Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

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

Response of Riesling Grapes and Wine to Temporally and Spatially Heterogeneous Soil Water Availability

View ORCID ProfileGeraldine Diverres, Danielle J. Fox, View ORCID ProfileJames F. Harbertson, View ORCID ProfileManoj Karkee, View ORCID ProfileMarkus Keller
Am J Enol Vitic.  2024  75: 0750019  ; DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2024.23073
Geraldine Diverres
1Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA 99350;
  • 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 Geraldine Diverres
Danielle J. Fox
2Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Wine Science Center, Richland, WA 99354;
  • 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
James F. Harbertson
2Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Wine Science Center, Richland, WA 99354;
  • 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 James F. Harbertson
Manoj Karkee
3Center for Precision and Automated Agricultural Systems, Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA 99350.
  • 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 Manoj Karkee
Markus Keller
1Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA 99350;
  • 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{at}wsu.edu
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • Schematic representation of the dynamic target soil moisture ranges by phenological period in an irrigation trial conducted in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington. Soil moisture (θv) was measured weekly and irrigation hours were scheduled according to the dynamic targets. The period in which deficit irrigation was applied is indicated for each treatment. Treatments included a no-stress control (FULL), regulated deficit irrigation (RDI), and partial rootzone drying (PRD).
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 1

    Schematic representation of the dynamic target soil moisture ranges by phenological period in an irrigation trial conducted in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington. Soil moisture (θv) was measured weekly and irrigation hours were scheduled according to the dynamic targets. The period in which deficit irrigation was applied is indicated for each treatment. Treatments included a no-stress control (FULL), regulated deficit irrigation (RDI), and partial rootzone drying (PRD).

  • Trends of monthly mean maximum, minimum, and average temperatures (Tmax, Tmin, and Tave, respectively) and monthly precipitation recorded in 2019 (A), 2020 (B), and 2021 (C) near the Washington State University Roza vineyard in southeastern Washington. Data were obtained from the AgWeatherNet Roza.2 station (https://weather.wsu.edu) located ~550 m from the trial site.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 2

    Trends of monthly mean maximum, minimum, and average temperatures (Tmax, Tmin, and Tave, respectively) and monthly precipitation recorded in 2019 (A), 2020 (B), and 2021 (C) near the Washington State University Roza vineyard in southeastern Washington. Data were obtained from the AgWeatherNet Roza.2 station (https://weather.wsu.edu) located ~550 m from the trial site.

  • Annual irrigation water supply in an irrigation trial conducted in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington over three years. Treatments included a no-stress control (FULL), regulated deficit irrigation (RDI), and partial rootzone drying (PRD). Irrigation water supply is shown by phenological period in 2019, 2020, and 2021. AH, after harvest; V-H, veraison to harvest; FS-V, fruit set to veraison; BK-FS, budbreak to fruit set; BBK, before budbreak.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 3

    Annual irrigation water supply in an irrigation trial conducted in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington over three years. Treatments included a no-stress control (FULL), regulated deficit irrigation (RDI), and partial rootzone drying (PRD). Irrigation water supply is shown by phenological period in 2019, 2020, and 2021. AH, after harvest; V-H, veraison to harvest; FS-V, fruit set to veraison; BK-FS, budbreak to fruit set; BBK, before budbreak.

  • Average midday leaf water potential (Ψleaf) for three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) from fruit set to veraison in 2019 (A), 2020 (B), and 2021 (C), and from veraison to harvest in 2019 (D), 2020 (E), and 2021 (F), in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington. Bars show means ± SE (8 ≤ n ≤ 32) of weekly measurements taken during each period; different letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) within years according to Tukey’s honest significant difference test.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 4

    Average midday leaf water potential (Ψleaf) for three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) from fruit set to veraison in 2019 (A), 2020 (B), and 2021 (C), and from veraison to harvest in 2019 (D), 2020 (E), and 2021 (F), in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington. Bars show means ± SE (8 ≤ n ≤ 32) of weekly measurements taken during each period; different letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) within years according to Tukey’s honest significant difference test.

  • Average volumetric soil water content (θv) for three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) from fruit set to veraison in 2019 (A), 2020 (B), and 2021 (C), and from veraison to harvest in 2019 (D), 2020 (E), and 2021 (F), in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington. The θv for PRD vines is separated into wet (PRDwet) and dry (PRDdry) sides. Bars show means ± SE (12 ≤ n ≤ 36) of weekly measurements taken during each period; different letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) within years according to Tukey’s honest significant difference test.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 5

    Average volumetric soil water content (θv) for three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) from fruit set to veraison in 2019 (A), 2020 (B), and 2021 (C), and from veraison to harvest in 2019 (D), 2020 (E), and 2021 (F), in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington. The θv for PRD vines is separated into wet (PRDwet) and dry (PRDdry) sides. Bars show means ± SE (12 ≤ n ≤ 36) of weekly measurements taken during each period; different letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) within years according to Tukey’s honest significant difference test.

  • Associations over three years (2019 to 2021) between relative extractable soil water content (θe) of the top 60 to 90 cm of the soil profile and midday leaf water potential (Ψleaf), measured from fruit set through harvest in a Riesling irrigation trial conducted in southeastern Washington. Non-linear regression and curve fitting was applied to each of three irrigation treatments: a no-stress control (FULL; r = 0.55), regulated deficit irrigation (RDI; r = 0.69), and partial rootzone drying (PRD; r = 0.47).
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 6

    Associations over three years (2019 to 2021) between relative extractable soil water content (θe) of the top 60 to 90 cm of the soil profile and midday leaf water potential (Ψleaf), measured from fruit set through harvest in a Riesling irrigation trial conducted in southeastern Washington. Non-linear regression and curve fitting was applied to each of three irrigation treatments: a no-stress control (FULL; r = 0.55), regulated deficit irrigation (RDI; r = 0.69), and partial rootzone drying (PRD; r = 0.47).

  • Effect of three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) on number of canes per meter of canopy (A), average cane weight (B), and pruning weight per vine (C) in a Riesling irrigation trial conducted in southeastern Washington from 2019 to 2021. Bars show means ± SE (n = 4); different letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) within years according to Tukey’s honest significant difference test.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 7

    Effect of three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) on number of canes per meter of canopy (A), average cane weight (B), and pruning weight per vine (C) in a Riesling irrigation trial conducted in southeastern Washington from 2019 to 2021. Bars show means ± SE (n = 4); different letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) within years according to Tukey’s honest significant difference test.

  • Effect of three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) on crop yield (A), cluster weight (B), berry weight (C), and clusters per vine (D) in a Riesling irrigation trial conducted in southeastern Washington from 2019 to 2021. Bars show means ± SE (n = 4); different letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) within years according to Tukey’s honest significant difference test.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 8

    Effect of three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) on crop yield (A), cluster weight (B), berry weight (C), and clusters per vine (D) in a Riesling irrigation trial conducted in southeastern Washington from 2019 to 2021. Bars show means ± SE (n = 4); different letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) within years according to Tukey’s honest significant difference test.

  • Principal component analysis biplots of the distribution of different volatile components measured in Riesling wines that were produced from grapes derived from three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) in an irrigation trial conducted in southeastern Washington in 2019 (A) and 2021 (B). Wine replicates R1, R2, and R3 were sourced from separate field replicates of each treatment. The means of two analytical replicates per treatment are shown. Only significant attributes were considered for the plot.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 9

    Principal component analysis biplots of the distribution of different volatile components measured in Riesling wines that were produced from grapes derived from three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) in an irrigation trial conducted in southeastern Washington in 2019 (A) and 2021 (B). Wine replicates R1, R2, and R3 were sourced from separate field replicates of each treatment. The means of two analytical replicates per treatment are shown. Only significant attributes were considered for the plot.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
  • Table 1

    Summary of weather conditions and key phenological stages for Riesling in the Washington State University Roza vineyard in southeastern Washington from 2019 through 2021. Data were obtained from the AgWeatherNet Roza.2 station (https://weather.wsu.edu) located ~550 m from the trial site. GDD, growing degree days (base 10°C); ETo, reference evapotranspiration; DOY, day of year.

    Table 1
  • Table 2

    Effect of irrigation method (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) and growing season on canopy growth and cluster sun exposure relative to ambient light at veraison in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington.

    Table 2
  • Table 3

    Effect of irrigation method (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) and growing season on basic fruit composition at harvest (means ± SE [n = 4]) in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington.

    Table 3
  • Table 4

    Effect of irrigation method (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) and growing season on basic juice composition of fruit from a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington, after pressing in the winery.

    Table 4
  • Table 5

    Effect of irrigation method (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) and growing season on basic wine composition at bottling, with fruit obtained from a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington.

    Table 5
  • Table 6

    Effect of irrigation method (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) and growing season on the phenolic composition of wines made with fruit obtained from a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington. Only compounds that were significantly affected by the irrigation treatments are shown.

    Table 6

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Supplemental Table 1  List of chemical standards used to quantify the phenolic profile of Riesling wines made from fruit harvested in a vineyard in southeastern Washington. Each compound is accompanied by the chemical class, the commercial supplier, and the solvent used to prepare the high-performance liquid chromatography standards for calibration curves.

    Supplemental Table 2  List of analytical standards used to semi-quantify the volatile composition of Riesling wines made from fruit harvested in a vineyard in southeastern Washington. Each compound is accompanied by commercial supplier and grouped by chemical class. For gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis, all analytical standards were prepared using methanol as solvent.

    Supplemental Table 3  Effect of irrigation treatment (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) and growing season on irrigation water use efficiency, irrigation water footprint, and total water footprint of a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington over three years.

    Supplemental Table 4  Phenolic compounds (µg/L) measured by high-performance liquid chromatography in Riesling wines obtained from three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) in a vineyard in southeastern Washington. Data are means of two technical replicates for each of three wine replicates in two years.

    Supplemental Table 5  Volatile organic compounds (in internal standard response ratio) measured by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry in Riesling wines obtained from three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) in a vineyard in southeastern Washington in 2019. Data are means of two technical replicates for each of three wine replicates and include only compounds that were above the detection limit.

    Supplemental Table 6  Volatile organic compounds (in internal standard response ratio) measured by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry in Riesling wines obtained from three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) in a vineyard in southeastern Washington in 2021. Data are means of two technical replicates for each of three wine replicates and include only compounds that were above the detection limit.

    Supplemental Figure 1  Diurnal changes of leaf water potential (Ψleaf) measured in an irrigation trial conducted in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington over three years. Treatments included a no-stress control (FULL), regulated deficit irrigation (RDI), and partial rootzone drying (PRD). Data show Ψleaf during pretreatment drydown before (day of year [DOY] 198, Tmax = 27.2°C) and during (DOY 204, Tmax = 34.3°C) a heatwave in 2019 (A), Ψleaf for each treatment on preveraison DOY 218 in 2020 (B), and Ψleaf for two treatments and two additional treatments (irrigation to field capacity or no irrigation since budbreak) on postveraison DOY 239 in 2021 (C). Data show means ± SE (n = 6 in A and B; n = 4 in C); time is Pacific Daylight Saving Time.

    Supplemental Figure 2  Irrigation water supply estimated from drip emitter number and flow rate against flow meter readings during two independent irrigation cycles in 2020 and 2021 in an irrigation trial conducted in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington. Flow meters were installed in submains supplying water to the four replicates of each treatment.

    Supplemental Figure 3  Seasonal growing degree day (GDD; base 10°C) accumulation from April through October near the Washington State University Roza vineyard in southeastern Washington. Data were obtained from the AgWeatherNet Roza.2 station (https://weather.wsu.edu) located ~550 m from the trial site.

    Supplemental Figure 4  Seasonal changes in the volumetric soil water content (θv) in the top 60 to 90 cm of the soil profile and midday leaf water potential (Ψleaf) measured in an irrigation trial conducted in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington over three years. Treatments included a no-stress control (FULL), regulated deficit irrigation (RDI), and partial rootzone drying (PRD). For PRD, θv is plotted separately for the wet (PRDwet) and dry (PRDdry) sections. Data show means ± SE (n = 4) for 2019 (A, B), 2020 (C, D), and 2021 (E, F). Vertical dashed lines indicate phenological stages fruit set (FS), veraison (V), and harvest (H).

    Supplemental Figure 5  Association between relative extractable soil water content (θe) of the top 60 to 90 cm of the soil profile and midday leaf water potential (Ψleaf), measured from fruit set through harvest in an irrigation trial conducted in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington over three years (2019 to 2021). Non-linear regression and curve fitting was applied to each of three irrigation treatments: a no-stress control (FULL; r = 0.55); regulated deficit irrigation (RDI; r = 0.69); and partial rootzone drying (PRD; r = 0.53). The θe for PRD is the average for the wet and dry sections.

    Supplemental Figure 6  Association between cluster sun exposure relative to ambient light at veraison and pruning weight (A) or number of shoots per vine (B) in an irrigation trial conducted in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington over three years (2019 to 2021). Treatments included a no-stress control (FULL), regulated deficit irrigation (RDI), and partial rootzone drying (PRD).

    Supplemental Figure 7  Association between average cluster weight and average midday leaf water potential (Ψleaf), measured from fruit set through veraison in an irrigation trial conducted in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington over three years (2019 to 2021). Treatments included a no-stress control (FULL), regulated deficit irrigation (RDI), and partial rootzone drying (PRD).

    Supplemental Figure 8  Effect of three irrigation treatments (a no-stress control [FULL], regulated deficit irrigation [RDI], and partial rootzone drying [PRD]) on yield-to-pruning weight ratio in an irrigation trial conducted in a Riesling vineyard in southeastern Washington over three years. Bars show means ± SE (n = 4).



    • 23-073_SupplementalData.pdf
PreviousNext
Back to top

Vol 75 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.
Response of Riesling Grapes and Wine to Temporally and Spatially Heterogeneous Soil Water Availability
(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
Response of Riesling Grapes and Wine to Temporally and Spatially Heterogeneous Soil Water Availability
View ORCID ProfileGeraldine Diverres, Danielle J. Fox, View ORCID ProfileJames F. Harbertson, View ORCID ProfileManoj Karkee, View ORCID ProfileMarkus Keller
Am J Enol Vitic.  2024  75: 0750019  ; DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2024.23073
Geraldine Diverres
1Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA 99350;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Geraldine Diverres
Danielle J. Fox
2Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Wine Science Center, Richland, WA 99354;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
James F. Harbertson
2Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Wine Science Center, Richland, WA 99354;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for James F. Harbertson
Manoj Karkee
3Center for Precision and Automated Agricultural Systems, Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA 99350.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Manoj Karkee
Markus Keller
1Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA 99350;
  • 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{at}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
Response of Riesling Grapes and Wine to Temporally and Spatially Heterogeneous Soil Water Availability
View ORCID ProfileGeraldine Diverres, Danielle J. Fox, View ORCID ProfileJames F. Harbertson, View ORCID ProfileManoj Karkee, View ORCID ProfileMarkus Keller
Am J Enol Vitic.  2024  75: 0750019  ; DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2024.23073
Geraldine Diverres
1Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA 99350;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Geraldine Diverres
Danielle J. Fox
2Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Wine Science Center, Richland, WA 99354;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
James F. Harbertson
2Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Wine Science Center, Richland, WA 99354;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for James F. Harbertson
Manoj Karkee
3Center for Precision and Automated Agricultural Systems, Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA 99350.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Manoj Karkee
Markus Keller
1Department of Viticulture and Enology, Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA 99350;
  • 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{at}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
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Supplemental Data
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More from this TOC section

  • Profiling Aldehydes and Furans in White Wine Oxidation: A Systems Perspective on Bottle Geometry, Cork, and Wine Type
  • Peer Knowledge Networking Groups Facilitate Social Connections, Information Sharing, and Collective Action
  • Annual Nutrient Removal from Irrigated Vineyards in Dry Climates
Show more Research Report

Similar Articles

AJEV Content

  • Current Volume
  • Archive
  • Best Papers
  • ASEV National Conference Technical Abstracts
  • Back Orders

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

© 2026 American Society for Enology and Viticulture.  ISSN 0002-9254.

Powered by HighWire