Background and Aims: The occurrence of frost after budburst is extremely damaging to the wine industry. This research aims to understand frost risk after budburst in Australian wine-growing regions amid a changing climate, investigating the factors driving frost events and their implications for grape production.
Methods and Results: Using historical climate data and modelled budburst date, this study assesses the spatiotemporal trends in frost occurrence after budburst from 1910 to 2019. This research demonstrates that recent climate variability and changes in frost risk are complex and vary between wine regions. Whilst the majority of wine regions showed no significant trend over time, some regions—predominantly in SA and WA—exhibited a decreasing frost risk after budburst. Conversely, some inland wine regions demonstrated an increasing trend in frost potential days, suggesting that frost risk may be worsening in these regions. The influence of climate drivers—ENSO, IOD and SAM—on frost occurrence was also evaluated, highlighting ENSO and IOD as significant factors in Eastern Australia, particularly during positive phases when drier conditions increase frost likelihood.
Conclusions: This research demonstrates that recent climate variability and changes in frost risk are complex and vary between wine regions. The assessment of the historic datasets showed varied trends in frost risk potential (both increasing and decreasing trends), while modelling indicated a reduction in overall frost risk. Ongoing monitoring and adaptation efforts are essential to address regional disparities and ensure the resilience of the wine industry to changing climatic conditions.
{"title":"Assessment of Spatial and Temporal Trends Influencing the Occurrence of Frost After Budburst","authors":"C. Liles, D. C. Verdon-Kidd","doi":"10.1155/ajgw/5507651","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1155/ajgw/5507651","url":null,"abstract":"<p><b>Background and Aims:</b> The occurrence of frost after budburst is extremely damaging to the wine industry. This research aims to understand frost risk after budburst in Australian wine-growing regions amid a changing climate, investigating the factors driving frost events and their implications for grape production.</p><p><b>Methods and Results:</b> Using historical climate data and modelled budburst date, this study assesses the spatiotemporal trends in frost occurrence after budburst from 1910 to 2019. This research demonstrates that recent climate variability and changes in frost risk are complex and vary between wine regions. Whilst the majority of wine regions showed no significant trend over time, some regions—predominantly in SA and WA—exhibited a decreasing frost risk after budburst. Conversely, some inland wine regions demonstrated an increasing trend in <i>frost potential days,</i> suggesting that frost risk may be worsening in these regions. The influence of climate drivers—ENSO, IOD and SAM—on frost occurrence was also evaluated, highlighting ENSO and IOD as significant factors in Eastern Australia, particularly during positive phases when drier conditions increase frost likelihood.</p><p><b>Conclusions:</b> This research demonstrates that recent climate variability and changes in frost risk are complex and vary between wine regions. The assessment of the historic datasets showed varied trends in frost risk potential (both increasing and decreasing trends), while modelling indicated a reduction in overall frost risk. Ongoing monitoring and adaptation efforts are essential to address regional disparities and ensure the resilience of the wine industry to changing climatic conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":8582,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research","volume":"2025 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/ajgw/5507651","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145101857","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Understanding vineyard spatial structure can help optimise grape production and ultimately wine quality by targeting the application of inputs through precision viticulture methods. We explored the spatially dependent variability of various soil, vine and fruit parameters, including yield and grape composition, in a South Australian Shiraz vineyard located in the Barossa Valley during the 2022/23 season. Our aim was to investigate the interdependencies between spatial structures within a vineyard block as related to soil and vine metrics, including predawn leaf water potential, midday stem water potential and leaf gas exchange under different soil moisture conditions. Maps of each parameter were produced using 114 spatially separated data points per variogram. Yield components were measured at harvest, and fruit composition was assessed at harvest across the vineyard at the same points. Soil parameters were found to have stronger spatial structure than vine parameters (e.g., leaf gas exchange, stem water potential) and were therefore deemed to be better predictors of overall vineyard variability. The pattern of spatial variability of a given soil or vine parameter was influenced by the spatial pattern of the underlying parameters that influence it.
{"title":"Vineyard Spatial Structures of Key Soil, Vine and Fruit Metrics Are Hierarchically Associated","authors":"Alessandro Mataffo, Boris Basile, Vinay Pagay","doi":"10.1155/ajgw/8416334","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1155/ajgw/8416334","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Understanding vineyard spatial structure can help optimise grape production and ultimately wine quality by targeting the application of inputs through precision viticulture methods. We explored the spatially dependent variability of various soil, vine and fruit parameters, including yield and grape composition, in a South Australian Shiraz vineyard located in the Barossa Valley during the 2022/23 season. Our aim was to investigate the interdependencies between spatial structures within a vineyard block as related to soil and vine metrics, including predawn leaf water potential, midday stem water potential and leaf gas exchange under different soil moisture conditions. Maps of each parameter were produced using 114 spatially separated data points per variogram. Yield components were measured at harvest, and fruit composition was assessed at harvest across the vineyard at the same points. Soil parameters were found to have stronger spatial structure than vine parameters (e.g., leaf gas exchange, stem water potential) and were therefore deemed to be better predictors of overall vineyard variability. The pattern of spatial variability of a given soil or vine parameter was influenced by the spatial pattern of the underlying parameters that influence it.</p>","PeriodicalId":8582,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research","volume":"2025 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/ajgw/8416334","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145101854","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The notion of “natural wines” has gained traction, yet the concept of vineyard naturalness remains largely neglected, often conflated with “organic” or “regenerative” viticulture. Vineyard naturalness, however, is rooted in a holistic approach that transcends these terms. In our effort to define its objectives, we focused on the methods and practices that enable its realization. This review explores several “natural-based” solutions aimed at the canopy and soil, guided by three core principles: (i) maximizing the use of freely available natural resources to reduce reliance on external and costly inputs; (ii) promoting approaches that support natural vine growth and productivity with minimal corrective interventions (repeated summer pruning serves as a prime example); and (iii) fostering practices that trigger natural tolerance responses to biotic or abiotic stresses. At the canopy level, the topics covered in this review include (i) strategies and tools to enhance light interception, distribution, and the conversion of assimilates into dry matter; (ii) leveraging existing biodiversity, including indigenous varieties and new rootstocks, to enhance adaptability to climate change challenges; and (iii) efforts to improve vineyard balance through the targeted application of established techniques, such as early basal leaf removal and late winter pruning, which can significantly enhance tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses. On the soil front, our focus will be on (i) enhancing the green water footprint within a vineyard ecosystem; (ii) identifying the optimal combination to achieve a carbon sink function in the vineyard without excessive competition for water and nutrients from cover crops; and (iii) increasing the ecological value of cover cropping, exemplified by reducing the splash dispersal of fungal pathogens through the growth of a tall interrow cover crop in spring and its subsequent termination under a sub-row mulching solution. Moving toward vineyard naturalness does not imply reverting to the wild behavior of nondomesticated plants; rather, it involves maintaining a necessary remunerative yield at the desired grape quality while employing a range of physiologically robust solutions that minimize the need for constant corrections and amendments in vineyard management.
{"title":"Vineyard “Naturalness”: Principles and Challenges","authors":"Stefano Poni, Tommaso Frioni, Matteo Gatti","doi":"10.1155/ajgw/3247228","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1155/ajgw/3247228","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The notion of “natural wines” has gained traction, yet the concept of vineyard naturalness remains largely neglected, often conflated with “organic” or “regenerative” viticulture. Vineyard naturalness, however, is rooted in a holistic approach that transcends these terms. In our effort to define its objectives, we focused on the methods and practices that enable its realization. This review explores several “natural-based” solutions aimed at the canopy and soil, guided by three core principles: (i) maximizing the use of freely available natural resources to reduce reliance on external and costly inputs; (ii) promoting approaches that support natural vine growth and productivity with minimal corrective interventions (repeated summer pruning serves as a prime example); and (iii) fostering practices that trigger natural tolerance responses to biotic or abiotic stresses. At the canopy level, the topics covered in this review include (i) strategies and tools to enhance light interception, distribution, and the conversion of assimilates into dry matter; (ii) leveraging existing biodiversity, including indigenous varieties and new rootstocks, to enhance adaptability to climate change challenges; and (iii) efforts to improve vineyard balance through the targeted application of established techniques, such as early basal leaf removal and late winter pruning, which can significantly enhance tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses. On the soil front, our focus will be on (i) enhancing the green water footprint within a vineyard ecosystem; (ii) identifying the optimal combination to achieve a carbon sink function in the vineyard without excessive competition for water and nutrients from cover crops; and (iii) increasing the ecological value of cover cropping, exemplified by reducing the splash dispersal of fungal pathogens through the growth of a tall interrow cover crop in spring and its subsequent termination under a sub-row mulching solution. Moving toward vineyard naturalness does not imply reverting to the wild behavior of nondomesticated plants; rather, it involves maintaining a necessary remunerative yield at the desired grape quality while employing a range of physiologically robust solutions that minimize the need for constant corrections and amendments in vineyard management.</p>","PeriodicalId":8582,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research","volume":"2025 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/ajgw/3247228","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144915061","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}