Spring 2021 · Volume 36 Number 4
SPRING
• Weighing up the effects of oak products and micro-oxygenation • Fungicide resistance to Botrytis cinerea • A machine learning-based system for early and accurate yield forecasting • Bumper 2021 harvest: what does it mean for growers? • Varietal report: Durif - an AUS vs US comparison
US US OR OR
CONTENTS
MER MER
INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION COLUMNS 8
ha ha
never been as unbelievably challenging as the last two years
00L 00L
M M
nits
U
AGW (Tony Battaglene): Planning for the unexpected has
9
WINE AUSTRLIA (Liz Waters): Harvesting the benefits of agtech
10 ASVO (Brooke Howell): ASVO 2021 oenology seminar — navigating new winemaking trends and finding solutions to existing problems
WINEMAKING
40
14 ERIKA SZYMANSKI: Oak products and micro-oxygenation: a surprising lack of surprises 18 Use of alternative vessels to oak barrels during fermentation of Sauvignon Blanc: a comparison of stainless-steel, concrete and polyethylene tanks and clay jars 24 Fresher wines, fewer sulfites: a new yeast for today’s challenges 30 AWRI REPORT: Vintage 2021 – observations from the AWRI helpdesk
52
VITICULTURE 32 Frequency and distribution of fungicide resistance in Botrytis cinerea collected from Australian vineyards 40 Dogs sniffing phylloxera – an industry perspective 46 A machine learning-based system for early and accurate vineyard yield forecasting 52 Can carbon sequestration in vineyard soils provide an internationally valid offset for greenhouse gas emissions? 60 Vine times for breeding
66
64 ALTERNATIVE VARIETIES: Aligoté
BUSINESS & MARKETING 66 Making the most of a cellar door in a COVID-19 world 70 Show me the money! Better understanding winery costs and efficiencies 73 Bumper harvest in 2021: what does it mean for growers? 75 Accelerated wine cooling before opening a wine bottle: is it good practice or better to avoid?
79
VARIETAL REPORT 79 Durif/Petite Sirah - an Aus vs US comparison
W I N E M A K I N G W I N E M AT U R AT I O N
Oak products and micro-oxygenation: a surprising lack of surprises By Erika Szymanski
Despite an ever-growing number of oak adjuncts and micro-oxygenation technologies available to winemakers that enable the effects of barrel-ageing to be mimicked in less time than the real thing, there is limited publicly-available research into the combined effect of the use of the two. Erika takes a look at what can be drawn from those few studies.
other spoilage microbes, among other things.
but when I went searching for studies that
Sometimes, understandably, winemakers
combined the two, I could count the results
are interested in availing themselves of
on my fingers. Odd, though maybe less odd
some of these functions without having to
in light of how many variations are involved,
of barrel-ageing generally means
take up all of them. An ever-growing bevy
and the likelihood that suppliers and the large
combining oak products with
of products serve those interests, notably
wineries who most stand to benefit will run
micro-oxygenation.
including oak adjuncts — staves and chips,
private trials with the specific combinations
but also other creative oak derivatives — and
they need.
IN BRIEF ■ Recreating the desirable effects
■ There is limited publicly available research on the combined effects of these.
■ This limited research has confirmed that more wood leads to more wood-derived sensory characteristics; more oxygen leads to faster phenolic evolution.
B
arrels have multiple functions in
micro-oxygenation, or micro-ox, technologies
Among those who are conducting
that mimic the gradual dose of outside air
controlled trials of oak and micro-ox
that a barrel will deliver to its contents over
treatments layered on top of each other is
time. Perhaps unsurprisingly, companies do
a group based in the analytical chemistry
not yet seem to be offering a replacement
department at the Universidad de Valladolid
for the thrill of finding Brett where it was not
in Spain. Its interests have recently
wanted — though plenty of yeast purveyors
centered on the properties of Quercus
will provide mixed microbial products to
pyrenaica, Rebollo or Pyrenean oak, a
encourage a wider range of sensory-active
species common in northwest Spain and
metabolic byproducts in more controlled
Portugal. Q. pyrenaica is of little use for
ways.
barrel manufacture, largely because it has
Recreating the desirable effects of
not been cultivated for that purpose, so
a winery: contributing flavour and
barrel-ageing without its undesirable risks
trees with the necessary grain structure for
texture, stabilising colour, assisting
and costs generally means combining oak
high-quality cooperage are in short supply.
oxidative stability, storing wine, soaking
products with micro-ox. It is therefore a bit
However, its sensory characteristics make it
up wine, soaking up money, giving cellar
odd that more publicly available research has
a sound choice for chips, staves and other
hands something heavy and awkward to
not been conducted on that combination. A
oak products where flavour can be the most
move, taking up space, decorating spaces
fairly wide range of oak products and micro-
important priority. Some producers in Galicia
for entertaining visitors, and providing a
ox strategies see endemic attention in the
are also interested in cultivating local oak
convenient home for Brettanomyces and
literature — and have for a decade or two—
options to preserve the ‘local’ aromas of their
14
w w w.w i netit le s . c o m . a u
W I NE & VIT IC U LT U R E J OU R N A L SPR IN G 2 0 2 1
V36N4
V I T I C U LT U R E P E S T S & D I S E A S E S
Frequency and distribution of fungicide resistance in Botrytis cinerea collected from Australian vineyards By Lincoln Harper1, Fran Lopez-Ruiz1, Suzanne McKay2, Ismail Ismail2, Barbara Hall2 and Mark Sosnowski2
Screening of Botrytis cinerea cultures collected from Australian winegrape vineyards for fungicide resistance is currently underway in a Wine Australia funded project. More than 800 B. cinerea cultures collected between 2013 and 2019 were screened against three commercially-critical fungicides: fenhexamid, fludioxonil and pyrimethanil. The authors report on the resistance frequencies for these fungicides.
INTRODUCTION
B
spectrum multi-site fungicides (Australian
otrytis bunch rot (BBR), caused by
Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines
the fungus Botrytis cinerea (Figure
Authority).
1), is one of the most economically
B. cinerea is considered a ‘high-
important diseases of grapevines in Australia,
risk’ pathogen for fungicide resistance
second only to powdery mildew (Scholefield
development due to its high reproductive
and Morison 2010). BBR and other bunch rots
rate and short life cycle (Brent and Hollomon
impact all Australian grapegrowing regions,
1998). Monitoring the frequency of fungicide
with an average cost of $50 million per annum
resistance in B. cinerea is necessary to ensure
to the grape and wine industry (Emmett et al.
that management practices can be adjusted in
1992, Scholefield and Morison 2010).
a timely manner.
Besides cultural practices, the primary
B. cinerea cultures resistant to
approach to control BBR in vineyards is
anilinopyrimidines (APs, group 9) have been
through the routine application of fungicides
previously described in grapevines in Australia
(Elad et al. 2016). In Australia, chemical
(Sergeeva et al. 2002). Mutations associated
applications can include single-site and broad-
with resistance to fungicide groups 9, 12 and
IN BRIEF ■ Since 2013, Wine Australia has funded research into fungicide resistance in Botrytis cinerea.
■ Fungicide sensitivity screening
and the identification of resistance-associated genetic mutations against seven chemical groups was carried out between 2013 and 2016.
■ Samples were collected from vineyards in Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland.
■ Resistance frequencies for
fenhexamid (TELDOR®), fludioxinil (one of the active constituents in Switch®) and pyrimethanil (SCALA®, fludioxinil and pyrimethanil) were tested.
Figure 1. Botrytis bunch rot caused by the fungus Botrytis cinerea on grapes. (Photo credit: Kejal Dodhia, Curtin University)
1
32
School of Molecular and Life Sciences, Centre for Crop and Disease Management, Curtin University, Bentley 6102, Western Australia 2 South Australian Research and Development Institute, Plant Research Centre, Urrbrae 5064, South Australia
w w w.w i netit le s . c o m . a u
W I NE & VIT IC U LT U R E J OU R N A L SPR IN G 2 0 2 1
V36N4