EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF VINE TRAINING SYSTEM IN STEPPE ENVIRONMENTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/2310-0478-2023-2-57-63Keywords:
grapes, vine, training system, yield, labor costsAbstract
Aim. Quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the influence of the parameters of grapevines on the yield and elaboration system management for non-irrigated cultivation in Steppe environment. Methods. The study was carried out using field experiment. The effect of different vine training systems on yield and quality of wine grape cultivars Rubin tairovskiy, Sukholimansky beliy, Odeskiy ciorniy (Vitis vinifera L.) was studied. The varieties are cultivated on rootstock RxR 101-14. The soil is chernozem heavy loamy on loess. The climate is moderately continental. The territory is classified as a zone of insufficient moisture. Aridity index 0.3 (semi-arid area). Vine management on a 1.8 m high vertical trellis, with individual support. The clean tillage vineyard. Direct labor costs per hectare of vineyard and per unit of yield were calculated. Data were analyzed by arithmetic mean, standard deviation, coefficient of variation and relative error of the mean. Results. It was established that in Steppe environment the yield of vineyards of experimental cultivars varies in a range from 7.5 to 12.8 t/ha depending on the vine training system. The value is increased by 13.7-39.8% under Guyot, Royat and Moser systems compared to Cordon, High single wire and Fan shape vine training. The quality of fresh grapes at full berry ripening varies more by cultivar than with changes of vine training system. The high-yielding Guyot and, Royat systems increase direct labor costs of management by 35-38% compared to High single wire. Sufficiently high yield levels, minimum direct labor costs per unit of yield at the level of 67 man-hours/t provides Moser vine training system, which is lower by 6-19% than in other variants of the experiment. Conclusions. Vine training systems differ in efficiency in non-irrigated vineyards of the Steppe, their evaluation and selection at establishment of plantations should be complex depending on productivity, cultivar peculiarities, direct labor costs, enterprise output.
References
Ресурсні елементарні кошторисні норми на будівельні роботи. Озелення. Захисні лісонасадження. Багаторічні плодові насадження. Збірник 47 : Наказ Мнрегіону від 31.12.2021 № 374.
URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/ (дата звернення: 01.08.2023 р.)
Шевченко І.В., Поляков В.І. Прогресивна технологія вирощування винограду в умовах зрошення : монографія. Одеса, 2007. 157 c.
Штірбу А. Організаційні і технологічні прийоми культивування винограду : практ. посіб. Київ, 2019. 144 c.
Berry phenolics of grapevine under challenging environments / Teixeira A., Eiras-Dias J., Castellarin S.D., Gerós H. International journal of molecular sciences. 2013. Vol. 14, No. 9. DOI: 10.3390/ijms140918711.
Clingeleffer P.R. Influence of canopy management systems on vine productivity and fruit composition. Recent Advances in Grapevine Canopy Management. Davis, 2009. P. 13-19.
Cortázar V., Córdova C., Pinto M. Canopy structure and photosynthesis modelling of grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana) grown on an overhead (parronal) trellis system in Chile. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research. 2005. Vol. 11, No. 3. P. 328-338. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-0238.2005. tb00032.x.
Deloire A., Rogiers S., Trujillo P.B. What could be the architectural forms of future vines adapted to climate change: a new challenge! Let’s discuss the Gobelet (Bush Vine). IVES Technical Reviews. 2022. DOI: 10.20870/IVES-TR.2022.5384.
Influence of foliage management on lyra for «high quality» wines production for Cabernet-Sauvignon variety: enological aspects (I note) / Spera G. et al. Journal international des sciences de la vigne et du vin. 2004. Vol. 3. No. 1. DOI: 10.20870/oeno-one.2004.38.1.939.
Matthews M.A., Rie Ishii M.M., Anderson M.M. Dependence of wine sensory attributes on vine water status. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 1990. Vol. 51, No. 3. P. 321-335. DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.2740510305.
Optimal geometric configuration and algorithms for LAI indirect estimates under row canopies: The case of vineyards / López-Lozano R. et al. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology. 2009. Vol. 149, No. 8. P. 1307-1316.
Response of Shiraz grapevines to five different training systems in the Barossa Valley, Australia / Wolf T. Et al. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research. 2003. Vol. 9, No. 2. P. 82-95. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-0238.2003.tb00257.x.
Response of Table Grape to Irrigation Water in the Aconcagua Valley, Chile / Zúñiga-Espinoza C., Aspillaga C., Ferreyra R., Selles G. Agronomy. 2015. Vol. 5, No. 3. P. 405-417.
Shtirbu A., Kovaleva I., Vlasov V. Responses of grapevines to planting density and training systems in semiarid environments. Agricultural Science and Practice. 2022. Vol. 9, No. 2. P. 38-50.
Shtirbu A., Olefir O., Sivak N. Agrobiological Responses of Grapevines to Different Training Systems in Semiarid Environments. Mitteilungen Klosterneuburg. 2023. Vol. 73. P. 114-125.
Strub L., Stoll M., Loose S. The effects of low-input training systems on viticultural costs on flat terrain and steep slope sites. OENO One. 2021. Vol. 55, No. 2. DOI: 10.20870/oenoone.2021.55.2.4619.
The eco-physiology of grapevine canopy systems – learning from models / Schultz H., Pieri P., Poni S., Lebon E. Recent Advances in Grapevine Canopy Management. Davis, 2009. P. 7-11.
The foldable lyre: ecophysiological interest for management of light absorption and water; technological interest for mechanical harvesting / Carbonneau A., Monte R., López F., Ojeda H. Journal international des sciences de la vigne et du vin. 2004. Vol. 38, No. 1. DOI: 10.20870/oenoone.2004.38.1.931.
Tkachenko O., Pashkovskiy A., Shtirbu A. Influence of viticultural practices on the sensory characteristics of wine grape varieties. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies. 2017. Vol. 86, No. 2/10. P. 48-56.
