Category: Current Articles

Wine Tasting Trials

Cyndi

Testing in tens, making it easy

a women in a lab coat standing in front of a table with several beakers of fluid and a syringe

By Thomas J. Payette, Winemaking Consultant

While in the wine business struggles often start with speaking and working in the odd amounts that we often hear in conversations with other winemakers.  Trials and fining agents are riddled with unfamiliar language and terms to many winemakers.  Grams per liter, pounds per thousand gallons and milligrams per liter project off most winemaster’s tongues as if the world is in tune.  Let’s review how to make this simpler and to understand.

When?  We should perform trials anytime a question is raised about how to improve or change a wine.  If a wine has a problem – identify the solution in a laboratory first.  Then apply the desired corrective action in the cellar.

Why?  The reason we do trials is to experiment with refinement and correction of a juice or wine.  Always work in small quantities with a wine so one does not create a larger problem, in a tank, in need of potential further corrective action.  These trials can be tasted and evaluated to see what the results would or will have been if the addition were made to the actual tank or vessel of juice/wine.  This eliminates guesswork and unnecessarily “shooting from the hip.”

Where?  One should do these trials in the laboratory where control, on a small-scale amount of wine, is essential.  The opportunities of what one can discover in the lab are almost endless.  Let’s always make our mistakes on a small scale in the laboratory before stepping into the cellar for any actions that may change the flavor, aroma, or chemistry of any juice/wine.  This lab area should be designed for this feature of experimentation. The metric system will be used.  Once this is attempted, one will not step back into some of the complicated aspects or other forms of measurement.  These trials can be used for many things including but not limited to sugar additions, acid additions, fining agents, concentrates, de-acidification’s etc.

Tools Needed

•   Scales that measure in grams preferably to a tenth of a gram

•   3 – 100 milliliter graduated cylinder (plastic preferred)

•   1 – 50 milliliter graduated cylinder (plastic preferred)

•   1 – 10 milliliter pipettes (Class A volumetric)

•   2 – 5 milliliter serological pipettes (Plastic preferred)

•   Small glass beakers 250 milliliters plus or minus

•   Representative sample(s) of each wine to be sampled.

•   Clean wineglasses

•   Watch glasses (to cover each glass)

•   Spit cup

•   Other testing equipment to answer questions at hand.

•   Magnetic Stir plate with stir bars and retriever for the stir bars.

•   Sharpie™ pen or pencil for marking beakers.

•   95% ethanol to remove Sharpie™ pen marks off glassware.

How?  Start with something simple where results can be easily determined with the wineglass to give the confidence needed to build upon the procedure.  An example of this may be a tartaric addition trial for pH correction and/or palate modification.  Let’s go over one example.

1.    Start with an ample quantity of wine to work with in the lab – perhaps an 800-milliliter representative sample from a wine vessel.

2.   Weigh accurately 1.0 grams of tartaric acid and fully dissolve the acid in approximately 85 milliliters of the base wine with which you are working.

3.   Once dissolved, place the full amount into a 100-milliliter graduated cylinder or as one becomes more experienced you may just make the solution in the 100-milliliter graduated cylinder.

4.   Bring the amount up to volume in the 100-milliliter graduated cylinder up to 100 milliliters mark with additional base wine.  [One should be clear they have made a solution of 1.0-gram tartaric acid dissolved into 100 milliliters of wine.]

5.   In a clean graduated cylinder, pipette 10 milliliters of the newly prepared acid stock solution into the cylinder.  Bring to the complete 100 milliliters volume mark with the base wine.  This should represent a 1.0 gram per liter tartaric acid addition.

6    .Pipette twenty milliliters from the stock acid solution made in step four into another graduated cylinder and bring to volume at the 100-milliliter mark to represent the next addition level of 2.0 grams per liter tartaric addition.

7.   Continue to add to the number of samples you care to do the trial on in standard logical increments.

Set up the Tasting Trial

1.    Pour about 50 milliliters or a quantity one desires to smell and taste, of the base wine, into a control glass and place it in the left-hand glass in the tasting area.  (One should always taste and compare against a control)

2.   Pour the trials to be tasted, made in steps 5,6 and 7 above, in increasing increments in each wineglass progressing from left to right.  Mark their contents.

3.   Add to this flight any wines from past vintages you may want to review or any other blind samples from other producers you may care to use as a benchmark.  Mark their contents.

4.   Taste and smell each wine several times.  Go through the “flight” and detect what wine may best match or improve the desired style one is trying to achieve.

5.   Select the match and leave the room for 1 to 2 hours.

6.   Return and re-taste to confirm your decision.

  Should chemistries play a significant role in reviewing certain additions be sure to run a necessary panel of lab tests to ascertain the proper numbers are also achieved.  One may need to balance taste, flavor, and chemistry to make some tough choices.  Have all the data necessary available to make those choices.  

Calculation:  Once the fear of the metric system is overcome and confidence is achieved, the calculations become extremely simplistic.  Let’s take the above as an example.  If we dissolve 1.0 gram of tartaric acid into 100 milliliters of wine, we now have 0.1 gram of tartaric acid in every 10 milliliters of wine.  From this base if we blend 10.0 milliliters (one-tenth gram of tartaric) into 100 milliliters of fresh wine – this represents the equivalent of one gram per liter.

If we were to have used twenty milliliters that would represent two grams per liter in the small 100-milliliter blend.  If we keep track of what we are tasting or testing and selecting the trial we prefer, one can mathematically calculate how much of the given addition is needed in a tank of known quantity of juice or wine.  One can also extrapolate this out to larger volumes in the laboratory should that be desired to work beyond a 100-milliliter sample.

Spicing it up!  Once the first set of trials is mastered one may build on to the next step projecting out what one may want to do with the wine.  This could eventually, and perhaps should, be built out to treating large enough samples that one could cold, and protein stabilize the wine in the lab, filter to the projected desired micron size and taste with a panel.

Double checking the results:  From experience, one can get so creative in a lab it can be difficult to trace exactly how one arrived at a certain desired concoction.  Copious notes should be kept and most often one can trace their steps.  When in doubt; however, re-perform the steps with each addition to reestablish and confirm the same results.  This extra time is well worth performing before stepping into the cellar.

Summary:  Given time and experimentation with this system many blending trials with additions will become easy and systematic.  Trials will often take less than ten minutes to prepare, and one may taste at several points during the day or use extra time to perform lab tests to confirm desired objectives.

Other helpful tips:  Keep in mind not to over scrutinize your accuracy in the laboratory.  By this I mean make sure that if we measure something very tightly in the laboratory make sure this action will be able to be duplicated outside the lab.  It is not uncommon, early on, for winemakers to get extremely exact in the lab only to step into the cellar with sloppy control over what they had just experimented with.  Something to consider on the practical side!

  One can use other base solutes should that be desired.  It does not always have to be wine.

  This system can be used for dosage formulation for sparking wines.

  If accurate scales may be an issue the winemaker may always start by weighing larger quantities and dissolving into solution, then breaking down that solution.  Example:  If a winemaker wants a 1.0 gram per liter solution and the scales are not accurate enough to weigh one gram the winemaker may dissolve 10.0 grams into 100 milliliters and then measure out 10 milliliters of that solution and this should roughly equate to one gram.

  Make sure all solids are dissolved and dispersed equally into any solution.

  One may also be able to blend two trials in 50% to 50% solutions to get an example of a trial in the middle without having to make one up specifically to match the amount desired.

  Always remember your palate may become desensitized while tasting and step away from tasting for an hour or two and then return to taste one’s preference.  You may be shocked you had become used to certain levels because of tasting such extremes.

Dedicated to:  Chris Johnson, a long-time colleague and friend who collaborated with me many years ago.  Chris passed away in April of 2009.  He was head of all red winemaking at Kendall Jackson, and he had his own family winery label called Blair in Northern Napa Valley.

Short Course:

•   Only be as accurate as your cellar can be – but do not be sloppy.

•   Build on trials to understand the ramifications of the next step.

•   Small trials before big decisions are made.

•   Experiment – Time is the only “cost.”

References:  Verbal discussion with Mr. Jacques Boissenot, Mr. Jacques Recht, Mr. Chris Johnson and Mr. Joachim Hollerith.

The Rise of Cultural Meh

Cyndi

How brands can speak to emotionally exhausted customer

a half filled wine glass next to a half filled wine bottle on a table in front of a person standing in front of a window not in focus

By Susan DeMatei, Founder of WineGlass Marketing

 I spend an embarrassing amount of time every January reading year-end recaps, trend reports, and “culture in review” pieces. It’s part professional habit, part curiosity, part doomscrolling with a notebook. But as I started flipping through 2025 retrospectives, something felt… off.

Not alarming. Not exciting. Just oddly muted.

  Nothing was shouting. Nothing felt particularly sharp. Even the topics that usually come with big opinions seemed softened, neutralized, turned down a few notches.

  So I pulled the thread and the more I looked, the more I began noticing the same quiet signals emerging in places that had no connection to each other: design trends, language, social behavior, media content, fashion, and even travel preferences. Different industries. Different audiences. Same emotional temperature…Meh.

  Which led me to a question I couldn’t shake:  Is this increasing indecisiveness a new form of rebellion? A sign of boredom? Or are we just culturally drained in a world that requires constant outcry, conviction, and commentary?

  Because what I kept seeing wasn’t outrage or disengagement; it was something more subtle—an actual preference for neutrality, comfort, and choices that don’t demand much emotionally. Not exactly apathy, but more like strategic restraint.

  Once you start looking for it, the pattern is hard to ignore.

Cloud Dancer:  Are We So Tired We Can’t Even Pick a Color? Pantone is a worldwide authority on color that offers a standardized language through its Pantone Matching System. Since 1999, it has chosen a Color of the Year to represent the link between global culture and design trends, impacting everything from fashion to interiors to branding.

color pallette of Pantone by Cloud Dancer

  The 2026 Color of the Year is 11-4201, Cloud Dancer. Which is to say: white.

That might not sound radical until you realize it’s the first time a white shade has ever been chosen in the history of the program. Pantone’s explanation is predictably soothing — Cloud Dancer is meant to evoke calm, clarity, and quiet reflection in a “noisy world.”

  My first reaction wasn’t calm. It was: White? Really?

Are we so overwhelmed — so cautious — that we can’t even commit to a color anymore? Is white a thoughtful response to cultural overload, or a polite way of opting out altogether? A blank canvas sounds appealing in theory, but it also lacks a point of view.

  As a creative, I love color. Color has always been about mood, identity, and expression. It’s how we signal taste, emotion, and even rebellion. I’m all for generous whitespace, but choosing white as a central cultural symbol feels less like a statement and more like a pass — or perhaps a refusal to engage in the discussion at all.

  But maybe that is the point. In a world where every choice feels loaded, even color can feel like taking a side. White doesn’t Offend. It doesn’t provoke. It doesn’t require explanation. It’s safe, neutral, and comfortable. visual equivalent of saying, let’s not make this harder than it needs to be.

  Whether Cloud Dancer suggests thoughtful restraint or cultural timidity probably depends on your mood. However, it’s difficult to ignore what it communicates: a shared desire to step back, soften the edges, and avoid bold declarations — even in something as low-stakes as color.

Dictionary.com’s Word of the Year Isn’t a Word

  If Pantone’s color choice feels like a cultural sigh, Dictionary.com’s Word of the Year for 2025 feels like a shrug.

  The winning entry? “6-7.”

It’s not a real word and has no official meaning. It’s just a pair of numbers that serve more as a tone indicator—meh, so-so, middling, lukewarm—rather than language. It spread quickly on TikTok and other social platforms because it perfectly expressed a kind of emotional neutrality that many younger people already felt and were expressing without passion.

  In fact, many people searched for “what does 6-7 mean?” which reveals everything you need to know about its emotional economy.

  Think about that for a moment. A “word” that hardly means anything becomes Word of the Year because people are using it to describe how they feel about… everything.

That’s ambivalence turned into language. Not clarity. Not ardor. Just a gentle meh.

That’s not laziness, It’s emotional insolvency.

TikTok Trends: The Beige Flag Phenomenon

  If cultural ambivalence had a mascot on social media, it might be the “beige flag.” A playful counterpart to the dreaded red flag, a beige flag refers to behaviors that aren’t bad— just not exciting either. Mildly underwhelming. Emotionally neutral. Perfectly fine.

  People aren’t mocking beige flags. They’re celebrating them. The beige flag indicates low emotional tension. It’s like lukewarm coffee with a splash of oat milk — comfortable, steady, and unlikely to cause conflict or require vulnerability.

an example of TikTok's beige flag

(TikTok: cassandrapalumboo)

  But there’s another way to read it. Is beige really neutral? Or is it a softer form of resistance?

  Endless agreeableness. No strong preferences. No genuine stance. These traits avoid conflict, but they also prevent connection. Beige flags can feel safe — but they can also be quietly passive-aggressive in their refusal to show they care loudly about anything at all. It’s passive disengagement. Saying whatever works and meaning I’m not invested enough to be bothered.

  What makes this interesting is that it’s not just about dating culture. It’s about how we’re learning to manage intensity. In a culture that values calm, likability, and low drama, beige becomes socially acceptable armor. Emotional neutrality isn’t just tolerated — it’s becoming a coping strategy. One that helps people stay present without revealing too much.

  Why We Keep Tuning into The Office

  Have you noticed how many channels now air years of the same TV shows back-to-back? Full start-to-finish rewinds. Not nostalgia nights — just entire eras on repeat.

  Streaming platforms are experiencing a strong comeback of older TV shows and classic content, with much of the viewing time spent rewatching familiar favorites or discovering them for the first time. According to NRG’s syndicated Future of Series research, nearly 60% of total TV viewing on streaming services is dedicated to older content — shows people already recognize.

a chart showing content that streamers are most typically in the mood for

  Despite countless new choices, viewers opt for what feels familiar. There are a few reasons for this. Familiar shows are easy. They lower anxiety. They require less mental effort. You know who will disappoint you. You know who will redeem themselves. You know what happens with Ross and Rachel — and that’s part of the appeal.

  Nostalgia plays a role, but this isn’t just a phenomenon limited to Gen X or Millennials. Gen Z also has a strong interest in “older” content — especially shows from the 2010s that already feel safe, familiar, and emotionally accessible.

  There’s also a practical reason: older series are complete, with multiple seasons. No waiting, no cliffhanger anxiety. They’re perfect for binge-watching, half-watching, or playing quietly in the background while life goes on.

  Psychologists highlight another aspect: familiar shows serve as emotional comfort food. They ease cognitive load, calm stress, and offer predictable emotional rhythms that new content can’t provide. You’re not watching to be surprised. You’re watching to feel in control.

  This isn’t about avoiding risk; it’s about managing it.

It’s easier to rewatch a favorite sitcom than to commit to a prestige drama that demands attention, interpretation, and emotional stamina. Comfort viewing isn’t laziness — it’s efficiency. Cultural self-care. Emotional cost-cutting.

So What Does All This Add Up To?

  What this truly highlights is that ambivalence isn’t unintentional — it’s adaptive.

  People aren’t disengaging because they don’t care. They’re disengaging because caring too much, too often, is draining. Whether it’s choosing white as a color, using “6-7” to describe how you feel, embracing beige flags, or looping the same TV shows on repeat, the impulse is the same: to minimize emotional risk while staying connected.

Ambivalence, in this context, isn’t indifference. It’s preservation.

  Once you view it as a coping mechanism instead of a flaw, the pattern stops seeming passive and begins to appear deliberate.

So What Does This Mean for Marketers?

  For years, the common wisdom — and I’ve promoted this too — was that transparency, bold positioning, and value-driven storytelling were the way to go. People connect with people, not products. They want brands with values that feel authentic.

  That part is still tru. What’s changed is how those values land.

  We’re no longer in a moment where louder is better. Today:

•     Too much intensity feels overwhelming

•     Too many choices breed skepticism

•     Forced conviction triggers suspicion

  Consumers aren’t asking brands to go silent. They’re asking them to be clear without drama, specific without agitation, human without theatrics. They don’t want to be convinced. They want to be understood.

  That means embracing clarity and consistency. Making life simpler, not more difficult. Not dull — confidently straightforward.

  Here’s what that can look like:

•     Saying “here’s what we do and why,” without a manifesto

•     Offering quality and transparency, without hyperbole

•     Respecting time and attention instead of demanding emotional labor

  In a culture where ambivalence signals strength — not failure — brands that embrace intentional simplicity may connect more deeply than those pursuing loud differentiation.

  Here’s the question this cultural moment forces us to ask:

•     Are we too indifferent to care passionately anymore?

•     Or have we just become more selective with our emotional investments?

  I lean toward the latter.

Maybe ambivalence isn’t retreat. Maybe it’s reallocation — of attention, energy, and engagement — toward what truly matters, in ways that don’t demand constant volume.

•    Pantone provided us with a blank canvas.

•    Dictionary.com responded with a shrug.

•    TikTok offered us neutral flags.

•    And our viewing habits brought us comfort.

  These aren’t signs of collapse. They’re signs of selective engagement.

And that’s worth paying attention to.

  Susan DeMatei founded WineGlass Marketing, the largest full-service, award-winning marketing firm focused on the wine industry. She is a certified Sommelier and Specialist in Wine, with degrees in Viticulture and Communications, an instructor at Napa Valley Community College, and is currently collaborating on two textbooks. Now in its 13th year, her agency offers domestic and international wineries assistance with all areas of strategy and execution. WineGlass Marketing is located in Napa, California, and can be reached at707-927-3334 or wineglassmarketing.com.

When Correcting Vineyard Soils Costs Too Much

Cyndi

Making strategic decisions about building soil fertility.

a man tilling the soil in the middle of a grape vineyard surrounded by mature vines

By Neal Kinsey, Kinsey Agricultural Services

What good is a soil test if it costs too much to follow the advice given? Many growers express concern about the expense involved in meeting fertilizer requirements, even when they recognize the importance of following recommended guidelines. Once it can be determined that the soil analysis accurately reflects the fertility of the area being evaluated, those results should then be used as a tool to help clarify what needs to be done based on the needs and goals for that specific vineyard.  Without understanding what is desired or expected by the grower, the best economic approach may not align with the recommendations that are offered.

  It is crucial to tailor the recommendations to the grower’s specific expectations and objectives. Too many soil samples are taken in a hurry, sent in a hurry and results are expected “in a hurry” as well. Consequently, valuable information that could be most helpful for recommending the best program to the grower may not have even been the most affordable proposal.

  Most soil laboratories provide a worksheet to be filled out as completely as possible by those sending samples for analysis and recommendations. Use of that information helps to make the best recommendations and to minimize delays in getting the results back in the shortest possible time.

  Worksheets sent along with samples for testing should include options for different recommendation programs: Excellent, Building, Maintenance, and Minimum. If no preference is given, the default is usually for the Excellent program. Many growers choose the Excellent program, sometimes by default, until they realize the associated costs— too much, even when such a program helps produce better quality or higher yields.  Rebuilding soil fertility can be costly, especially where crops have been produced there repeatedly without adequately replacing essential nutrients that have been removed.

  When growing grapes for years on the same land, without replacing what is taken out year by year, failure to replenish critical nutrients helps make restoring the lack of minerals for the highest levels of soil nutrition for grapes an expensive process. It is important to consider how long it has been since key nutrients, such as sulfur and micronutrients, have been adequately applied.  Large numbers of vineyard soils sampled throughout the world still show to be sorely lacking in vital minerals. Even soils that have received manure or compost and “token amounts” of various trace elements in purchased fertilizers for years often still fit into this category.

  Limited funds do not mean there are no viable approaches based on soil test needs? The question becomes which needs will deliver the greatest advantage for producing the best crop? While most growers aim for excellent soil conditions for growing their grapes, the costs of catching up after years of constant removal can be significant.

  This financial challenge often leads those who make the final decisions to consider minimum programs for vineyard fertility. However, minimum programs should only be considered when there is absolutely no other choice, and even then, keeping in mind that such means should only be considered as a very temporary solution. Using this type of program risks depleting nutrients that are currently sufficient which can seriously impact the condition of future crops depending on whether soil levels at the time these measures are initially instituted are poor, or good, or merely adequate.

  To be sure such measures are not a mistake, consider one other question.  How qualified is the person who makes such a decision?  Is it based on the ability to distinguish between which soils perform the best, those that perform well or the problem areas?  And can that be determined just by observing the test results without knowing where they were taken?  If not, then are they qualified as decision makers to decide what will and will not hurt each of those soils and the grapes to be grown there?

  There are yet additional choices that can be made when it costs too much to achieve an excellent soil fertility level in the shortest period for the needs of each vineyard.  For most vineyards, the fertilizer budget does not cover all that is needed to bring every one of the nutrients back in line at once.  When such may be the case, prioritizing which nutrients will provide the most benefit based on overall needs helps maximize results for the money being spent.  This enables the grower to go down the list and put the money where it will provide the most benefit.

  When funds are limited to such an extent that a grower cannot afford to follow the complete program, then spend the available budget where it will make the most difference for the grapes being grown there. In other words, request excellent soil fertility recommendations in at least one area of your property so you can see the difference in production and quality.  This will help create more profit by investing back into one of the most important resources you have: your soil.

  The better vineyards will generally need far less in terms of nutrients to reach excellent condition while the poorer producing vineyards can be quite expensive to get to that higher level of performance. If  vineyards are rated based on performance using a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the best, generally the return on investment will tend to be better on the “8” field than on the “3” field.

  Once confidence in the program has been built and proven to be worthwhile on a smaller portion of land, there is another option that some grape growers choose regarding achieving optimum performance from each field.  Instead of excellent, in the beginning check the box for the soil building program and ask that all nutrients be prioritized according to the fertility needs of the crop to be grown there.  First spend the allocated fertilizer budget on priority #1, then go to #2 and so on until the budgeted amount for that field is used up.  In this way, to the extent that “soil feeder” types of fertilizers can be applied to build fertility instead of fertilizers that are “plant feeders” used to supply the same nutrients year after year, the soil can be improved and the priorities adjusted as progress is made.  This allows spending the budgeted amount for fertility every year but putting that money where it will make the most difference for fertility and consequently the production improvements in each field.

  Growers often want to experiment with several types of soil building practices to determine which yields the best results for their operation. Some prefer using soil amendments as the preferred route, while others believe that cover crops or grazing livestock sufficiently improves soil fertility for vineyards.

  Each operation is unique, so it may be most beneficial to consult knowledgeable consultants and educators, as well as observe what other producers are doing, to gain insight into what might work better for each operation. 

  Based on fifty years of working with soil fertility on vineyard soils, our experience has been that on average to poor soils it can require decades to build up soils growing cover crops or grazing livestock.  Both are beneficial for specific purposes, but to restore needed fertility, use of mineral rich fertilizers and soil amendments take at most only a few years to accomplish the needed changes.

More on that subject next time.

  To learn more about the types of soil recommendations that Kinsey Agricultural Services provides, contact Neal at neal@kinseyag.com.

Wine & Hospitality

Cyndi

The last bastion of human connection in an AI-driven world

a man and a women sitting at a table next to a vineyard while a woman pours wine into their glasses

By Cory Krejcik, Founder of Thirsty Bandit

In a culture increasingly shaped by screens, algorithms, and artificial intelligence, wine and hospitality may represent one of the last places where people still gather, slow down, and remember what it feels like to be human together.

  We are living in the most technologically connected era in human history, and paradoxically, one of the most socially disconnected. Our interactions increasingly pass through screens. Meetings happen on video calls. Friendships live inside text threads. Entertainment streams on every device. Meals are ordered through apps, dropped at the door, and eaten in front of laptops. Even leisure time is optimized for efficiency.

  Convenience has never been greater. Yet loneliness continues to rise across nearly every demographic group, and public health experts now describe social isolation as one of the defining challenges of modern life. According to recent data from AARP and Cigna, roughly 40 percent of Americans over 45 report feeling lonely, while younger adults, particularly Gen Z, report some of the highest levels of loneliness of any generation, showing that social disconnection spans every age group.

  Against this backdrop, cafés, wine bars, pubs, restaurants, tasting rooms, and neighborhood gathering places take on renewed importance. They remain some of the last public spaces where people still encounter one another organically, where conversation unfolds without an algorithm shaping it, and where shared experiences happen in real time.

  For those of us in wine and hospitality, this moment feels both familiar and urgent. Because what we steward every day is not simply product or service. It’s critical human connection.

What AI Can (And Cannot) Replace

  Artificial intelligence is rapidly reshaping nearly every industry, including ours. It can generate tasting notes, forecast sales, streamline purchasing, personalize marketing, and recommend wines with startling accuracy. It can optimize menus, automate reservations, and predict guest behavior. However, it cannot read the subtle energy shift in a room celebrating good news. It cannot sense when a guest wants guidance versus quiet. It cannot recreate the comfort of being welcomed by someone who genuinely remembers your last visit or your favorite bottle.

  Hospitality thrives on qualities technology struggles to reproduce: the human touch that turns service into care, emotional intelligence that guides interactions naturally, and presence that allows guests to feel seen rather than processed. Technology can make us more efficient behind the scenes, but the reason people return again and again remains deeply human.

How Gathering Spaces Strengthen Community

  In early January this year, Dr. Mehmet Oz described alcohol as a “social lubricant that brings people together,” pointing to the ways shared social experiences can support emotional well-being when enjoyed responsibly.

  The remark sparked debate, but it underscored a long-standing truth: humans have always gathered around shared food and drink. Wine, in particular, encourages conversation and lingering. The 750ml bottle is a universally sharable format meant to be opened, poured, discussed, and passed around the table. Stories emerge. Conversations lengthen. Time slows.

  Furthermore, hospitality spaces have historically served as community living rooms. Local pubs, enotecas, and cafés have historically served as sacred places where neighbors meet, friendships deepen, business relationships form, and milestones are celebrated. They are where newcomers feel welcomed and regulars feel known. In an era increasingly marked by digital isolation, these physical gathering spaces reinforce the everyday social ties that hold communities together. They offer neutral ground where people from different walks of life can still share a table and, if only for a moment, feel part of something collective.

Emotional Connection as Competitive Advantage

  As technology commoditizes knowledge and routine service interactions, emotional connection becomes hospitality’s true competitive advantage. No app replicates the feeling of walking into a place where someone greets you by name. No algorithm recreates the comfort of a familiar table after a long week. In a future increasingly mediated by AI, these human advantages only grow more valuable. Hospitality’s power lies not just in feeding or serving people, but in creating spaces where people feel connected again.

  Industry leaders now carry responsibilities that extend beyond operations and profitability. We are not simply operators, beverage directors, sommeliers, or restaurateurs. We are culture carriers. Hiring practices, training philosophies, lighting, pacing, music, and room design all influence whether spaces encourage people to linger, converse, and belong, or simply move through as transactions. Every operational decision shapes the emotional temperature of a room.

  The question facing hospitality leaders is increasingly clear: are we building businesses optimized purely for efficiency, or spaces designed for connection? The future of wine and hospitality may depend on how we answer.

Action Items:

Reigniting Social Connection Over a Glass of Wine

  Here are practical steps wine and hospitality leaders can take to reinforce social connection in their spaces:

1. Redefine Success Metrics:  Shift from purely operational metrics (turn times, covers per hour) to connection-oriented ones.

•     Guest feedback on feeling welcomed and heard

•     Return visits for conversation, not just consumption

•     Word-of-mouth referrals rooted in experience

2. Train Teams for Emotional Intelligence: Invest in training programs that go beyond service technique.

• Active listening skills

• Reading room energy

• Recognizing moments for genuine human engagement

  Your team should be incentivized not just to serve, but to connect.

3. Curate Shared Experiences:  Design programs that encourage group exploration and story-sharing.

•     Guided tasting flights with shared narrative arcs (regions, themes, stories)

•     Winemaker dinners emphasizing conversation

•     Community-focused events that spotlight local producers

  These experiences make people feel part of something larger.

4. Create Intentional Spaces for Interaction:

  Spatial design matters.

•     Communal tables

•     Intimate seating nooks

•     Fireplaces or shared counters

•     Low-pressure tasting salons

  Make layouts that invite conversation, not isolation.

5. Champion Local Wine Culture:  Celebrate the stories of the people behind the bottles.

•     Bring in local winemakers for tastings

•     Host producer Q&As

•     Feature regional pairings that tie to community identity

  This reinforces that wine is of a place, not just in a place.

A Human-First Future

  AI will undoubtedly shape the future of hospitality, helping operators run smarter, leaner, and more efficiently behind the scenes. But what happens across the bar, at the table, and inside the room must remain unapologetically human.

  Wine and hospitality continue to remind people what it feels like to slow down, engage their senses, and connect without a screen between them. They offer places where strangers become regulars, neighbors become friends, and ordinary evenings become lasting memories. In a culture defined by speed and digital convenience, the simple act of sharing a glass of wine with others becomes quietly radical.

  The opportunity (and responsibility) for wine and hospitality leaders is to protect and amplify these experiences. To design spaces where people linger. To empower teams to engage authentically. To create environments where guests feel welcomed not as transactions, but as participants in something communal.

  In a digital-first world, wine-led hospitality remains proudly human-first. And as technology continues to reshape how we live and work, the places that help us reconnect with one another may become the most valuable spaces of all, not just commercially, but culturally and socially. The future of hospitality, at its best, is not simply about serving food and wine. It is about reminding people, again and again, how good it feels to be together.

  Corey Krejcik is the founder of Thirsty Bandit, providing strategic marketing, brand development, and revenue optimization for hospitality and wine brands. With over 20 years of executive leadership experience, he believes the best outcomes are found at the intersection of strategy, adaptability, and identity. Outside of work, he enjoys cooking, running, home renovation projects, and spending time with his wife and two teenage children in Malvern, PA.

Certificates of Label Approval for Wines

Cyndi

A few tips and label basics

wine bottle laying on top of legal agreements with a large approved stamped on the wine lable

By Brad Berkman & Louis J. Terminello of Greenspoon Marder LLP

Virtually every wine that it makes to the shelf of a US wine shop has had its label reviewed by the Alcohol and Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) of the U.S. Government. After a review and compliance is found, a Certificate of Label Approval is issued, commonly known by its acronym, COLA (Wines below 7% a/b/v do not need label approval, but the labels must comply with FDA requirements).

  COLAs do not grant the holder any legal ownership rights but rather indicate that the wine meets all federal labeling regulations with the ultimate goals of ensuring that labels do not contain any misleading, deceptive or inaccurate statements, they properly identify product identity. and contain the ubiquitous “health warning” statement a/k/a the “GOVERNMENT WARNING.” Importantly, COLA’s travel under the permittee, not by brand. This means that each producer or importer must hold the COLA under its TTB permit, regardless of whether the product was previously issued a COLA.

Label Basics

  Labels must have certain required information under the law. This is referred to as “mandatory” information. All other information, absent a mandated exclusion, is generally referred to as voluntary information, which the producer may wish to include on its label.

Mandatory Information-Required Information:

The following must be placed on the label(s):

•     Brand name and class/type designation.

•     Alcohol content.

•     Net contents statement

•     Producer’s name and address.

•     Government health warnings.

•     Country of origin (for imports).

•     Sulfite declaration (for most wines).

•     Appellation of Origin

  An appellation of origin is not always needed on all wine labels, but it must be stated when the following is on the label:

•     A vintage date

•     A varietal designation.

•     A type designation of a varietal.

•     A semi-generic designation.

•     An “estate-bottled” claim.

  It should also be noted that each piece of information be placed on the appropriate label as required by the law. Some information is placed on the back label, while other information may be on the brand label.

wine bottle laying on its side clearly showing it's front label

Notes on Stating Varietal:

Only grape varietals approved by TTB can be used. The list of grape variety names and their synonyms, approved for use, can be found in subpart J in 27 CFR 4 (Code of Federal Regulations).

  Another important point worth noting is the 75% rule. If the varietal is stated on the label, with certain exceptions, 75 percent or more of the wine must be made from the named grape variety. Also, the entire 75 percent of the grape variety must have been grown in the labeled appellation of origin.

  Producers and importers may use multiple grape varietal names on the label. When this is the case, all the grapes used to make the wine must be on the label, and the percentage of the wine derived from each grape is shown on the label as well, with certain tolerances permitted (2%).

Nutritional Information-Is it Required?  For now, nutrient information may be placed on a wine label, but it is not mandatory. The reader should be aware that there are two TTB proposed rules open for public comment. One rule requires the disclosure of per-serving alcohol, calorie, and nutrient content information in an “Alcohol Facts” statement on all alcohol beverage labels. The other requires a labeling disclosure of all major food allergens used in the production of alcoholic beverages, such as milk, eggs, fish, crustaceans’ shellfish, tree nuts, wheat, peanuts, soybeans, and sesame, as well as ingredients that contain protein derived from the aforementioned foods.

  If nutrient information is voluntarily placed on the label (as well as advertising materials), specific requirements apply.  Only calories, fat, carbohydrates, and protein may be included, and according to a TTB webpage, they must be stated in the following manner:

•     Calories: A statement of the caloric content per serving must be expressed to the nearest calorie, except that amounts less than 5 calories may be stated as zero.

•     Fat: A statement of the number of grams of total fat in a serving must be expressed to the nearest 0.5 (1/2) gram increment below 5 grams and to the nearest gram increment above 5 grams. If the serving contains less than 0.5 grams, the content may be expressed as zero.

•     Carbohydrates: A statement of the number of grams of total carbohydrates in a serving must be expressed to the nearest tenth of a gram, except that if a serving contains less than 1 gram, the statement “Contains less than 1 gram” or “less than 1 gram” may be used as an alternative, or if the serving contains less than 0.5 gram, the content may be expressed as zero.

•     Protein: A statement of the number of grams of protein in a serving must be expressed to the nearest tenth of a gram, except that if a serving contains less than 1 gram, the statement “Contains less than 1 gram” or “less than 1 gram” may be used as an alternative, and if the serving contains less than 0.5 gram, the content may be expressed as zero.

  According to TTB ruling 2013-2, Serving Facts statement appearing on a label or an advertisement may be stated per container size if the container is equal to or less than a single serving size. Serving Facts statement may be presented in dual-column format, which provides information both per serving size and per container size. The per serving size requirement is- a single serving is 12 fl. oz. for malt beverages; 5 fl. oz. for wine; and 1.5 fl. oz. for distilled spirits.

The European

Approach-Mandatory Since 2023

  As a point of comparison, wines sold in the European Union, since 2023, must provide consumers with detailed nutritional and ingredient information.

  The stated goal is to offer consumers clear information regarding the wine they are consuming. Interestingly, the regulations allow for QR codes to be placed on wine labels that take the consumer to a website where all the nutritional values can be found. Alcohol content, allergens, and nutritional values must be placed on the label.

Blanc Du Bois in Texas

Cyndi

Disease-tolerant grapes have been enthusiastically embraced by Texas wineries

close up of blanc du bois grapes in a vineyard

By Danny Hillin, Justin Scheiner, Ph.D., and Michael Cook

Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service

It’s not often that a new grape variety is developed, and it’s even rarer that a new grape becomes widely adopted in the wine industry. In order for a new grape variety to succeed, it must first prove to be durable and productive in the vineyard, qualities that are absolutely essential for growers. Equally important, the grape must produce wine of acceptable, and ideally exceptional, quality. Yet, even if a grape excels in both these areas, the largest hurdle is consumer acceptance and market demand. In Texas, however, Blanc Du Bois has managed to overcome these obstacles, establishing itself as a stand-out example of a success story of a relatively new hybrid grape.

  For those unfamiliar, Blanc Du Bois is an interspecific hybrid white wine grape whose most important characteristic is its tolerance to Pierce’s Disease. Blanc Du Bois was developed by the University of Florida grape breeder, Dr. John Mortenson, specifically as a Pierce’s Disease-tolerant wine grape capable of thriving in Florida’s humid and disease-prone climate. Interestingly, Blanc Du Bois has proven to be even better suited to the Texas Gulf Coast, where the humidity and rainfall are typically more moderate than in Florida, creating an ideal environment for this resilient grape.

  Where Blanc Du Bois truly shines among Pierce’s Disease-tolerant grapes is in wine quality, a key reason it has been enthusiastically embraced by a growing number of Texas wineries. Blanc Du Bois wines have aromatic flavors characterized by citrus, grapefruit, floral, and spicy notes. The ripe grapes also offer a pleasantly flavorful snack for harvest crews. While most wineries use Blanc Du Bois to produce table wines, sparkling wines made from Blanc Du Bois have surged in recent years. The grape’s relatively low soluble solids at ripeness (usually 16–21%) make it particularly well-suited for sparkling wines as well as lower-alcohol still wines. One of the most celebrated Blanc Du Bois wines is Haak Winery’s Blanc Du Bois Madeira, which has garnered just about every award out there.

  Blanc Du Bois is impressively versatile in the winery, and recent research at Texas A&M University suggests that Blanc Du Bois wines can have a very high antioxidant capacity. This may help explain why its aromatics can remain vibrant in the bottle for several years. Another clear marker of Blanc Du Bois’s rise in reputation is the increasing number of wineries now producing and labeling varietal Blanc Du Bois wines, reflecting industry-wide recognition of its quality.

  In the vineyard, Blanc Du Bois is certainly not without challenges, but ongoing research and grower experience in Texas have paved the way for continued improvements in production. The most persistent issues faced by Texas producers are downy mildew (Plasmopara viticola) and bunch rots. Although Blanc Du Bois is also susceptible to several other fungal diseases, these two are especially troublesome in wetter regions or during particularly rainy years. Along the Texas Gulf Coast, this typically translates into eight to twelve protectant spray applications per season, with higher numbers required in areas with more rainfall and longer frost-free periods.

  Blanc Du Bois ripens as early as late May in the southernmost reaches of Texas, up to July in the northern Gulf Coast and North Texas, approximately 115–125 days from bud break to harvest. This gives vineyards in far south Texas a longer post-harvest season than the pre-harvest growth period. At Texas A&M, researchers have successfully double-cropped Blanc Du Bois on an experimental basis in this region suggesting a potential to produce two crops each year there. Although Blanc Du Bois tends to break bud early, making it vulnerable to late spring frosts, it fortunately produces relatively fruitful secondary buds.

close up showing one large bunch of blanc du bois grapes hanging on the vine

  Managing the high vigor of Blanc Du Bois has led to innovative solutions in Texas. The Watson Training System, developed by Jerry Watson, the state’s longest-standing Blanc Du Bois grower, is a high-wire, horizontally divided canopy system featuring 48-inch cross arms and two pairs of rake wires to keep shoots in position. Although this system demands extensive canopy management, the payoff can be worthwhile for small vineyards: higher yields and better air circulation within the fruiting zone compared to single-canopy systems. Several publications from Texas A&M University and the University of Georgia describe this system and provide comparative data for its performance.

  Blanc Du Bois is most often grown as own-rooted or ungrafted vines, but when soil pH is above 7.0, alkaline tolerant rootstocks are generally recommended to mitigate nutrient deficiencies. This represents many areas of Texas and fortunately grafted vines are available from several nurseries.

  With good vineyard management Blanc Du Bois routinely yields around two to five tons per acre. However, growers in Texas commonly report poor fruit set, although the cause remains unclear. The Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service has tested various canopy management strategies and prebloom zinc applications to improve fruit set, though results have been mixed. It is possible that observed fruit set issues are related to virus infections and excessive vine vigor, both of which commonly occur. Fortunately, Foundation Plant Services at UC Davis maintains clean Blanc Du Bois plant material to supply nurseries.

  Over the past four decades since Blanc Du Bois was released, Texas grape growers and winemakers have built up a wealth of knowledge and practical experience with this variety. Fortunately, that expertise has been captured in a comprehensive new book scheduled for publication later this year: A Compendium of the Blanc Du Bois Grape, from Texas A&M University Press. The authors, Fran Pontasch, Justin Scheiner, and Russ Kane have chronicled the extensive experiences of Texas Blanc Du Bois growers and winemakers, along with numerous applied research studies focused on improving Blanc Du Bois production. Fran Pontasch, the principal author, and co-author Dr. Justin Scheiner are viticulturists with a combined 27 years of hands-on experience in Texas vineyards. Dr. Russ Kane is a technical researcher and writer, author of The Wineslinger Chronicles: Texas on the Vine and Texas Hill Country Wineries. He also pens the long-running wine blog VintageTexas.com and recently launched BlancDuBois.com, further connecting Blanc Du Bois enthusiasts.

  The success of Blanc Du Bois in Texas represents the combined work and dedication of grape and wine producers and as the industry continues to expand and diversify, it will remain as an important testament of success for the Gulf Coast.

What is Subsidized Crop Insurance?

Cyndi

How does it work & are there differences between providers

six people around a table with a laptop and a booth called Vineyard Crop Insurance in a vineyard

By Trevor Troyer, Agricultural Risk Management

The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) was created in 1938. When coverage began, it was limited to major crops. It was essentially an experiment at that time, until the passage of the Federal Crop Insurance Act in 1980. The 1980 Act expanded the number of crops insured and the locations in the United States. In 1996 the USDA Risk Management Agency (RMA) was created.  The USDA RMA’s purpose was to administer the Federal Crop Insurance programs and other risk management related programs.

  Perennials are quite different from traditional row crops or other vegetable crops.  But a lot of the risks are very much the same.  Drought, freeze, wildlife damage, fire/smoke, and the list of perils goes on. From what we see the risks are more with perennials.  It doesn’t matter if it’s an apple orchard, avocado grove or vineyard, your investment is subject to the elements all year round. You don’t have time to wait till the weather gets better to plant your crop. Things may happen after you harvest that might affect the following year’s crop production. 

  Grape Crop Insurance goes back to 1998; the current policy was written in 2010. Crop insurance is a partnership with authorized Insurance companies and the FCIC. Crop insurance is partially subsidized through the USDA. Currently there are 13 Approved Insurance Providers (AIPs) authorized to administer crop insurance policies reporting to the USDA RMA. Prices and premiums are set by the USDA Risk Management Agency per crop, state, and county. There is no price/premium competition from one company to the next because of this. Independent insurance agencies sell for these 13 different insurance providers.

  Grape crop insurance is available in the following states: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Virginia, and Washington. Starting in 2026 grape crop insurance is now available in Dona Ana County in New Mexico. 

Crop insurance is not available for grapes in all counties though. Insurable varieties are also different between states and counties. As mentioned before prices are different between states and counties as well. The USDA price for a ton of Cabernet Franc in Napa County California is different than a ton of Cabernet Franc in Seneca County New York.

map of states that have grape crop insurance and the sigh-up deadlines
Map of states that have grape crop insurance and the sigh-up deadlines

  Grapes are insured under an Actual Production History (APH) plan of insurance. An average of the vineyard’s production per variety is used. Grapes need to be in their 4th growing season to be insurable. A minimum of 4 years is needed to do the average, if the grapes have just become insurable then a Transitional Yield (based on the county and variety) is used in place of any missing years. A maximum of 10 years can be used to determine the average if the vineyard has been in production for that amount of time. Basically, you are insuring an average of your tons per acre per variety.

  With crop insurance you cannot cover 100% of your average production. You can choose coverage levels from 50% to 85%. There is a built-in production deductible. Coverage levels are in 5% increments. Coverage levels are relative to premium, the lower the coverage the lower the premium, the more coverage you buy the higher the premium. It comes back to how much risk you feel safe with. For example, if you have Cabernet Sauvignon and your average is 5 tons per acre. At the 75% coverage level you would be covered for 3.75 tons per acre. You would have a 25% deductible (1.25 tons per acre). To have a payable loss you would have to lose more than 25% of your average production in a year.

  Crop insurance is designed to help a grower have enough money to be able to produce a crop the following year.  I have had winery owners complain to me that it doesn’t cover the cost of how much their wine is worth.  While I can totally understand this, it is the growing costs that are being insured against loss. Crop insurance does not cover the production costs of making wine or juice etc.  What is being covered with grape crop insurance is the price per ton of a specific variety as if you were to sell it.   Only the Causes of Loss that are listed in the policy are being insured against.  You can have an insurable cause reduce the value of your grapes (reduced brix, smoke taint etc.)  and be paid a claim based on the set county price and the difference in the dollar amount received.

  Here are the Causes of Loss for Grapes from the National Fact Sheet from the USDA:

Causes of Loss

  You are protected against the following:

•    Adverse weather conditions, including natural perils such as hail, frost, freeze, wind, drought, and excess precipitation;

•    Earthquake;

•    Failure of the irrigation water supply, if caused by an insured peril during the insurance period;

•    Fire;

•    Insects and plant disease, except for insufficient or improper application of pest or disease control measures;

•    Wildlife; or

•    Volcanic eruption.

  Additionally, we will not insure against:

•     Phylloxera, regardless of cause; or

•     Inability to market the grapes for any reason other than actual physical damage for an insurable cause of loss.

  Crop insurance is partially subsidized through the USDA. Premiums are subsidized from 100% at Catastrophic Coverage (there is an administrative fee though) to 41% depending on coverage level chosen.  A lot of growers “buy-up” coverage from 65% to 80% and their premium subsidy is around 50% to 60%. The subsidy makes crop insurance an affordable risk mitigation tool. 

  Hopefully, you don’t have a lot of situations where you would have a loss.  But as a grower you need to assess your risks.  These must be taken into consideration for the growing region your vineyard is located in. Here are some other questions to ask yourself.  What are your break-even costs?  Do you know your cost of production with projected inflation? Have you evaluated the risk of a severe crop loss? What varieties are planted in your vineyard?  Some types of Vitis vinifera are more susceptible to weather issues than others. Are you able to repay current operating loans without crop insurance in the event of a loss?

  Our job as a crop insurance agent or crop insurance agency is not to convince you that you need crop insurance.  It is to help you make an educated decision, based on your risks, on whether you need crop insurance.  And then, if it is a good fit to mitigate your risks, to determine how much coverage is needed.  No one wants to have a loss, but they do unfortunately happen.

Vineyard Health

Cyndi

Grapevine virus diseases that are best detected in the spring

Typical foiliar symptom of Grapevine fanleaf virus in a California Vineyard
Typical foliar symptom of Grapevine fanleaf virus in a California Vineyard

By Judit Monis, Ph.D., Vineyard and Plant Health Consultant

One of the most important factors to take into consideration when establishing a new vineyard is the health status of the planting material.  The most common way to transmit and perpetrate grapevine diseases caused by viruses is by making multiple cuttings of one infected vine. 

  The detection and diagnostics of important pathogens affecting grapevines is seasonal and their concentration varies throughout the year. This article will describe important grapevine diseases caused by viruses that are more effectively detected in the laboratory in the spring.  In addition, the viruses described in this article are transmitted by nematodes.  Therefore, overall sanitation and good cultural practices are needed to maintain a healthy and productive vineyard. 

Grapevine Viral Decline & Degeneration

  Viral diseases are normally have named based on the crop they infect, and the symptoms observed in diseased plants.  However, with a deeper characterization of the different pathogens (disease causal agents) that infect grapevines it has been possible to determine that many different viruses (bacteria or fungi) can cause similar symptoms. 

  In this article I will  only focus on the description of viruses associated with grapevine decline and degeneration diseases.  The viruses causing decline are closely related and grouped in the genus “Nepovirus “ because  they are transmitted by nematodes (ne) and have a polyhedral (po) shape.  The most important viruses reported in the United States are Grapevine fanleaf, Arabis mosaic, Tobacco ringspot and Tomato ring spot. 

  Other viruses that are less prevalent in the USA include the European Nepoviruses: Raspberry ringspot, Peach rosette, and Tomato black ring viruses.  All these viruses, regardless of their names, can cause significant economic loss in the vineyard and must be kept out of propagation and planting material.

Fanleaf Disease

Typical foliar symptom of Grapevine Fanleaf virus in a California vineyard
Typical foliar symptom of Grapevine Fanleaf virus in a California vineyard

  Fanleaf disease, caused by Grapevine fanleaf virus (GFLV), is one the most serious and devastating grapevine viral diseases. Most grape varieties are susceptible and display rapid decline, sparce, and low quality of fruit.  Affected vines are smaller than healthy vines. Up to 80% of yield loss can be expected in severe infections.  Furthermore, the life span of the vineyard is decreased considerably in infected vines.  Foliar symptoms included misshapen leaves with the appearance of an open fan (thus the name fanleaf). Other visible vine symptoms include yellowing (chlorosis, mosaic), bright yellow bands near veins (vein banding), abnormal branching, and short internodes.   Vines affected by fanleaf disease have poor fruit set and the fruit ripens irregularly.  Grapevine fanleaf virus is transmitted by the dagger nematode Xiphinema index. The disease is found in all areas where Vitis vinifera and American hybrid rootstocks are grown.

Arabis Mosaic Decline

  Symptoms associated with Arabis mosaic virus (ArMV) are similar to fanleaf decline and include leaf chlorosis, necrosis, and distortion, shortened internodes, reduced growth, and overall decline.  The virus infects many hosts and has worldwide distribution.  Although this virus has been reported in different areas in North America there is no evidence of spread.  In USA, ArMV has been found in Missouri Vineyards.  The virus is transmitted by several nematode vectors, but the principal natural vector is Xiphinema diversicaudatum.  In French vineyards it is common to find mixed infections of ArMV and GFLV, causing a disease known as court-noué.  Due to the soil movement of the viruses by their nematode vectors, the infected areas are seen as yellow patches that increase in size as the nematodes continue to spread the disease from vine to vine.

Yellow Vein Disease

  Yellow vein disease, caused by Tomato ring spot virus (ToRSV) -also known as Tomato ring spot decline and Tomato ring spot disease.  Symptoms vary but are most drastic in cold climates. Foliar symptoms include leaf distortion, mottling, and reduced leaf size.  Affected vines are stunted, have increased susceptibility to cold damage, and display small grape clusters.  Typical yellow vein symptoms are rarely found in in California. However, this disease is endemic in the northeastern U.S. and Canada. Tomato ring spot virus is transmitted by several nematode species, but Xiphinema americanum is the main natural vector.

Tobacco Ring Spot Decline

  Tobacco Ring Spot Decline, caused by Tobacco ring spot virus (TRSV), induces decline in grapevines.  Symptoms are indistinguishable from those caused by ToRSV.  The disease has been reported in New York and Pennsylvania.  Tobacco ring spot virus is also transmitted by Xiphinema americanum.

Diagnostic Methods

  The viruses that cause grapevine decline and degeneration diseases have been well characterized. The nucleic acid sequence is available for these viruses and reliable disease diagnostic methods have been available for a long time.  The most commonly used methods commonly used in the laboratory for the detection of these viruses in infected grapevines are ELISA (Enzyme-linked immune-assay) and RT-PCR.  ELISA is available for the detection of ArMV, GFLV, TRSV, and  ToRSV.  In spite of potential mutation of the viruses, sensitive primers for  reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) have been developed for the detection of ArMV, GFLV, TRSV, ToRSV.  RT-PCR is currently considered  the “gold standard” for virus detection as viral sequences allow the development of detection primers much faster and less laborious than the elaboration of antibodies that could be used in ELISA.  Sampling methodology remains one of most important factors for the sensitive detection of grapevine viruses.   Work in my laboratory has shown that young tips and leaves collected in the spring season provide the most reliable material for the detection of any of the Nepoviruses that infect grapevines.  However, it is possible to detect Nepoviruses in dormant cuttings, albeit in lower concentrations, allowing to test for a larger number of viruses in the fall.

Infection Prevention and Control

  As mentioned earlier, the main method of transmission of grapevine viruses is by the movement or propagation of infected vines.   Virus transmission may occur by grafting infected scion buds onto healthy rootstock  cuttings or vice-versa.  As mentioned above, nematodes are known to transmit specifically certain grapevine-infecting viruses, particularly those that cause grapevine decline and fanleaf diseases.  Infected nematodes can spread on the roots of plants, through soil, water, and by routine vineyard cultural practices. Furthermore, many of the viruses that cause grapevine decline diseases are known to infect weeds present in the vineyard.  Therefore, routine nematode and weed control is a recommended practice to keep the viruses and vectors out of the vineyard.

Conclusions

  Prevention of virus spread in the vineyard is the most important disease strategy. 

Once a viral disease is established in the vineyard or nursery block there is no treatment or cure.  The only and most drastic solution will be the removal of infected and/or declined vines.  Obviously, infected vines are a source of infection and will allow the spread the viruses to nearby healthy vines/vineyards. To avoid devastating health issues in the vineyard only virus-tested vines should be planted.   When grafting over o “top working” vines in an established vineyard, the existent vines as well as the incoming cuttings must be tested.  Laboratory tests conducted in the right season using appropriate sampling methods will help rule-out infection, detect the disease causal agent(s), and avoid the spread of harmful disease-causing viruses.

  Judit Monis, Ph.D. is a California-based international plant health consultant, that provides specialized services to help growers, vineyard managers, and nursery personnel avoid the propagation and transmission of diseases caused by bacteria, fungi, and viruses.   Judit is fluent in English, Italian, and Spanish and is available to consult in other important grape growing regions of the word.   Please visit juditmonis.com for information or contact juditmonis@yahoo.com to request a consulting session.

Precision Irrigation Controls

Cyndi

A Simple Solution for Modern Viticulture 

man working in grape vineyard with irrigation hand control and monitoring

By: Adam Setzler

While established vineyards are hearty and may not require as much water as some other crops, growers know a steady flow of the essential resource – especially at certain times of the year – is vital for growing high quality grapes. And, we know nature doesn’t always deliver precipitation when it’s needed. On top of the stress of weather, there are so many additional challenges when it comes to managing acres of vines – labor, disease and pest prevention, pruning and harvesting, among many others. All these factors can be a lot to tackle from sunup to sundown, and some days beyond.

  This is where precision farming – specifically installing and mastering the use of irrigation management tools – can provide solutions to help care for the grapes and streamline the day-to-day management of the vineyards to keep everything as simple and efficient as possible. With the use of technology, irrigation systems can be easy to navigate and provide benefits beyond creating a reliable source of water to the vineyard.

  So, how can growers choose the right irrigation control system? There is a fine balance to keep. It’s important to choose the system that’s a sound investment in equipment and technology while also matching the vineyard’s management style, and of course keeping business margins in mind. Here are five priorities growers should consider when searching for the right precision irrigation automation system.

Precision

  Water management is a critical concern for growers, especially with increasing environmental and regulatory pressures. According to the USDA, agriculture consumes approximately 80% of the nation’s water supply, and traditional irrigation systems are responsible for significant inefficiencies, with up to 50% of water lost due to evaporation, runoff or overwatering. That’s why it’s important for growers to choose an irrigation control system like Toro’s Tempus Ag that can deliver water in the most precise way, making every drop count. Controlling the water and being able to irrigate when and where it’s needed most gives growers a double benefit – environmental sustainability and more cost-effective operations.

  Some irrigation automation systems have smart scheduling capability – the ability to manage and adjust the irrigation system in real-time from a smartphone, tablet or computer – which will help growers keep water usage precise. Other equipment that will help make an irrigation system even more precise are soil moisture monitors, rain sensors and air temperature sensors. When looking for the right irrigation control system, growers should make sure the system they choose supports all the additional technology they want to incorporate. While tools like soil monitors and weather sensors may seem like extra bells and whistles that aren’t needed, they provide important information so growers can make data-driven decisions and get the most out of the investment into an irrigation automation system.

  By reducing unnecessary water use and streamlining irrigation practices with precision technology, growers will conserve water, lower energy costs, and improve the sustainability of their operations, ultimately boosting productivity and profitability.

Labor Efficiency

  Managing a workforce can be a big part of running a vineyard. With staffing shortages and a seemingly never-ending daily to-do list, labor can be a big challenge. However, a new irrigation control system can maximize labor efficiency and reduce workforce needs, which can help many growers who are burdened by the scarcity of skilled workers. This is especially beneficial for growers who depend on manual labor for critical tasks like irrigation. Labor is also a large expense for growers. According to the USDA, hired labor accounts for approximately 12% of all farm production expenses, making labor-intensive manual irrigation a significant operational cost. Installing a precision irrigation automation system can help reduce labor and the operational costs that go with it. Plus, having digital management tools also benefits the employees who continue working in the vineyards, minimizes workers’ exposure to hazardous conditions and giving them, their families and the growers peace of mind.

Simplicity

  When adding a new irrigation automation system, growers should consider how easy it is to use the new tool. Ultimately, the goal is that new technology will simplify operations, so choosing an irrigation control system with a user-friendly interface and simple design will ensure growers feel comfortable and at ease. Of course, any new system will require a little up-front time to learn and program the system, but minimizing the effort required for the set-up by selecting an easy-to-use system helps the investment pay off quickly.

  Smart technologies can also make irrigation management even more simple. An irrigation control system that is accessible through a smartphone or tablet allows growers to control water usage in the vineyard any time and from anywhere. For growers who are looking for more freedom, an irrigation system that is supported by on-the-go technology is a way to know their vineyards are well cared for, even when they aren’t at home.

Reliability

  Reliability is also important to consider when choosing an irrigation automation system. When it comes to getting tasks done, growers need confidence they can rely on the technology to work correctly. After all, a new investment shouldn’t make an operation harder by constantly needing repairs. Growers should go with a brand they trust – one backed by expertise and dependable services and devices. Irrigation control systems can reduce risk associated with human error and minimize the need for manual intervention, saving time and optimizing water usage, so if a grower can’t trust a system to work, they won’t reap the benefits of the investment.

  Reliability goes beyond the trust factor. Growers should also consider cut-and-dry factors such as if a control system retains memory even during power outages, and how much regular system downtime is required. Choosing a system that is reliable provides a smart, sustainable approach that lets growers focus on the big picture.

Flexibility

  While expansion may not be a high priority for all growers, it’s an important factor to consider when installing an irrigation automation system. Choosing a system that can be flexible and support a growing vineyard allows for a streamlined operation with endless possibilities. Making an investment in a flexible control system that can grow and change with an individual operation is imperative. It’s impossible to know what the future holds, so choosing a system that can be expanded sets a grower’s future up for success.

  No matter where a vineyard is located, water management is a high priority. While there are many factors to consider when adding any type of equipment to a vineyard, growers can keep these five priorities in mind when choosing an irrigation control system to feel confident about their investment. With the help of technology, precision irrigation can reduce labor and energy costs, optimize water usage and minimize maintenance, all leading to long-term savings and increased profitability.

Advanced Winery Wastewater Management Systems Extract Renewable Energy & Resources

Cyndi
cambrian tanks next to vineyards and mountains

By: Gerald Dlubala

Wastewater has traditionally been considered a necessary byproduct of doing business,” said Matt Seng, the global strategic accounts manager for Cambrian Innovation, Inc. His company is a leader in sustainable resource management, providing clean water, renewable energy and water treatment as a service to industrial manufacturing businesses. “Businesses buy water, bring it in to produce a product, then they have wastewater left over that goes out to the city’s treatment system. For many years, businesses just assumed this is just how it is, like in our homes,” he said. 

  Now, thanks to advanced technologies, winery wastewater can be treated, extracting reusable, valuable resources for reuse in the vineyard and winery.

Cambrian Innovation Inc: Wastewater Treatment as a Service

  Cambrian Innovation’s unique Water Energy Purchase Agreement (WEPA) provides on-site wastewater management services that transform the winery’s wastewater into renewable energy and clean water for reuse within the winery and vineyard.

  Matt Seng has been with Cambrian Innovation since its inception. He tells The Grapevine that Cambrian’s innovative and cutting-edge Water Energy Purchase Agreement (WEPA) is winery friendly, using biological treatments that mimic the earth’s natural cycles and wastewater treatments to help move their clients to their sustainability, clean water and renewable energy goals.

  “At Cambrian, we’ve looked at the wastewater that the food and beverage industry produces and see that there are some resources in that wastewater that we can extract using technology,” said Seng. “We can provide an on-site treatment system that extracts those natural resources and returns them to the plant for use.”

  “We use a couple of different technologies, some of which produce renewable energy in the form of biogas, which is the natural fermentation of the byproduct of a natural process occurring in nature,” he said. “That biogas is returned to the winery for use as fuel for a boiler to heat up water or produce steam. Biogas is categorized as renewable energy because it replaces or reduces the amount of fossil-based natural gas that needs to be extracted. In that process, we clean up the water for reuse in the winery for cleaning and washups. We take the status quo of paying the city for water only to pay them again to dispose of wastewater and flip that script. Cambrian can do this for you on-site with several advantages.”

Advantages of Cambrian Innovation Wastewater Treatment Systems

  Those advantages include producing renewable energy, so wineries don’t have to buy as much natural gas from the gas company to fire their boilers. Another result is receiving clean, EPA-quality drinking water back from the treatment.

  “This isn’t grey water, and it’s not partially treated wastewater,” he explained. “It’s drinking water made possible because we use the same technologies that the city uses to make its drinking water. The net result is there is less water going to the city’s treatment system, which reduces their emissions of greenhouse gases. And we’re now also enabling the winery to buy less city water to bring into the winery. We’re reducing the amount of city water coming in and the amount of wastewater going out, and we’re keeping those natural resources of energy and drinking water on-site.”

  Seng tells The Grapevine Magazine that their business model is service-based over equipment sales. “We want to own and operate the system,” said Seng. “That is very compatible with many winery owners who just want to make wine. They don’t want to treat water and wastewater. So we do this as a service rather than selling them the equipment to do it themselves. Then, winery owners don’t have to spend the capital to purchase, operate or maintain this technology. They pay Cambrian a service fee based on the amount of wastewater that is treated.

  “All of this work involves biology, which anyone in the wine industry knows well,” said Seng. “It’s all about biological processes, some of which occur without oxygen and are called anaerobic systems. The anaerobic microorganisms convert the organic matter in the wastewater into biogas, providing renewable energy. On the other hand, we use aerobic, or oxygen-containing biological systems to treat wastewater further and provide the basis for producing EPA-quality drinking water. These advanced treatments involve reverse osmosis and UV disinfection. The combination of anaerobic biological treatment to produce renewable energy, followed by the aerobic biological treatment, followed by reverse osmosis and UV disinfection results in EPA-quality drinking water that goes right back into the winery.”

Maximum Results with Minimum Requirements

  Cambrian takes responsibility for designing, building, owning, operating and maintaining the system. Seng said that although their systems are designed for all sizes of wineries, larger facilities have better economies of scale because there’s a certain amount of control system automation that has to be applied, no matter how big the winery is.

  “We do our best to do a financial business case that improves the winery’s finances,” said Seng. “We certainly don’t expect a winery to do this if it will cost them more money than their current situation. Sustainability and greenhouse gas emission reduction are important to wineries and vineyards, but we understand the financial impact is equally important. We always strive to make our solution less expensive than the costs that the winery is currently incurring. And the winery only pays if we produce the energy and the quality water.”

  “Generally, at minimum, we’ll need about a quarter of an acre, or 10,000 (100×100) square feet,” said Seng. “We come in and lease the area and pay the insurance and property tax. As engineers, we work with the winery to design the space, typically providing above-ground structures inside a building to ensure it’s not an aesthetic issue. We don’t want to put industrial equipment on a site and ruin the aesthetics.”

  “There are no further requirements from the winery owner to provide any operational assistance,” he said. “We are autonomous, but we work closely with our customers. Upsets and changes in production are inevitable, and we work with our clients to ensure consistent, quality results. We design the systems to ramp up or down to match the variability in production, for example, during crush. Any biosolids produced from our biological process are our responsibility to manage. In the worst case, it’s moved off-site for disposal. Often, we’ll upgrade it to EPA standards so we can use it on farm fields as a fertilizer amendment. The basis of our systems is to never impact the environment negatively, and we adhere to all EPA requirements in all 50 states just as any organization, city or municipal authority has to do.”

  Winery owners can contact Cambrian Innovation directly to see how their WEPA can benefit their winery.

BioMicrobics: Proven Wastewater Treatment in Compact Designs

  Based in Lenexa, Kansas, BioMicrobics is a leader in Integrated Water Resource Management, celebrating over two decades in the global water and wastewater industry. One of their many specialties is in wastewater management for wineries. Their BioBarrier® HSMBR® Winery wastewater treatment system uses a High Strength Membrane Bioreactor (HSMBR) designed to handle the unique, fluctuating wastewater loads present in winemaking production.

  Joe Rebori is BioMicrobics Inc.’s assistant vice president for inquiries, engineering and regulatory affairs. He spoke to The Grapevine Magazine about the company’s wastewater solutions for wineries of all sizes.

  “For wineries, it’s primarily about handling the wastewater derived from the grape processing,” said Rebori. “To a lesser extent, it also includes places like tasting rooms. Winery wastewater has a very high sugar load; in wastewater terminology, it has a high carbonaceous, biochemical oxygen demand. There’s just a lot more sugar per volume measured that has to be broken down by a wastewater treatment system. In fact, it can be more concentrated by a factor of 10 to 20 times as compared to domestic waste.”

  BioMicrobics’ BioBarrier® HSMBR® Winery wastewater treatment system uses ultrafiltration membranes predesigned to remove the organic pollutants and suspended solids that wineries produce during their normal day-to-day operations. These systems can handle more fluctuating and higher amounts of organic loads than those in typical wastewater systems.

  “During crush is a winery’s highest wastewater load just because of the volume and heavy processing that occurs with the skins, stems and pulp during fermentation,” said Rebori. “Some facilities may use a holding area to take the waste away. Others might still use conventional septic drain fields to dispose of waste if allowed. Those fields usually can’t keep up and need additional on-site treatment before the waste can be disposed of. Treatment with a septic drain field is based on soil characteristics and the capacity of the soil to take on that high organic load of waste.”

  That’s where BioMicrobics’ wastewater management experience and expertise can help wineries transform their wastewater into a reusable water resource. First and foremost, Rebori recommends that every winery owner check their local regulations and know upfront what they are allowed to do with their wastewater. Are you allowed to spray it over your land? Can you dispose of it subsurface in septic drain fields? Some states, like California, have different rules that depend on winery size. The larger the winery, the more restrictions on self-management there are.

BioMicrobics Wastewater Systems for Your Winery

  “We offer wastewater treatment systems for process waste and optionally combined with all other facility waste like tasting room, sanitary, restaurant and more,” said Rebori. “Sometimes those waste systems are combined, sometimes they’re separate. Our membrane filters treat this type of waste. BioBarrier® HSMBR® Winery Wastewater Treatment System is predesigned to handle the high sugar load that occurs during wine production. The system uses a biological treatment combined with a membrane filtration process. We have a slurry of bacteria to break down all the sugary waste in combination with fine membrane filters containing microscopic openings that physically prevent bacteria and large molecules from passing through. This gives a winery owner a system that turns their wastewater into filtered, disinfected and treated water with no organic content that can be used for irrigation, equipment cleanup, outdoor spraying or fire suppression.”

  Regarding spatial requirements, Rebori says that BioMicrobics’ smallest scale projects would include a couple of different tanks with a minimum volume of a few thousand gallons located within a 30×10 foot (300 square foot) space. Most are buried in a greenspace or under a parking area, using traffic-rated tanks to best use the winery’s space while maintaining its aesthetics. Maintenance is minimal, with an eight-year membrane filter replacement schedule and a bi-annual preventative maintenance schedule that includes filter cleaning and blower application checks. Other inspection points include sampling the liquid inside the chamber that reacts with the wine waste where the bacteria are growing to gauge the state and health of the slurry within the system. Solids may occasionally have to be removed, depending on system use.

What to Know Before Getting Started

  A BioBarrier® HSMBR® Winery Wastewater Treatment System serves many small wineries that other systems may not target,” said Rebori. “It’s an affordable solution for wineries to produce quality, reusable water on-site using membrane filtration, which has been proven over other technologies to yield the best water quality. A winery owner or their engineer can contact us directly to get started. All we need to know to get started is the annual wine production. That gets us in the ballpark of the system size we’re looking at. Then, we can work with civil engineers on the site plan and the types of tanks needed. Our systems are modular and can manage projected expansion, but the better choice is to install the proper tank upfront and modify the aeration and filtration equipment when needed.”