Browsing by Author "Lategan, Eugene Lourens"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- ItemDEFICIT IRRIGATION AND CANOPY MANAGEMENT PRACTICES TO IMPROVE WATER USE EFFICIENCY AND PROFITABILITY OF WINE GRAPES(2024-03-05) Lategan, Eugene Lourens; Hoffman, Josias Eduard; Myburgh, Philipus Albertus
- ItemDetermining of optimum irrigation schedules for drip irrigated Shiraz vineyards in the Breede River Valley(Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2011-12) Lategan, Eugene Lourens; Hoffman, J. E.; Myburgh, P. A.; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of AgriSciences. Dept. of Soil Science.ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Shiraz/110R grapevines, growing in a fine sandy loam soil in the Breede River Valley, were subjected to ten different drip irrigation strategies during the 2006/07, 2007/08 and 2008/09 seasons. Grapevines of the control treatment (T1) were irrigated at 30% to 40% plant available water (PAW) depletion throughout the growing season. Grapevines of three treatments were irrigated at 70% to 80% PAW depletion from bud break until véraison (i.e. when ca. 95% of grape berries have changed colour), followed by either irrigation at 30% to 40% PAW depletion (T2) or a continuous deficit irrigation (CDI) strategy (T3) or irrigation at 70% to 80% PAW depletion (T4) during ripening. The CDI strategy was obtained by applying ca. half the volume of water that was applied to the control. This allowed the soil to dry out gradually between physiological stages (i.e. bud break and véraison or véraison and harvest). Grapevines of three further treatments were irrigated at ca. 90% PAW depletion from bud break until véraison, followed by irrigation at 30% to 40% PAW depletion (T5) or a CDI strategy (T6) or irrigation at ca. 90% PAW depletion (T7) during ripening. Grapevines of two treatments were irrigated by means of a CDI strategy from bud break until véraison. For both treatments, the soil water content (SWC) was allowed to dry out gradually until ca. 90% PAW depletion was reached. After véraison, the SWC of the one treatment was maintained at ca. 90% PAW depletion by applying only four small irrigations of three hours each during ripening (T8). The soil of the other treatment, received an irrigation at véraison to refill the SWC to field capacity (T9) followed by the CDI strategy during ripening. Grapevines of the tenth treatment were irrigated at ca. 90% PAW depletion between bud break and véraison followed by a partial profile refill (PPR) strategy during ripening (T10). In order to obtain the PPR strategy, SWC was only maintained between 40% and 60% PAW depletion. Evapotranspiration varied between 3.5 mm/day and 0.1 mm/day for driest and wettest treatments, respectively, during the period between December and February. This was substantially less than the volumes required for full surface irrigation. For irrigations applied at 30% to 40% PAW depletion (T1), 70% to 80% PAW depletion (T4) and ca. 90% PAW depletion (T7) levels throughout the season, crop coefficients for the Penman-Monteith reference evapotranspiration (ETo) were 0.4, 0.2 and 0.1, respectively. Under the given conditions, the different irrigation strategies did not have any effect on root distribution and density. Shoot growth of grapevines exposed to high to severe water deficits in the pre-véraison period stopped before mid December. Shoots of grapevines that were exposed to high or severe water deficits before véraison followed by more frequent irrigation during ripening showed active re-growth. These trends occurred during all the seasons. The level of PAW depletion reflected strongly in the plant water potential in the grapevines. Leaf water potential was influenced by the prevailing atmospheric conditions, whereas stem water potential was less sensitive to atmospheric conditions, but responded more directly to soil water availability. Due to the good relationships between pre-dawn leaf, mid-day leaf, mid-day stem and total diurnal water potential, it was possible to re-classify the water status in terms of previous classifications for these water potentials based on pre-dawn measurements. Water constraints in T1, T2 and T5 grapevines were classed as experiencing no stress, whereas the T7 and T8 ones experienced strong to severe water constraints before harvest. High frequency irrigation strategies during ripening delayed sugar accumulation due to dilution of sugar in the larger berries. Except for the wettest strategy, and where grapevines were subjected to the CDI strategy throughout the season, berry mass increased during ripening, i.e. from véraison to harvest. Water deficits had a negative effect on berry mass, bunch size and yield. Where higher soil water depletion levels were allowed, irrigation strategies had a positive effect on the irrigation water productivity of grapevines compared to the frequently irrigated or CDI strategies. Higher water constraints in grapevines, particularly during ripening, improved sensorial wine colour and enhanced some of the more prominent wine aromas, e.g. spicy and berry. Grapevines that were irrigated at a high frequency during ripening produced wines with diluted character flavours and aromas and inferior overall quality. Under the given conditions, sensorial wine colour and spicy character were the dominant factors in determining overall sensorial wine quality.