The Effect of Vine Architecture in New England Vineyards

Gouveia VineyardWallingford, CT

Francis J. FerrandinoDepartment of Plant Pathology and Ecology

The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station

Background and Rationale:

Most inland New England growers continue to depend on French-American hybrids or other

cold-hardy cultivars for the bulk of their production.

These hybrids are much more vigorous than the old-world vinifera

Saint Croix

Can different canopy structure increase productivity?

… without affecting fruit quality?

To answer these questions we established a 0.5 A plot at

Gouveia Vineyard in Wallingford CT

Treatments Four training systems were followed:

• Vertical Shoot Positioning (VSP)– Mid-wire trained– Catch wires above– Hedged

• Hudson River Umbrella (HRU)– Top-wire trained– Combed

• Smart-Dyson (SD)– Vertically divided canopy, mid-wire trained.– Catch wires above and below

• Geneva Double Curtain (GDC)– Horizontally divided canopy, top-wire trained.– Combed

VSPVertical Shoot Positioning

HRUHudson River Umbrella

Pruning Method

• Fruit is borne on canes from last years buds.• A single cane from last year can supply many

buds.• Cane pruning uses last year’s canes to become

a cordon.• Spur pruning cuts back the cordon to last

years wood.

Cane Pruning

Spur Pruning

Split Canopies

The more cordon length … more potential yield

• Vertical splitting … Smart Dyson• Horizontal splitting … Geneva Double Curtain

VSPVertical Shoot Positioning

SD/SHSmart Dyson- Scott Henry

HRUHudson River Umbrella

GDCGeneva Double Curtain

Treatments Four training systems were followed:

• Vertical Shoot Positioning (VSP)– Mid-wire trained– Catch wires above– Hedged

• Hudson River Umbrella (HRU)– Top-wire trained– Combed

• Smart-Dyson (SD)– Vertically divided canopy, mid-wire trained.– Catch wires above and below

• Geneva Double Curtain (GDC)– Horizontally divided canopy, top-wire trained.– Combed

2015 was a DRY year!

• There were no major disease problems• Yield depended on cordon length• Cane-pruned vines suffered winter damage!

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

GDC HRU SD/SH VSP

Yiel

d (k

g)2015

Cane 1.83 m

Spur 1.83 m

Spur 2.44 m

0

1

2

3

GDC HRU SD/SH VSP

Yiel

d/m

eter

(kg

/m)

2015Cane 1.83 m

Spur 1.83 m

Spur 2.44 m

2014 was a wet year!

• Downy Mildew was a major problem• Grape leaves close to the ground stay wet

longer• This resulted in yield loss for VSP and SD/SH

treatments.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

GDC HRU SD/SH VSP

Yiel

d (k

g)

2014Cane 1.83 m

Spur 1.83 m

Spur 2.44 m

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

GDC HRU SD/SH VSP

Yiel

d (k

g/m

eter

)Cane 1.83 m

Spur 1.83 m

Spur 2.44 m

2014

What about Quality?

• Fruit analysis was relatively constant for all treatments

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

GDC HRU SD/SH VSP

Brix

2015Cane 1.83 m

Spur 1.83 m

Spur 2.44 m

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

GDC HRU SD/SH VSP

Brix

2014Cane 1.83 m

Spur 1.83 m

Spur 2.44 m

3.00

3.20

3.40

3.60

3.80

4.00

4.20

4.40

4.60

4.80

5.00

GDC HRU SD/SH VSP

pH2015Cane 1.83 m

Spur 1.83 m

Spur 2.44 m

3.00

3.20

3.40

3.60

3.80

4.00

4.20

4.40

4.60

4.80

5.00

GDC HRU SD/SH VSP

pH2014Cane 1.83 m

Spur 1.83 m

Spur 2.44 m

Results

• Doubling cordon length doubles yield• This requires twice the pruning and training• However, more inter-row spacing may reduce

efficiency.• Low canopies are more prone to disease • Denser canopies promote fruit rots

The Effect of Vine Architecture in New England Vineyards

Gouveia VineyardWallingford, CT

Francis J. FerrandinoDepartment of Plant Pathology and Ecology

The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Stationfrancis.ferrandino@ct.gov