano JA et al.
    2010. Implications of 21st century climate change for the hydrology of Washington State. Clim Change 102:225-260. DOI: 10.1007/s10584-010-9855-0
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  16. ↵
    1. Ferguson JC,
    2. Moyer MM,
    3. Mills LJ,
    4. Hoogenboom G and
    5. Keller M.
    2014. Modeling dormant bud cold hardiness and budbreak in twenty-three Vitis genotypes reveals variation by region of origin. Am J Enol Vitic 65:59-71. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2013.13098
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    1. Fritzke E.
    2022. Canopy and Irrigation Management Effects on Grape Acidity. MS thesis, Washington State University, Pullman.
  18. ↵
    1. Galat Giorgi E,
    2. Sadras VO,
    3. Keller M and
    4. Perez Peña J.
    2019. Interactive effects of high temperature and water deficit on Malbec grapevines. Aust J Grape Wine Res 25:345-356. DOI: 10.1111/ajgw.12398
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  19. ↵
    1. Galat Giorgi E,
    2. Keller M,
    3. Sadras V,
    4. Roig FA and
    5. Perez Peña J.
    2020. High temperature during the budswell phase of grapevines increases shoot water transport capacity. Agric For Meteorol 295:108173. DOI: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2020.108173
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  20. ↵
    1. Gambetta GA,
    2. Herrera JC,
    3. Dayer S,
    4. Feng Q,
    5. Hochberg U and
    6. Castellarin SD.
    2020. The physiology of drought stress in grapevine: Towards an integrative definition of drought stress. J Exp Bot 71:4658-4676. DOI: 10.1093/jxb/eraa245
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  21. ↵
    1. Gambetta JM,
    2. Holzapfel BP,
    3. Stoll M and
    4. Friedel M.
    2021. Sunburn in grapes: A review. Front Plant Sci 11:604691. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2020.604691
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  22. ↵
    1. Gouot JC,
    2. Smith JP,
    3. Holzapfel BP and
    4. Barril C.
    2019a. Impact of short temperature exposure of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Shiraz grapevine bunches on berry development, primary metabolism and tannin accumulation. Environ Exp Bot 168:103866. DOI: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2019.103866
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  23. ↵
    1. Gouot JC,
    2. Smith JP,
    3. Holzapfel BP,
    4. Walker AR and
    5. Barril C.
    2019b. Grape berry flavonoids: A review of their biochemical responses to high and extreme high temperatures. J Exp Bot 70:397-423. DOI: 10.1093/jxb/ery392
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  24. ↵
    1. Groenveld T,
    2. Obiero C,
    3. Yu Y,
    4. Flury M and
    5. Keller M.
    2023. Predawn water potential of grapevines is not necessarily a good proxy for soil moisture. BMC Plant Biol 23:369. DOI: 10.1186/s12870-023-04378-6
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  25. ↵
    1. Gutiérrez-Gamboa G,
    2. Zheng W and
    3. Martínez de Toda F.
    2021. Current viticultural techniques to mitigate the effects of global warming on grape and wine quality: A comprehensive review. Food Res Int 139:109946. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109946
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  26. ↵
    1. Hardie WJ and
    2. Considine JA.
    1976. Response of grapes to water-deficit stress in particular stages of development. Am J Enol Vitic 27:55-61. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.1976.27.2.55
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. ↵
    1. Hernández-Montes E,
    2. Zhang Y,
    3. Chang B-M,
    4. Shcherbatyuk N and
    5. Keller M.
    2021. Soft, sweet, and colorful: Stratified sampling reveals sequence of events at the onset of grape ripening. Am J Enol Vitic 72:137-151. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2020.20050
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  28. ↵
    1. Hewitt S,
    2. Hernández-Montes E,
    3. Dhingra A and
    4. Keller M.
    2023. Impact of heat stress, water stress, and their combined effects on the metabolism and transcriptome of grape berries. Sci Rep 13:9907. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-36160-x
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  29. ↵
    1. Intrigliolo DS and
    2. Castel JR.
    2010. Response of grapevine cv. ‘Tempranillo’ to timing and amount of irrigation: Water relations, vine growth, yield and berry and wine composition. Irrig Sci 28:113-125. DOI: 10.1007/s00271-009-0164-1
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  30. ↵
    1. Jones GV,
    2. Duff AA,
    3. Hall A and
    4. Myers JW.
    2010. Spatial analysis of climate in winegrape growing regions in the western United States. Am J Enol Vitic 61:313-326. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2010.61.3.313
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  31. ↵
    1. Katul GG,
    2. Oren R,
    3. Manzoni S,
    4. Higgins C and
    5. Parlange MB.
    2012. Evapotranspiration: A process driving mass transport and energy exchange in the soil-plant-atmosphere-climate system. Rev Geophys 50:RG3002. DOI: 10.1029/2011RG000366
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  32. ↵
    1. Keller M.
    2020. The Science of Grapevines. 3d ed. Elsevier Academic Press, London.
  33. ↵
    1. Keller M and
    2. Tarara JM.
    2010. Warm spring temperatures induce persistent season-long changes in shoot development in grapevines. Ann Bot 106:131-141. DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcq091
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    1. Keller M,
    2. Mills LJ,
    3. Wample RL and
    4. Spayd SE.
    2005. Cluster thinning effects on three deficit-irrigated Vitis vinifera cultivars. Am J Enol Vitic 56:91-103. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2005.56.2.91
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. ↵
    1. Keller M,
    2. Smith JP and
    3. Bondada BR.
    2006. Ripening grape berries remain hydraulically connected to the shoot. J Exp Bot 57:2577-2587. DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erl020
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. ↵
    1. Keller M,
    2. Smithyman RP and
    3. Mills LJ.
    2008. Interactive effects of deficit irrigation and crop load on Cabernet Sauvignon in an arid climate. Am J Enol Vitic 59:221-234. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2008.59.3.221
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. ↵
    1. Keller M,
    2. Tarara JM and
    3. Mills LJ.
    2010. Spring temperatures alter reproductive development in grapevines. Aust J Grape Wine Res 16:445-454. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-0238.2010.00105.x
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  38. ↵
    1. Keller M,
    2. Deyermond LS and
    3. Bondada BR.
    2015a. Plant hydraulic conductance adapts to shoot number but limits shoot vigour in grapevines. Funct Plant Biol 42:366-375. DOI: 10.1071/FP14206
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  39. ↵
    1. Keller M,
    2. Zhang Y,
    3. Shrestha PM,
    4. Biondi M and
    5. Bondada BR.
    2015b. Sugar demand of ripening grape berries leads to recycling of surplus phloem water via the xylem. Plant Cell Environ 38:1048-1059. DOI: 10.1111/pce.12465
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  40. ↵
    1. Keller M,
    2. Romero P,
    3. Gohil H,
    4. Smithyman RP,
    5. Riley WR,
    6. Casassa LF et al.
    2016. Deficit irrigation alters grapevine growth, physiology, and fruit microclimate. Am J Enol Vitic 67:426-435. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2016.16032
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  41. ↵
    1. Keller M,
    2. Scheele-Baldinger R,
    3. Ferguson JC,
    4. Tarara JM and
    5. Mills LJ.
    2022. Inflorescence temperature influences fruit set, phenology, and sink strength of Cabernet Sauvignon grape berries. Front Plant Sci 13:864892. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2022.864892
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  42. ↵
    1. Keller M,
    2. Mills LJ and
    3. Kawakami AK.
    2023. Optimizing irrigation for mechanized Concord juice grape production. Am J Enol Vitic 74:0740008. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2022.21050
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  43. ↵
    1. Kolb CA,
    2. Kopecký J,
    3. Riederer M and
    4. Pfündel EE.
    2003. UV screening by phenolics in berries of grapevine (Vitis vinifera). Funct Plant Biol 30:1177-1186. DOI: 10.1071/FP03076
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  44. ↵
    1. Kovalenko Y,
    2. Tindjau R,
    3. Madilao LL and
    4. Castellarin SD.
    2021. Regulated deficit irrigation strategies affect the terpene accumulation in Gewürztraminer (Vitis vinifera L.) grapes grown in the Okanagan Valley. Food Chem 341:128172. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.128172
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  45. ↵
    1. Koyama K and
    2. Goto-Yamamoto N.
    2008. Bunch shading during different developmental stages affects the phenolic biosynthesis in berry skins of ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ grapes. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 133:743-753. DOI: 10.21273/JASHS.133.6.743
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  46. ↵
    1. Kurtural SK and
    2. Fidelibus MW.
    2021. Mechanization of pruning, canopy management, and harvest in winegrape vineyards. Catalyst 5:29-44. DOI: 10.5344/catalyst.2021.20011
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  47. ↵
    1. Kurtural SK and
    2. Gambetta GA.
    2021. Global warming and wine quality: Are we close to the tipping point? OENO One 55:353-361. DOI: 10.20870/oeno-one.2021.55.3.4774
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  48. ↵
    1. Lehr PP,
    2. Hernández-Montes E,
    3. Ludwig-Müller J,
    4. Keller M and
    5. Zörb C.
    2022. Abscisic acid and proline are not equivalent markers for heat, drought and combined stress in grapevines. Aust J Grape Wine Res 28:119-130. DOI: 10.1111/ajgw.12523
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  49. ↵
    1. Levin AD,
    2. Matthews MA and
    3. Williams LE.
    2020. Effect of preveraison water deficits on the yield components of 15 winegrape cultivars. Am J Enol Vitic 71:208-221. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2020.19073
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  50. ↵
    1. Marín D,
    2. Armengol J,
    3. Carbonell-Bejerano P,
    4. Escalona JM,
    5. Gramaje D,
    6. Hernández-Montes E et al.
    2021. Challenges of viticulture adaptation to global change: Tackling the issue from the roots. Aust J Grape Wine Res 27:8-25. DOI: 10.1111/ajgw.12463
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  51. ↵
    1. Martínez-Lüscher J,
    2. Kizildeniz T,
    3. Vučetić V,
    4. Dai Z,
    5. Luedeling E,
    6. van Leeuwen C et al.
    2016. Sensitivity of grapevine phenology to water availability, temperature and CO2 concentration. Front Environ Sci 4:48. DOI: 10.3389/fenvs.2016.00048
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  52. ↵
    1. Matthews MA and
    2. Anderson MM.
    1989. Reproductive development in grape (Vitis vinifera L.): Responses to seasonal water deficits. Am J Enol Vitic 40:52-60. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.1989.40.1.52
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  53. ↵
    1. Medrano H,
    2. Tomás M,
    3. Martorell S,
    4. Escalona J-M,
    5. Pou A,
    6. Fuentes S et al.
    2015. Improving water use efficiency of vineyards in semiarid regions. A review. Agron Sustain Dev 35:499-517. DOI: 10.1007/s13593-014-0280-z
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  54. ↵
    1. Morales-Castilla I,
    2. García de Cortázar-Atauri I,
    3. Cook BI,
    4. Lacombe T,
    5. Parker A,
    6. van Leeuwen C et al.
    2020. Diversity buffers wine-growing regions from climate change losses. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 117:2864-2869. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1906731117
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  55. ↵
    1. Müller K,
    2. Keller M,
    3. Stoll M and
    4. Friedel M.
    2023. Wind speed, sun exposure and water status alter sunburn susceptibility of grape berries. Front Plant Sci 14:1145274. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1145274
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  56. ↵
    1. Naulleau A,
    2. Gary C,
    3. Prévot L and
    4. Hossard L.
    2021. Evaluating strategies for adaptation to climate change in grapevine production–A systematic review. Front Plant Sci 11:607859. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2020.607859
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  57. ↵
    1. Palai G,
    2. Caruso G,
    3. Gucci R and
    4. D’Onofrio C.
    2022a. Berry flavonoids are differently modulated by timing and intensities of water deficit in Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sangiovese. Front Plant Sci 13:1040899. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2022.1040899
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  58. ↵
    1. Palai G,
    2. Caruso G,
    3. Gucci R and
    4. D’Onofrio C.
    2022b. Deficit irrigation differently affects aroma composition in berries of Vitis vinifera L. (cvs Sangiovese and Merlot) grafted on two rootstocks. Aust J Grape Wine Res 28:590-606. DOI: 10.1111/ajgw.12562
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  59. ↵
    1. Palai G,
    2. Caruso G,
    3. Gucci R and
    4. D’Onofrio C.
    2023. Water deficit before veraison is crucial in regulating berry VOCs concentration in Sangiovese grapevines. Front Plant Sci 14:1117572. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1117572
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  60. ↵
    1. Parker A,
    2. Garcia de Cortázar-Ataurie I,
    3. Chuine I,
    4. Barbeaug G,
    5. Bois B,
    6. Boursiquot J-M et al.
    2013. Classification of varieties for their timing of flowering and veraison using a modelling approach: A case study for the grapevine species Vitis vinifera L. Agric For Meteorol 180:249-264. DOI: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2013.06.005
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  61. ↵
    1. Pastore C,
    2. Dal Santo S,
    3. Zenoni S,
    4. Movahed N,
    5. Allegro G,
    6. Valentini G et al.
    2017. Whole plant temperature manipulation affects flavonoid metabolism and the transcriptome of grapevine berries. Front Plant Sci 8:929. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00929
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  62. ↵
    1. Petrie PR and
    2. Sadras VO.
    2008. Advancement of grapevine maturity in Australia between 1993 and 2006: Putative causes, magnitude of trends and viticultural consequences. Aust J Grape Wine Res 14:33-45. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-0238.2008.00005.x
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  63. ↵
    1. Poni S,
    2. Tombesi S,
    3. Palliotti A,
    4. Ughini V and
    5. Gatti M.
    2016. Mechanical winter pruning of grapevine: Physiological bases and applications. Sci Hort 204:88-98. DOI: 10.1016/j.scienta.2016.03.046
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  64. ↵
    1. Poni S,
    2. Sabbatini P and
    3. Palliotti A.
    2022. Facing spring frost damage in grapevine: Recent developments and the role of delayed winter pruning – A review. Am J Enol Vitic 73:211-226. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2022.22011
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  65. ↵
    1. Previtali P,
    2. Giorgini F,
    3. Mullen RS,
    4. Dookozlian NK,
    5. Wilkinson KL and
    6. Ford CM.
    2022. A systematic review and meta-analysis of vineyard techniques used to delay ripening. Hort Res 9:uhac118. DOI: 10.1093/hr/uhac118
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  66. ↵
    1. Price SF,
    2. Breen PJ,
    3. Valladao M and
    4. Watson BT.
    1995. Cluster sun exposure and quercetin in Pinot noir grapes and wine. Am J Enol Vitic 46:187-194. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.1995.46.2.187
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  67. ↵
    1. Puga G,
    2. Anderson K,
    3. Jones G,
    4. Doko Tchatoka F and
    5. Umberger W.
    2022. A climatic classification of the world’s wine regions. OENO One 56:165-177. DOI: 10.20870/oeno-one.2022.56.2.4627
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  68. ↵
    1. Rienth M,
    2. Vigneron N,
    3. Darriet P,
    4. Sweetman C,
    5. Burbidge C,
    6. Bonghi C et al.
    2021. Grape berry secondary metabolites and their modulation by abiotic factors in a climate change scenario – A review. Front Plant Sci 12:643258. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2021.643258
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  69. ↵
    1. Rocchi L.
    2015. Physiological Responses of White Grape Berries to Sunlight Exposure. Dissertation, Universitá degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
  70. ↵
    1. Romero P,
    2. Botía P and
    3. Keller M.
    2017. Hydraulics and gas exchange recover more rapidly from severe drought stress in small pot-grown grapevines than in field-grown plants. J Plant Physiol 216:58-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.jplph.2017.05.008
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  71. ↵
    1. Romero P,
    2. Navarro JM and
    3. Botía Ordaz P.
    2022. Towards a sustainable viticulture: The combination of deficit irrigation strategies and agroecological practices in Mediterranean vineyards. A review and update. Agric Water Manag 259:107216. DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2021.107216
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  72. ↵
    1. Rounce DR,
    2. Hock R,
    3. Maussion F,
    4. Hugonnet R,
    5. Kochtitzky W,
    6. Huss M et al.
    2023. Global glacier change in the 21st century: Every increase in temperature matters. Science 379:78-83. DOI: 10.1126/science.abo1324
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  73. ↵
    1. Sadras VO and
    2. Moran MA.
    2012. Elevated temperature decouples anthocyanins and sugars in berries of Shiraz and Cabernet Franc. Aust J Grape Wine Res 18:115-122. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-0238.2012.00180.x
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  74. ↵
    1. Sanders RD,
    2. Boss PK,
    3. Capone DL,
    4. Kidman CM,
    5. Bramley RGV,
    6. Nicholson EL et al.
    2022. Rootstock, vine vigor, and light mediate methoxypyrazine concentrations in the grape bunch rachis of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Cabernet Sauvignon. J Agric Food Chem 70:5417-5426. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.1c07978
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  75. ↵
    1. Sargolzaei M,
    2. Rustioni L,
    3. Cola G,
    4. Ricciardi V,
    5. Bianco PA,
    6. Maghradze D et al.
    2021. Georgian grapevine cultivars: Ancient biodiversity for future viticulture. Front Plant Sci 12:630122. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2021.630122
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  76. ↵
    1. Savoi S,
    2. Wong DCJ,
    3. Arapitsas P,
    4. Miculan M,
    5. Bucchetti B,
    6. Peterlunger E et al.
    2016. Transcriptome and metabolite profiling reveals that prolonged drought modulates the phenylpropanoid and terpenoid pathway in white grapes (Vitis vinifera L.). BMC Plant Biol 16:67. DOI: 10.1186/s12870-016-0760-1
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  77. ↵
    1. Scheiner JJ,
    2. Vanden Heuvel JE,
    3. Pan B and
    4. Sacks GL.
    2012. Modeling impacts of viticultural and environmental factors on 3-isobutyl-2-methoxypyrazine in Cabernet franc grapes. Am J Enol Vitic 63:94-105. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2011.11002
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  78. ↵
    1. Scholasch T and
    2. Rienth M.
    2019. Review of water deficit mediated changes in vine and berry physiology; Consequences for the optimization of irrigation strategies. OENO One 53:423-444. DOI: 10.20870/oeno-one.2019.53.3.2407
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  79. ↵
    1. Sivan A,
    2. Rahimi O,
    3. Lavi B,
    4. Salmon-Divon M,
    5. Weiss E,
    6. Drori E et al.
    2021. Genomic evidence supports an independent history of Levantine and Eurasian grapevines. Plants People Planet 3:414-427. DOI: 10.1002/ppp3.10197
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  80. ↵
    1. Sorek Y,
    2. Greenstein S,
    3. Netzer Y,
    4. Shtein I,
    5. Jansen S and
    6. Hochberg U.
    2021. An increase in xylem embolism resistance of grapevine leaves during the growing season is coordinated with stomatal regulation, turgor loss point and intervessel pit membranes. New Phytol 229:1955-1969. DOI: 10.1111/nph.17025
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  81. ↵
    1. Spayd SE,
    2. Tarara JM,
    3. Mee DL and
    4. Ferguson JC.
    2002. Separation of sunlight and temperature effects on the composition of Vitis vinifera cv. Merlot berries. Am J Enol Vitic 53:171-182. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2002.53.3.171
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  82. ↵
    1. Stevenson S,
    2. Coats S,
    3. Touma D,
    4. Cole J,
    5. Lehner F,
    6. Fasollo J et al.
    2022. Twenty-first century hydroclimate: A continually changing baseline, with more frequent extremes. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 119:e2108124119. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2108124119
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  83. ↵
    1. Sweetman C,
    2. Deluc LG,
    3. Cramer GR,
    4. Ford CM and
    5. Soole KL.
    2009. Regulation of malate metabolism in grape berry and other developing fruits. Phytochemistry 70:1329-1344. DOI: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2009.08.006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  84. ↵
    1. Taber G.
    2005. Judgment of Paris: California vs. France and the Historic 1976 Paris Tasting That Revolutionized Wine. Scribner, New York.
  85. ↵
    1. Tarara JM,
    2. Perez Peña JE,
    3. Keller M,
    4. Schreiner RP and
    5. Smithyman RP.
    2011. Net carbon exchange in grapevine canopies responds rapidly to timing and extent of regulated deficit irrigation. Funct Plant Biol 38:386-400. DOI: 10.1071/FP10221
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  86. ↵
    1. Tardaguila J,
    2. Petrie PR,
    3. Poni S,
    4. Diago MP and
    5. Martinez de Toda F.
    2008. Effects of mechanical thinning on yield and fruit composition of Tempranillo and Grenache grapes trained to a vertical shoot-positioned canopy. Am J Enol Vitic 59:412-417. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2008.59.4.412
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  87. ↵
    1. Theron H and
    2. Hunter JJ.
    2022. Mitigation and adaptation practices to the impact of climate change on wine grape production, with special reference to the South African context. S Afr J Enol Vitic 43:10-25. DOI: 10.21548/43-1-4735
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  88. ↵
    1. Torres N,
    2. Martínez-Lüscher J,
    3. Porte E and
    4. Kurtural SK.
    2020. Optimal ranges and thresholds of grape berry solar radiation for flavonoid biosynthesis in warm climates. Front Plant Sci 11:931. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2020.00931
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  89. ↵
    1. van Leeuwen C,
    2. Destrac-Irvine A,
    3. Dubernet M,
    4. Duchêne E,
    5. Gowdy M,
    6. Marguerit E et al.
    2019. An update on the impact of climate change in viticulture and potential adaptations. Agronomy 9:514. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy9090514
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  90. ↵
    1. Vasconcelos MC,
    2. Greven M,
    3. Winefield CS,
    4. Trought MCT and
    5. Raw V.
    2009. The flowering process of Vitis vinifera: A review. Am J Enol Vitic 60:411-434. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2009.60.4.411
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  91. ↵
    1. Vaterlaus T.
    2013. Ein Franzose namens Gantenbein. Vinum 1/2:32-43.
    OpenUrl
  92. ↵
    1. Wagner AM,
    2. Bennett KE,
    3. Liston GE,
    4. Hiemstra CA and
    5. Cooley D.
    2021. Multiple indicators of extreme changes in snow-dominated streamflow regimes, Yakima River Basin region, USA. Water 13:2608. DOI: 10.3390/w13192608
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  93. ↵
    1. Wang H,
    2. Xiang L,
    3. Steffen H,
    4. Wu P,
    5. Jiang L,
    6. Shen Q et al.
    2022. GRACE-based estimates of groundwater variations over North America from 2002 to 2017. Geodes Geodyn 13:11-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.geog.2021.10.003
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  94. ↵
    1. White MA,
    2. Diffenbaugh NS,
    3. Jones GV,
    4. Pal JS and
    5. Giorgi F.
    2006. Extreme heat reduces and shifts United States premium wine production in the 21st century. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 103:11217-11222. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0603230103.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  95. ↵
    1. Xanke J and
    2. Liesch T.
    2022. Quantification and possible causes of declining groundwater resources in the Euro-Mediterranean region from 2003 to 2020. Hydrogeol J 30:379-400. DOI: 10.1007/s10040-021-02448-3
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  96. ↵
    1. Zarrouk O,
    2. Brunetti C,
    3. Egipto R,
    4. Pinheiro C,
    5. Genebra T,
    6. Gori A et al.
    2016. Grape ripening is regulated by deficit irrigation/elevated temperatures according to cluster position in the canopy. Front Plant Sci 7:1640. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01640
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top

Vol 74 Issue 2

Issue Cover
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
View full PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on AJEV.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Climate Change Impacts on Vineyards in Warm and Dry Areas: Challenges and Opportunities
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from AJEV
(Your Name) thought you would like to read this article from the American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Open Access
Climate Change Impacts on Vineyards in Warm and Dry Areas: Challenges and Opportunities
View ORCID ProfileMarkus Keller
Am J Enol Vitic.  2023  74: 0740033  ; DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2023.23024
Markus Keller
1Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Markus Keller
  • For correspondence: mkeller@wsu.edu

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Open Access
Climate Change Impacts on Vineyards in Warm and Dry Areas: Challenges and Opportunities
View ORCID ProfileMarkus Keller
Am J Enol Vitic.  2023  74: 0740033  ; DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2023.23024
Markus Keller
1Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Markus Keller
  • For correspondence: mkeller@wsu.edu
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Save to my folders

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Yield: Drought and Heat May Leave Your Glass Empty
    • Fruit Composition: Temperature Trumps Water Status
    • Growth and Physiology—But Not Phenology: Water Status Trumps Temperature
    • Crop Load: Implications for Ripening and Water-use Efficiency (WUE)
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More from this TOC section

  • Adoption of New Winegrape Cultivars to Reduce Pesticide Use in Europe
  • Transmission of Grapevine Red Blotch Virus: A Virologist’s Perspective of the Literature and a Few Recommendations
Show more Insight

Similar Articles

AJEV Content

  • Current Volume
  • Archive
  • Best Papers
  • ASEV National Conference Technical Abstracts
  • Print on Demand

Information For

  • Authors
  • Open Access Publishing
  • AJEV Preprint and AI Software Policy
  • Submission
  • Subscribers
  • Permissions and Reproductions

Other

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Feedback
  • Help
  • Alerts
  • ASEV
asev.org

© 2025 American Society for Enology and Viticulture.  ISSN 0002-9254.

Powered by HighWire