ISHS Acta Horticulturae 526: V International Symposium on Grapevine Physiology
TRELLIS AND VINE SPACING EFFECTS ON GROWTH, CANOPY MICROCLIMATE, YIELD AND FRUIT COMPOSITION OF CABERNET SAUVIGNON |
| Authors: | W. Mark Kliewer, James A. Wolpert, M. Benz |
| Keywords: | Canopy density, canopy division, canopy management, vine training, Vitis vinifera L. |
| Abstract:
Cabernet Sauvignon trained to six different trellising systems each with in-row vine spacings of 1,2 and 3m and grafted onto two different rootstocks (110R and O39–16) were evaluated for differences in vegetative growth, productivity, fruit composition and canopy microclimate over a period of three years (1993 to 1995) at Oakville, CA. Crop yield of the VSP, SH, TK2T, GDC, Lyre and V trellis systems averaged 9.9. 12.8, 15.3, 16.8 and 18.6 mt/ha, respectively. Yield increases above that obtained with the VSP trellis were due mainly due to greater number of shoots and clusters per ha. The number of shoots and leaf area (m2) per m of canopy length ranged from 9 to 14 and 2.9 to 4.7, respectively. Pruning weight (kg) per m of canopy length ranged from 0.48 (Lyre (to 0.89 (VSP); weight per cane (g) ranged from 38 (Lyre) to 64 (VSP) and yield/pruning weight ratios ranged from 4.9 (VSP, SH) to 7.4 (Lyre). Fruit from divided canopy trellis systems at harvest generally were lower in titratable acidity (TA), malic acid and potassium than fruit from the VSP system. The fruiting region of the divided canopy trellis systems had lower leaf layer number (LLN) and higher percent exterior leaves, exterior clusters and canopy gaps than the VSP trellis system. Only the VSP trained vines at one m vine spacing had excessively dense vine canopy as judged by LLN, pruning weight and total leaf area per m canopy length. Closer vine spacing produced higher yields per ha due mainly to greater number of shoots and clusters per ha. Wider vine spacing produced more shoots per vine but shorter shoots and internode lengths, less leaf area and weight per shoot, and higher yield/pruning weight ratio than narrow vine spacing. Fruit from close vine spacing was higher in °Brix, pH, malic acid and K but did not differ in TA and total anthocyanin. LLN, percent interior leaves and clusters increased with closer vine spacing, whereas canopy gaps decreased. | |
Download Adobe Acrobat Reader (free software to read PDF files) | |
