Category: Vineyard Info

By: Judit Monis, Ph.D.  

Last March I was invited to present for the Canadian Grapevine Certification Network (CGCN RCCV). Ethan Churchill, the CGCN-RCCV program manager did an introduction to their certification program standards.  Rob Haynes described the application of tissue culture and other practices at his Upper Canada Growers Nursery.  Robin Ross presented his research on tissue culture techniques. Tanja Voegel and myself did presentations on crown gall disease caused by Agrobacterium vitis.  While I have written before and plan to do an update on crown gall in the future, this article will focus on the Canadian Grapevine Certification Network program with emphasis on the application of tissue culture of the Upper Canada Growers Nursery in their production practices.

  In June of 2019 over two million dollars in funding through the Canadian Agricultural Partnership’s AgriAssurance program became available to start a network of virus-free grapevines in Canada.   The program would provide clean planting material to Canadian growers to assure the viability of their wine industry.  The funding is being allocated to both the interim verification standard and the long-term Canadian certification programs.  An interim verification standard consists of visual inspection and testing existent nursery blocks for the presence of Grapevine leafroll associated viruses (GLRaV) -1 and -3; Grapevine red blotch virus (GRBV), and Grapevine Pinot Gris virus (GPGV).  The sample collection and testing are performed in the laboratory of the Cool Climate Oenology and Viticulture at Brock University at a 50/50 cost share between nurseries and the CGCN-RCCV (until March 2023).  The network works with partner nurseries for general propagation and with vineyard growers and wineries for custom propagation of their own vineyard planting material.  The testing protocol is as follows: an initial random sampling of 10% of the vineyard that includes visual inspection and RT- PCR testing for the presence of the viruses of concern (GLRaV-1 and -3, GRBV, GPGV).  If 15% or more of the vineyard block is found to be infected it is dropped from the program.  If the vineyard block is found to be less than 15% infected, it is moved to the second phase of testing which consists on testing the entire vineyard. Samples are composites of leaves from five vines or canes from two vines.  The threshold for acceptance to the program is 0.1% (i.e., less than one infected vine in 1000 vines).  If the block is found to be infected more than 0.1%, the nursery has the option of testing each vine in the positive composite sample individually and remove the infected vines from the block.  Once the vineyard is tested and confirmed to be under the 0.1% threshold, plants propagated from those vines are deemed verified through CGCN-RCCV, Of course, similar to other certification programs there is no guarantee that the vines produced by the nurseries are virus free.  The program includes yearly audits with visual inspection and virus testing (10% random sampling) of the nursery blocks to ensure the lack of infection or spread to planting material.  Participating nurseries as well as available certified varieties are listed in the CGCN-RCCV website (see: https://www.cgcn-rccv.ca/site/about-cgcn).  Custom propagation of vineyard or winery planting material is subjected to a protocol similar to the one described for nursery blocks.

  Rob Haynes presented information on the practices of his family nursery operation (see: https://www.uppercanadagrowers.ca). The family purchased Mori Nursery in 2016 and started the Upper Canada Growers Nursery.  The use and application of tissue culture technology is what sets this nursery apart from others. It all stated ten years ago when the nursery had problems with the propagation of apples due to the presence of viruses and the fire blight bacterial pathogen.  At the time researchers at Cornell University had developed apple rootstocks that were resistant to these pathogens (Geneva rootstocks).  However, these rootstocks were difficult to propagate.  The company turned into using tissue culture (a collaboration with the University of Guelph) to develop their tissue culture program.  After a long and slow learning process the nursery is now ready to release two million tissue cultured propagated apple, hazelnuts, and plum plants (apples being the larger part of the production).  The company also has grapevines in the pipeline.  Although there is no timeline for the release of grapevines, so far, the process appears to be easier than the other crops produced at the nursery.  To summarize, the propagation material starts in the laboratory (as tissue culture plants), once the plants are rooted and grown to a certain size, the plants are transferred to the greenhouse in misting tents (the humidity must be kept very high.  The plants continue to grow in the greenhouse up to a certain point and are transferred to the field.  However, the plants are not planted directly in the field but inside “smart pots”. The plants (in pots) are constantly being screened from insects and the environment to avoid infection.  Therefore, from start to end, plants are being grown in a clean environment to ensure that pathogens are not present. In the fall the plants senesce and go dormant, being finally moved into a cold storage unit   The final planting product described is different from the dormant bare root plants that the orchard farmers are used to planting.  Instead, the plants produced are kept inside containers in peat /perlite mix media.  The roots appear to be further developed compared to plants grown in a standard production.  The technology is not new to the fruit (or grape) growing industry, but the nursery has developed specialized media that has made the process very successful. 

  The same process developed for fruit and nut crops at the nursery is being transferred to grapevines. The nursery approached CGCN-RCCV to work on the commercial release of certified grapevine planting stock.  The material being propagated was initially sent to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency for virus indexing.  This allowed the nursery to determine that they were starting with clean propagation material.  Indexed grapevine cuttings were sent to the University of Guelph who set up all the protocols to initiate the material in tissue culture (media, growth conditions, etc.).  Once the plants were initiated in tissue culture, the material was transferred to the nursery’s laboratory for further propagation and to develop a commercial product.  There are many advantages to the propagation system:  the nursery is starting with a clean product (virus tested), grown in a sterile/aseptic media (tissue culture) and subsequently grown in hermetic greenhouses (air showers and other mitigation practices to avoid the entrance of insect vectors/pathogens), to finally being moved to a screened area in the field.

  Rob Haynes mentioned that initially there were concerns from the industry that the apple tissue culture plants would be juvenile (which they were during the first two years).  However, the apple plants appear to start production much faster in the first five years, than apple trees propagated normally.  By the 10th year the production is expected to even out, but the quality of tissue culture propagated trees seem to be superior to the standard propagated trees.  Presently, Canadian grape growers are not familiar with tissue culture produced plants but at some points when these plants become available, the nursery expects these plants will be superior to standard propagated grapevine plants. 

  The Nursery has an active research and development program.  One current program is applied to understand the microbial population (microbiome) around the roots and within the plants.  It is known that tissue cultured plants are grown aseptically, consequently many of the microbes that were present in the original plants have been removed.   Some of the microbes (bacteria, fungi, and/or viruses) may be harmful to the plant growth.  However, some can be beneficial and help the plants absorb nutrients or may have other important functions. Learning about the plant’s microbiome will allow the isolation of the beneficial microbes while eliminating the harmful ones.  The ultimate goal, is to replenish (at a later stage of production) the beneficial microbes that were removed during the tissue culture process to develop of stronger and healthier plants.    Judit Monis, Ph.D. provides specialized services to help growers, vineyard managers, and nursery personnel avoid the propagation and transmission of disease caused by bacteria, fungi, and viruses in their vineyard blocks.   Judit (based in California) is fluent in Spanish and is available to consult in all wine grape growing regions of the word.  Please visit juditmonis.com for information or contact juditmonis@yahoo.juditmonis@yahoo.comcom to request a consulting session at your vineyard.

By: Annie Klodd, University of Minnesota Extension Educator

Food for thought: In viticulture, we reduce our vine canopies through hours of shoot thinning, leaf removal, and hedging. So why do many of us act so swiftly to stop Japanese beetles from eating our leaves? While Japanese beetle control is important, you can increase your bottom line by waiting to spray until it really needed.  

Japanese beetles are invasive insects that feed on leaves of over 300 plant species including grapevines. They aggregate (congregate) on leaves in mid-summer by emitting pheromones that attract other beetles to the area. They “skeletonize” leaves by eating around the leaf veins.

The trick is to decide how many Japanese beetles to tolerate in the vineyard before starting to spray.

Many agricultural insect pests have an “economic threshold” – a certain number of insects that must be present in the vineyard before an insecticide application will be economically beneficial. Economic thresholds help growers make sure that the benefit of an application outweighs the cost.

But Japanese beetles are different. There is no widely accepted economic threshold for Japanese beetles yet. More research is currently underway in this arena.

Without an economic threshold, growers’ tolerance levels seem to vary widely. Many growers spray at the first sign of beetles or leaf defoliation, while others wait until beetles have congregated on the vines and skeletonizing some of the leaves.

To decide when to spray, consider the following:

Vines can tolerate some beetle feeding

Research new and old suggests that healthy grapevines can tolerate some leaf feeding before fruit or plant health are impacted.

New research from University of Minnesota measured the impact of Japanese beetle feeding on yield and fruit quality of Frontenac. The researchers found that heavy leaf defoliation (About 20-50% of leaf surface eaten) decreased fruit quality by decreasing brix and increasing titratable acidity. However, it did not impact yield, and lighter defoliation had little impact on fruit quality. From that research, they recommended an economic threshold of 25-30% defoliation or 25 beetles per meter.

A 2003 study at Michigan State University enclosed 40 Japanese beetles per grapevine and let them feed. After two weeks, they caused about 6.8% defoliation, but this did not affect vine growth that year or the next. They determined that 30% defoliation at bloom was needed to decrease vine growth.

These studies suggest that Japanese beetles do not reduce vine health or fruit quality until 25-30% of the leaf surface is eaten. 30% defoliation of every leaf is higher than we typically see in Minnesota. In 2018, UMN researchers surveyed several grape varieties and found the highest defoliation levels between 12-15%, which is below their 30% suggested threshold for spraying.

Photo: Grapevine leaves with 2%, 6%, and 10% defoliation, measured using a standard laboratory leaf area meter. Dominique Ebbenga, University of Minnesota

Vine age and health:

As Japanese beetles aggregate on plants, they can defoliate a small, newly planted vine faster than a mature vine. Similarly, they are likely to do more damage to a stressed or stunted vine than one with a full, rapidly growing canopy.

Therefore, growers should prioritize protecting newly planted vines from Japanese beetles before populations do significant damage to the leaves.

When aesthetics matter:

Even if the beetles fail to impact grapevine health, many people find them to be disturbing and unsightly. This is enough to encourage some vineyard managers, especially those at public venues like wineries, to control Japanese beetles as soon as they see them even if the damage is minimal.

Japanese Beetle Management

Once a grower decides to spray insecticide for Japanese beetles, the next question is what to spray. Several insecticides are labeled for Japanese beetles. The Midwest Fruit Pest Management Guide is one of the resources that lists and compares these options.

Many insecticides provide knockdown control, killing beetles at or shortly after contact. Several neonicotinoids have residual activity, killing beetles in the 2-3 weeks following the application.

Spraying for Japanese beetles can be time-consuming and expensive. To minimize applications, consider incorporating a product with residual control rather than relying solely on knockdown products. Consider cost as well – based on the research discussed above, this application may not make a strong difference for yield or vine health.

Examples of effective active ingredients include phosmet, carbaryl, acetamiprid, fenpropathrin, cyfluthrin, and cypermethrin. Organic options include neem oil, kaolin clay, and Bt galleriae (e.g. BeetleGone!). Please consult the Midwest Fruit Pest Management Guide, a similar publication, and the product labels for more information.

Non-insecticide control measures

Very small vineyards may be able to manually remove Japanese beetles. Manual removal, commonly used by home gardeners, involves brushing the beetles off the vines into soapy water or vacuuming them off with a handheld car vacuum. This is generally not practical for commercial vineyards.

Another potential non-chemical option is to surround the vines in insect exclusion netting, which is similar to bird netting with smaller holes to keep out insects. I am not personally aware of research testing this method in vineyards, but a current study of exclusion netting on apple trees at University of Minnesota shows promise for a variety of insect pests.

In summary – Controlling Japanese beetles will be beneficial if infestations are high, but the good news is that growers need not panic upon spotting the first beetles. Take time to assess the situation and determine an economical plan of action before filling the spray tank.

To see recent research on how Japanese beetles affect grape yield and quality, see: Impact of Adult Popullia japonica Foliar Feeding Injury on Fruit Yield and Quality of a Temperate, Cold-Hardy Wine Grape, ‘Frontenac.’ https://doi.org/10.3389/finsc.2022.887659

By: Gerald Dlubala

The importance of water and its management for grapevine quality and yield cannot be overstated,” said Randy Heinzen, president of Vineyard Professional Services in Paso Robles, California.

  “When it comes to irrigation,” said Heinzen, “vineyards depend on drip irrigation for the most part. Sprinklers are great at spreading water across the entire acreage, but applications by sprinklers in-season can increase the potential for disease in the canopy. I haven’t worked on a furrow irrigation system (which diverts naturally accumulating water into channels that run into or along each side of the vineyard rows) here on the Central Coast since 2011. Choices will always differ by region, and some vineyards successfully utilize dual systems that combine drip and overhead systems or drip and under vine micro-sprinklers. Grapevines are fairly drought tolerant, so they readily adapt to receiving drip irrigation at several points near the trunk.”

  Heinzen said that most vineyard managers prefer drip irrigation systems because of the ability to provide a directed and constant volume to each plant. Another advantage of utilizing a drip system is the ability to fertigate and apply chemicals directly and precisely to each vine when needed.

  “The type and amount of scheduling for those needs varies based on system ability, soil dynamics, the winegrower’s goals, and seasonal weather events and conditions,” said Heinzen. “At the most basic level, irrigation is applied at some fraction of the grapevine’s water use. Other variables include the time in the growing season and the grapevine’s age, root system, soil interaction level and general overall health. And the more active the leaf area is that is photosynthesizing, the greater the water use is going to be by the plant, which in turn requires a greater need for water replenishment.”

  Heinzen told The Grapevine Magazine that the cost of installing a drip system depends on the volume of water available for irrigation and the vineyard spacing, layout and design. The cost of mate

rial and installation of a drip system’s sub mains through to the above-ground infrastructure can be between $3,000 and $6,000 per acre, comparable to installing a quality sprinkler system.

  “Most vineyards track irrigation through flow meters and in-field pressure systems in drip hoses,” said Heinzen. “But, while digital tracking removes most human errors caused by erroneous note-taking and transcription of numbers, technology is not always reliable, and data gaps can occur. A novel approach to monitoring irrigation uses satellite imagery to estimate actual evapotranspiration and deduce the correlating irrigation needs. In terms of field operations, there are several automated systems available for remote pump and valve control, but the same caveat about reliability applies to agricultural field technology as well.”

  “With that in mind, a vineyard owner’s most important question for the irrigation system installer concerns the warranty. For most vineyard owners, the irrigation systems are installed by third-party contractors, with the majority of their work buried underground. The most professional and experienced contractors give the best warranties because they are good at their craft. In my experience, paying more for that professional design and installation upfront eventually saves money in the long run due to the potential of more costly and untimely field repairs and maintenance after installation. Further, vineyard owners should educate themselves on how the system runs, how to use it, and how to handle and make minor repairs themselves. Disruptions in the availability of needed water impact current and future crops, so as the vineyard manager, you should know the location of the underground pipes, how the controllers and filters operate and what pressures your system is designed to maintain for optimal performance. A good relationship with your contractor is critical to your farming success.”

Water Efficiency Is Key: Noble Vineyard Management Services

  “Water efficiency is key when choosing irrigation systems,” said Tyler Rodrigue, CEO of Noble Vineyard Services, a full-service, vineyard-to-winery service operating on California’s North Coast. “The grape-growing industry has been forward-thinking for decades regarding efficient water applications and measuring cost benefits and needs to ensure that our water resources are put to their highest, most beneficial use. We use drip irrigation systems in spring, summer and fall to irrigate the vines. Then, if we’re not getting normal rains, sprinklers are used during late fall, winter and early spring to simulate normal rain conditions and provide a good soil profile.”

  Like Heinzen, Rodrigue said that drip irrigation is the preferred choice because of its efficiency. “It’s important to ensure that vineyards are adequately irrigated through the seasons, including pre-budbreak, during the growing season and then through the harvest into post-harvest. Rainfall received during our rainy season naturally influences our irrigation schedules. As a rule of thumb, we like to have an approximately one-acre foot of water available for irrigation during the growing season. We use remotely controlled, automated irrigation systems that provide leak detection and track the amount of water allocated during the irrigation session, the vine water capacity and critical soil moisture levels.”

  Rodrigue recommends that vineyard owners perform quality research before choosing a system. Always check with other growers who use similar irrigation systems to validate capabilities, user-friendliness and return-on-investment (ROI). Finally, choose a distributor that offers serviceability and critical support when you need it. Drip, sprinkler and micro-sprinkler systems can all seem expensive because of the infrastructure necessary for proper performance, including PVC pipe, fittings, sprinkler heads, drip tubes, motors and pumps. Still, when appropriately scaled, the ROI ranges in the three-to-five-year range.

Precision Irrigation in Stages: William Chris Wine Company

  Tate Gregory is the Vineyard Manager for William Chris Wine Company, located in Hye, Texas. He told The Grapevine Magazine that it’s close to, if not impossible, to establish a vineyard in Texas without some form of irrigation system in place. Like the others, he prefers drip irrigation systems, the choice method in Texas, for all the wineries he oversees.

  “Drip irrigation allows for more precision in your watering and chemical injection needs,” said Gregory. “A drip system is probably one of the more expensive options when starting, but the ability to granularly control your water and nutrient applications is well worth the upfront cost. The emitters on the drip system ensure that the proper amount of water needed is dispensed and directed towards the root zone of the vines underneath the row. Additionally, those emitters allow the desired amount of water you want at each emitter, reducing water waste by not irrigating unnecessary areas. Sprinkler systems will direct a lot of water to your vineyard all at once, but sprinklers can’t precisely deliver water to a target. On top of that, you can end up with mildew or other fungal issues that arise from having a moist canopy during your growing season. I have seen sprinklers used in vineyards as a form of frost protection, but here in Texas, we use fans.”

  “The watering comes in stages for our vineyards, unless you’re in a drought like we are currently experiencing, when we irrigate more frequently just to maintain vine health,” said Gregory. “Here in Texas, we usually get in-season rains that supplement our irrigation plan, which depends on many factors, including temperatures, site water holding capacity, rootstock, grape variety and more. We want to ensure proper shoot and cluster development and a canopy that is sufficient to ripen our fruit later in the season, so as a regular part of our routine, we develop and alter irrigation schedules weekly.”

  “At the post-fruit set, water is applied on a more prudent basis to control excessive canopy growth and focus on cluster size and berry development versus lateral shoot growth. It really is a fine line between discouraging excessive growth versus maintaining the health of the canopy to ripen fruit. In-season watering can vary from six to 12 gallons a week per plant early on, versus two to four gallons closer to harvest. Post-harvest, we’re looking to keep the canopy viable for as long as possible to ensure proper carbohydrate storage for next growing season.”

  Gregory said that all irrigation systems require infrastructure both in the field and at the control center. Field infrastructure includes the PVC needed to move the water into the fields, the risers to get the water into the drip tape and the pressure gauges to ensure consistency. The control center infrastructure is usually centrally located and includes things like electric solenoid or manual valves, backflow prevention, chemical injectors and water filters. Controlling your irrigation system depends on the vineyard’s situation. It can be as simple as a valve to manually turn the blocks on and off to a remote-control box that allows for scheduling different timing and length of irrigation sets. There are many options, but it all comes down to available resources and time. A smaller vineyard with an on-site manager can get by manually. Still, larger-scale vineyard operations over multiple sites would benefit from and be more efficient with a control box to schedule system operations. Prices vary based on how intricate your system is.

  “There are things to think about when choosing and installing an irrigation system,” said Gregory. “Try to forecast ahead to ensure your water supply will meet your irrigation needs, especially in a drier year. If not, you may need multiple wells or water storage tanks to meet demand. Additionally, you want to determine if you or someone else will be available to be out in the field when necessary to open and close the valves to change blocks. If not, can you acquire the resources needed to put towards a control box that can do these tasks on a preset schedule? Lastly, segmenting your vineyard blocks based on soil types and water needs can help ensure your plants get the water they need to thrive. For example, we farm a specific vineyard and section off the top of a hillside into its own block so we can provide for the needs of that block, compensating for soil type and exposure.”

Baseline Water Requirements

Water requirements, as expected, are influenced by several factors, including vine age and density, cover crops used (if any), rootstock and actual climate conditions (rate of rainfall with evaporation rates) under which they are grown. Additionally, the grape variety can play a role in baseline water needs. For example, red grape varietals typically require less water than white varietals, and grapes traditionally grown for aromatic and lighter styles of wine demand more water to minimize water stress or loss than those produced for medium to full-bodied wines.

By: Cheryl Gray

From preparation to harvest, equipment makes the difference in how well a vineyard is maintained year-round. Tractors, tools and expertise in how to use both go a long way towards reaching that goal. To help clear the path are companies with the products that get the job done.

One of them is Tillage Management, Inc, which designs and manufactures one-pass and reduced-pass tillage equipment. A family-owned company out of Tulare, California, Tillage Management first began manufacturing one-pass tillage equipment for row crops back in 2006. In 2017, the company expanded its product line to include equipment that can handle the needs of vineyards. To be certain that innovation meets practical application, Tillage Management works side-by-side with its farming division to test its equipment and new product designs. Kat Coombes, project manager for Tillage Management, describes why minimizing passes optimizes cost savings.

“Our aim has been to sell high-quality products that are easy to use, simple and inexpensive to maintain, and ready to run when the farmer needs them. We can customize our units for different crops and soil types so our customers have the optimal setup or setups for their needs. By reducing passes, our customers typically save 50 percent or more on time and tillage costs. Our equipment also helps to reduce dust, incorporate organic material, and potentially improve soil health for crop roots.”

Coombes described some of the company’s most widely used products.

“For our newer models, we have applied large-scale, one-pass tillage principles to orchard- and vineyard-sized equipment to reduce passes and fix some of the typical tillage issues that exist in the market.”

Among the best features for Tillage Management products, Coombes says, is that there is little-to-no wear on original parts or replacement parts. The company prides itself on building for the lifetime of the product.

“We build heavy-duty frames with long-lasting working parts to allow our customers to keep running and stay out of the repair shop. All disk blades are independently-mounted to custom maintenance-free bearings with 10,000 to 25,000-plus acre lifetimes. Units leave a clean finish, maintain levels and do not throw dirt outside the working width.”

Tillage Management equipment, says Coombes, is customizable to fit almost any need. Some of those custom features include either towed or three-point hitch options, three-row or five-row disk and implement combinations, multiple implement types to combine with disks and every working width from four to 15 feet.

Coombes told The Grapevine Magazine about Tillage Management products that vineyard owners should consider.

“The OPTIMIZER Model 1007 is a three- or five-row towed disking implement. For a vineyard with 12-foot spacing and cover crops to work into the soil, this eight-foot-wide unit with a seven-foot working width would be set up with two rows of disk blades for complete uprooting coverage, two rows of chrome-edged baskets for soil mixing and residue incorporation and a final smooth roller for a clean, flat finish. This would typically replace two to three passes with a traditional disk and work two to three times as quickly as a rototiller.

The OPTIMIZER Model 304 is a three-row, three-point hitch disking implement. For a vineyard with eight-foot spacing and some residue, prunings or cover crop to work in, this is a five-foot-wide unit with a four-foot working width. All weeds and cover crops would be uprooted and soil inverted by the two rows of disk blades; then, the rear cultipacker would break up clods and leave a level, crumbly finish. The seven-foot-long 300 Series is great for tight spaces and precision control but with the tillage potential of a much larger implement.

The OPTIMIZER CR Series Model CR-7 is a three-row, three-point hitch chisel implement. For a vineyard with compaction issues, water penetration problems or soil stratification that extends past the top four inches, the Chisel Roller is an excellent solution. Chisel shanks with wings allow full soil-shattering coverage across the working width, while the subsequent roller breaks down large clods and leaves a level, crumbly finish. It works great on its own or in combination with an OPTIMIZER disk.”
Coombes adds that Tillage Management has also designed products with smaller vineyards in mind.

“The OPTIMIZER 300 and 1000 Series require a minimum of 11 to12 horsepower per foot working width, so tractor requirements start at 48 HP. Our goal has been to make our one-pass tools more widely available for smaller tractors and smaller farms.”

Another California-based company, Solectrac, offers vineyards electric tractors. This year, World Ag Expo recognized the company for innovation in its field, earning an award for “Top 10 New Product.” Being quiet with zero emissions and no dependency on fossil fuel are among the features that make Solectrac’s products not only popular in the United States but as far away as Canada, Norway and India. Global demand, the company says, continues to grow because of concerns over protecting the environment, coupled with increasing prices for fossil fuels.

Vineyards switching from diesel to one of Solectrac’s electric tractors can charge their machinery with solar energy. Prices for these electric tractors range anywhere from $35,000 for a 24- to 30-horsepower model to $75,000 for the 70-horsepower version. While the initial cost is as much as 40 percent higher than traditional tractors, Solectrac points out that by not having to use fuel and oil, coupled with lower maintenance costs, the electric tractors pay for themselves within two to three years.

On the East Coast, BDI Machinery Sales, Inc. specializes in the tool and machinery needs of fruit, vegetable and nursery growers. Founded in 1996 and based just outside of Philadelphia, the company sources and distributes agricultural equipment from around the world.

Paul Licata has more than 25 years of experience in senior sales, marketing and operations management.

“BDI Machinery Sales is your complete source for innovative specialty agricultural machinery. We offer numerous types and sizes of sprayers, hedgers, leaf removers, shredders, cultivators, pruners, mowers, row mulchers and other specialized machinery from around the world.”

Licata explains why BDI Machinery is the first choice for many vineyards when it comes to finding just the right equipment, giving details on some of its most popular options.

“The CIMA low-volume atomizer sprayers are the industry standard and technology leader, with single, multi-row, row cannon and pneumatic air boom spray heads. The OLMI Air (Pneumatic) Impulse deleafers are the industry standard and technology leader, with single and multi-row configurations. The Rinieri CRV Vision Hedger/Trimmer is the industry standard and technology leader, with single, multi-row and over-the-row configurations.”
When it comes to product innovation and technology, Licata promises that BDI can deliver.

“CIMA EPA 2.0 System (Delivery Proportional to Advance) works with the full range of new CIMA’s low-volume pneumatic sprayers. For spraying quantity accuracy, by decreasing the forward speed, the system automatically reduces the quantity delivered while increasing the forward speed and the quantity delivered. This system avoids product waste and assures treatment effectiveness, a great cost-saving and a reduction in the environmental impact. Easy programming is guaranteed, as it is possible to save and manage up to 15 programs by entering the following operation parameters.

OLMI Air impulse deleafers are implemented multiple times during the growing season and are the pinnacle of leaf-removal technology. The machine is air-powered through a compressor to multi-diffusers that are rotating. The pneumatic machine shatters leaves to remove them from the canopy, as opposed to previous technologies that pull the leaves. Trials have shown traditional leaf pullers remove about 50 percent to 60 percent with control, while the air impulse deleafer removes targeted leaves with 100 percent control.

The Rinieri Finger weeder cultivator allows farmers to no longer reduce spraying and use this machine for organic weed control. The new range of Rinieri finger weeders is for fast mechanical weeding (up to 6 MPH) composed of the Bio-disc, which breaks the ground near the plants and then the Bio-Star with its rubber spokes for inter-row processing.”

Brazil is home to Jacto, an agricultural machinery company touting workable solutions for vineyards looking for equipment alternatives. Jacto has clients in more than 100 countries, with production plants in Brazil, Argentina and Thailand. Paulo Bueno works as a product manager in the engineering, marketing and commercial areas.

“Jacto has a wide range of high-tech products, from equipment for pruning and portable sprayers to large machines for spraying, fertilizer spreading, planting, coffee and sugarcane harvesting. Jacto also provides solutions and services for precision agriculture and agriculture 4.0 for increasingly more sustainable productions.

The main innovations in the field of fruit sprayers are present in the Arbus 4000 JAV (Jacto Autonomous Vehicle) used in citrus cultivation. In this equipment, LIDAR sensors, radar and optical units capture information from the environment and support decision-making. The spray tower is composed of eight independent electric fans, four on each side and arranged in a row, in each of which it is possible to change the wind speed and spray flow, allowing the application to be interrupted in each of the eight sections as needed. Adjusting the position of the fans is also possible, bringing it closer or further away from the crop, modifying the angle of each deflector in the vertical direction, in order to make the application converge to the plant.”

The experts agree that cost, low maintenance and longevity are key to making a good investment when it comes to vineyard equipment and tools. The choices are vast, and discernment goes a long way to making the right one.

By: Annie Klodd, University of Minnesota Extension Educator

Row orientation is one of the first decisions a grower makes when planting a new vineyard. But how much does this decision matter, and what should you consider when choosing row orientation?

  For generations, many have touted north-south (N-S) row orientation as a best practice because it exposes the canopy to the most direct sunlight. But modern research suggests that, like many things, it is more complicated than this.

  For some vineyards, north-south is the best choice. But a strict north-south stance could overlook other factors like field shape, variety, climate, convenience, and even aesthetics. The freedom to consider different row orientations can improve multiple aspects of vineyard management.

Benefits of North-South Orientation

  Simply speaking, N-S row orientation directs more uniform solar radiation to the full canopy, compared to East-West (E-W) orientation. The east side of the canopy is exposed to direct light in the morning and the west side in the afternoon. A 2008 study (Grifoni et al) found that N-S rows received increased and more uniform solar radiation, and as a result, photosynthesis.

  With E-W rows, the south side gets more direct sun than the north, possibly meaning that south-facing fruit ripens faster than north-facing fruit.

Why “It’s Complicated”

  In theory, north-south row direction could enhance ripening and fruit quality by increasing sunlight exposure. However, current research paints a less clear picture.

  Much of the research I have found was done in the southern hemisphere. Several of these studies took place in the same Shiraz vineyard in South Africa. Without much research in US climates, it is hard to draw too many conclusions about the region where I work, or the varieties we grow in the Midwest.

  Secondly, many factors play into a grower’s decisions about row orientation beyond just sunlight interception, which I delve into later.

  A 2015 study on mature vines in this South African vineyard found no significant difference in anthocyanins or grape mechanical composition between NS and EW rows. However, a later study from the same vineyard in a different year found that EW rows had lower soluble solid/titratable acidity ratios, lower anthocyanins, and lower phenolics. The other row orientations like N-S, NE-SW, and NW-SE ripened faster and produced better wine quality. Additionally, one study found that N-S rows had slightly higher yields than the other orientations.

  While light exposure is of course important, too much direct sunlight on fruit can be just as harmful as over-shading. It can cause sunscald, which degrades the fruit and leads to rotting. For this reason, a grower with a south-facing VSP vineyard in a hot, sunny region may consider planting on NE-SW or E-W orientation to limit excess exposure. If N-S orientation is selected, the grower can alter canopy management practices like leaf removal to control overexposure.

  Other factors to weigh against row orientation

Growers should weigh various other decisions against row orientation when planting a vineyard. Field shape, variety, trellis system, weather, and climate all influence the bottom line and could either outweigh or exaggerate the impact of row orientation.

  Like row orientation, trellis systems also affect sunlight exposure and ripening. In theory, planting N-S rows to Vertical Shoot Positioning (VSP) could compound the effect of row orientation by further increasing sun exposure. Planting on Single High Wire (SHW) might reduce the sun exposure for vines in N-S rows, protecting them from sunscald in hot, sunny areas.

  Consider the field shape, row length and number of rows when deciding row orientation. If a field is long from east to west and narrow from north to south, the east-west row orientation would mean longer and fewer rows, less turning around, and fewer end posts to install.

  Varieties: In short-season regions like the upper Midwest and Northeast, varieties with longer ripening times should benefit more from NS orientation than shorter-season varieties. For example, Frontenac is a popular cold hardy hybrid that needs a long ripening period to lower acidity. I would hypothesize that NS orientation might benefit Frontenac by helping it ripen faster, avoiding the first frost. Shorter season hybrids like Itasca, Marquette, and LaCrescent that ripen well before the first frost may benefit less from NS row orientation. More research on the cold hardy hybrids is needed to support this hypothesis.

  Consider your climate as well. In hot, dry, sunny regions, grapes on the western side of N-S rows, and the southern side of E-W rows, are at a higher risk of sunscald. Sunscald risk would be further increased by using VSP trellising and late leaf removal. The sun hits the west side of the N-S canopy in the afternoon when temperatures are highest and sunlight is most intense. For this reason, growers may rotate the rows by 45 degrees, opting for a SW-NE orientation. As some regions become hotter and drier, practices to mitigate overexposure will be important (source).

  Lastly, an individual winery may have aesthetic reasons to choose one orientation over another, like creating the perfect wedding photo spot or a dramatic view down a hill.

  Row orientation is just one of the many factors determining the overall success of a vineyard. Hopefully this information helps growers plug it into the big picture when making key vineyard planting decisions.

By: Becky Garrison

During the Oregon Wine Symposium, held virtually from February 15-17, 2022, Akif Eskalen, Professor of Cooperative Extension, UC Davis, offered his insights into the identification, biology, epidemiology and current management strategies of grapevine trunk diseases.

  In Eskalen’s estimation, GTDs are considered one of the most significant challenges for viticulture across the globe. These harmful diseases can be found on the spurs, cordon, trunk and rootstock of the grapevine and gain entry primarily via pruning wounds. GTDs are caused by a broad range of permanent, wood-colonizing fungal pathogens. They are also present as part of normal grapevine microbiota, with environmental factors triggering them to switch from normal to pathogenic.

  When examining the fungal pathogens responsible for creating GTDs, Eskalen found that most of these pathogens produce overwintering fruiting structures containing infectious spores. These overwintering structures are found in old pruning wounds, harvesting debris, the bark surface of infected vines and other woody perennial crops such as nut and fruit trees.

  Researchers have identified more than 130 different fungal species associated with GTDs. Commonly found in both young and mature vines was Black Foot disease, and Petri disease was found predominant in young vines. Researchers found Esca (black measles), Botryosphaeria dieback, Eutypa and Phomopsis dieback in mature vines. These are called canker diseases because they cause characteristic perennial cankers in the vines. The word canker comes from the Greek word “cancer,” which describes dead tissue in living organisms. Perennial cankers cause spur, cordon, and trunk dieback, ultimately resulting in the death of the entire vine. Other significant symptoms of the presence of GTDS in vines include poor vigor, stunted shoots, leaf chlorosis and stripe, berry specks and shoot and tendril dieback.

  In analyzing the lifestyle of this disease, Eskalen said that if the infection cannot be controlled in the cordon, it’s going to move into the main trunk. Once it settles there, the trouble starts. As the main trunk is the essential part of the plant, the pathogen will move faster because more woody tissues and nutrition are in that area.

  Should the pathogen reach the graft union, then it is too late to do anything about managing GTDs. In some cases, black foot and charcoal rot diseases are caused by a soil-borne pathogen complex. Once they colonize the roots and lower level of the trunk, nothing much can be done to save the vines.

  Through Eskalen’s research at the UC Cooperative Extension Eskalen Lab, he’s discovered that pruning wounds are the primary entry point for these fungal pathogens.

  “Some of them could be entering the plant without the pruning wounds, but the major entry point is the pruning wounds because…there is no defense mechanism,” Eskalen said. As soon as the fungal spores land on the tip of the wound, sap provides enough nutrients to the fungi for them to colonize.

  Another infection method is latent infection, occurring when the fungal pathogens release from their source and land on the tissue without causing further problems until the right conditions come, such as when the vine is stressed by factors like nutrition, climate change and irrigation.

  According to Eskalen Lab’s research, conducted with California-based farmers, most spores appear to be released during precipitation events from December to February. Since this time overlaps with pruning season, there’s a window for the fruiting bodies (i.e., overwintering spore structures) to release fungal spores onto exposed pruning wounds and cause infection. Eskalen estimates that pruning wounds could be susceptible for several months and that pruning wound protection is essential in vineyards during this time.

Mitigating Grapevine Trunk Disease

  GTDs are vascular diseases, which means they can colonize the wood part of the plant. As the symptoms above are caused by mycotoxin, or toxins produced by the fungus in the vascular tissue, applying fungicide, or anything from outside, to control it will not work because these pathogens are present inside the wood.

  Pruning wound protection strategies alongside cultural practices are the best strategies to mitigate GTDs. Cultural practices focus on sanitation, including using clean material when establishing a new vineyard, removing pruned and infected material, and pruning dead shoots, spurs, and cordons below the symptomatic tissue.

  In Eskalen’s estimation, the most effective way to protect pruning wounds from airborne fungal spores of GTDs is to apply registered fungicides or biological pruning wound protectants annually. These treatments should be sprayed the same day if applying synthetic chemicals. To avoid inclement weather from washing the solution away, apply these protectants after pruning and during a dry weather window. If beneficial fungal species, known as biocontrol agents, are used, Eskalen said it could be better to have sap accumulation on the wound so they can colonize and compete with the pathogens.

  In their research, Eskalen Lab found that delayed pruning after the high disease pressure period was another option for mitigating GTD infection. Eskalen said some of the powdery mildew fungicides might control some of the GTD pathogens, but the lab doesn’t spray powdery mildew fungicides during the dormant season.

  Commercial chemical protectants shown to be effective in controlling GTDs include a combination of Rally and Topsin-M. Currently, Eskalen Labs is researching biological wound protectants that are more sustainable.

  Assessing the Economic Impact of GTDs

According to the data collected by Eskalen dating back twenty years, if a grower did not do any preventative practices for GTDs when initially planting the vines, the vineyard will start to see GTDs within the first five to 15 years. By then, the vineyard has matured, and removal becomes far more difficult than if the recommended treatments had been applied from the beginning.

  Those looking for a more in-depth analysis of the work of Eskalen Lab and the latest research on treatments for GTDs, go to https://ucanr.edu/sites/eskalenlab.

  Eskalen Lab’s website offers these suggestions for managing GTDs in the nursery and vineyard.

Preventative Management in Nursery

•   Treat pruning wounds on mother plants to prevent new infections.

•   Sanitation in mother fields and during the entire nursery process.

•   Disinfect grafting machines regularly.

•   Reduction of the cutting hydration period.

•   Apply control products (chemicals or biologicals) as a dip after grafting, before storage and/or before dispatch.

•   Hot water treatment of dormant nursery plants prior to dispatch.

Preventative Management in Vineyards

•   Use the cleanest plant material available when establish new vineyards.

•   Protection of pruning wounds with effective registered chemicals and/or biological control agents is the most effective way to prevent new infections from air-borne spores of GTD fungal pathogens. More than one application may be necessary to protect the pruning wound during its susceptible time period.

•   Minimize stress conditions on young vines after planting.

•   In applicable, In VSP systems, double pruning has shown to facilitate late pruning of large acreage vineyards and thus, reduce infection.

•   Prune dead shoots, spurs and cordons below the symptomatic tissue (at least a few inches past the last symptomatic wood).

•   Make a clean and smooth pruning cut to speed up the callusing process at the pruning wound.

•   Sanitation is very important in the vineyard. Remove pruned and infected plant materials away to prevent the development and increase of GTD fungi overwintering structures in the vineyard.

•   Remedial surgery, where visible infected parts of the vine (spurs, cordons and/or trunk) are removed, can be an effective strategy to remove the pathogen from the vine (primarily when cuts are done 7” to 10” below the visual canker tissue) and thus, prolong the lifespan of vineyards.

Preventative Management in Vineyards

•   Protect pruning wounds.

•   Use disease free, clean plant materials when establish new vineyards.

•   Apply good cultural practices to minimize stress on young and mature vines.

•   Delay dormant pruning to avoid potential pathogen dissemination during winter precipitation and to reduce the susceptibility.

•   If applicable, consider doing double pruning to reduce fungal spore infection during winter moths.

•   Prune dead shoots, spurs and cordons below the symptomatic tissue (at least a few inches below).

•   Make a clean and smooth pruning cut to speed up the callusing process at the pruning wound.

•   Remove pruned plant materials away from the vineyard to prevent fungi to form pycnidia and perithecia.