[et_pb_section bb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section” inner_width=”auto” inner_max_width=”1080px”][et_pb_row admin_label=”row” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” background_size=”initial” width=”80%” max_width=”1080px”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ custom_padding__hover=”|||” custom_padding=”|||”][et_pb_text use_border_color=”off” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” background_size=”initial” _builder_version=”4.9.2″ text_text_shadow_horizontal_length=”text_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ text_text_shadow_horizontal_length_tablet=”0px” text_text_shadow_vertical_length=”text_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ text_text_shadow_vertical_length_tablet=”0px” text_text_shadow_blur_strength=”text_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ text_text_shadow_blur_strength_tablet=”1px” link_text_shadow_horizontal_length=”link_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ link_text_shadow_horizontal_length_tablet=”0px” link_text_shadow_vertical_length=”link_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ link_text_shadow_vertical_length_tablet=”0px” link_text_shadow_blur_strength=”link_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ link_text_shadow_blur_strength_tablet=”1px” ul_text_shadow_horizontal_length=”ul_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ ul_text_shadow_horizontal_length_tablet=”0px” ul_text_shadow_vertical_length=”ul_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ ul_text_shadow_vertical_length_tablet=”0px” ul_text_shadow_blur_strength=”ul_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ ul_text_shadow_blur_strength_tablet=”1px” ol_text_shadow_horizontal_length=”ol_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ ol_text_shadow_horizontal_length_tablet=”0px” ol_text_shadow_vertical_length=”ol_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ ol_text_shadow_vertical_length_tablet=”0px” ol_text_shadow_blur_strength=”ol_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ ol_text_shadow_blur_strength_tablet=”1px” quote_text_shadow_horizontal_length=”quote_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ quote_text_shadow_horizontal_length_tablet=”0px” quote_text_shadow_vertical_length=”quote_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ quote_text_shadow_vertical_length_tablet=”0px” quote_text_shadow_blur_strength=”quote_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ quote_text_shadow_blur_strength_tablet=”1px” header_text_shadow_horizontal_length=”header_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_text_shadow_horizontal_length_tablet=”0px” header_text_shadow_vertical_length=”header_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_text_shadow_vertical_length_tablet=”0px” header_text_shadow_blur_strength=”header_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_text_shadow_blur_strength_tablet=”1px” header_2_text_shadow_horizontal_length=”header_2_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_2_text_shadow_horizontal_length_tablet=”0px” header_2_text_shadow_vertical_length=”header_2_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_2_text_shadow_vertical_length_tablet=”0px” header_2_text_shadow_blur_strength=”header_2_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_2_text_shadow_blur_strength_tablet=”1px” header_3_text_shadow_horizontal_length=”header_3_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_3_text_shadow_horizontal_length_tablet=”0px” header_3_text_shadow_vertical_length=”header_3_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_3_text_shadow_vertical_length_tablet=”0px” header_3_text_shadow_blur_strength=”header_3_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_3_text_shadow_blur_strength_tablet=”1px” header_4_text_shadow_horizontal_length=”header_4_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_4_text_shadow_horizontal_length_tablet=”0px” header_4_text_shadow_vertical_length=”header_4_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_4_text_shadow_vertical_length_tablet=”0px” header_4_text_shadow_blur_strength=”header_4_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_4_text_shadow_blur_strength_tablet=”1px” header_5_text_shadow_horizontal_length=”header_5_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_5_text_shadow_horizontal_length_tablet=”0px” header_5_text_shadow_vertical_length=”header_5_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_5_text_shadow_vertical_length_tablet=”0px” header_5_text_shadow_blur_strength=”header_5_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_5_text_shadow_blur_strength_tablet=”1px” header_6_text_shadow_horizontal_length=”header_6_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_6_text_shadow_horizontal_length_tablet=”0px” header_6_text_shadow_vertical_length=”header_6_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_6_text_shadow_vertical_length_tablet=”0px” header_6_text_shadow_blur_strength=”header_6_text_shadow_style,%91object Object%93″ header_6_text_shadow_blur_strength_tablet=”1px” box_shadow_horizontal_tablet=”0px” box_shadow_vertical_tablet=”0px” box_shadow_blur_tablet=”40px” box_shadow_spread_tablet=”0px” vertical_offset_tablet=”0″ horizontal_offset_tablet=”0″ z_index_tablet=”0″]<\/p>\n
Abstract<\/strong> \u00a0<\/p>\n Viticulture in the 21st century faces numerous challenges that current viticultural systems were not designed to meet. In many cases, the methods of canopy management, pruning, soil maintenance, planting densities and the choice of grape varieties were determined on the basis of agronomic objectives (quality and quantity of harvest) at a time when the vine was confronted with few pests and diseases. Through successive health crises (powdery mildew, phylloxera and mildew in the 19th century), the vineyards adapted without major modification. The only case where this was not possible was the phylloxera crisis, which led to a major modification of the viticultural systems with the introduction of grafting throughout the vine population. This shows that changing the system can achieve lasting protection, at the cost of major upheavals for the sector. The appearance of plant protection products in the 19th century and throughout the 20th century made it possible to disconnect the protection of the vineyard from agronomic objectives. Today, for a variety of reasons, we are having to make do with fewer and fewer plant protection products, and perhaps one day will have to do without them altogether. And there are additional challenges. In response to all this, viticulture is being obliged to call its production systems into question. This is the whole point of the \u201csystem\u201d approach. The initial experiments in this field are drawing to a close and have yielded results, but also new questions and the realization that in future trials we have to go much further than we have been able to do so far.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Over and above a reduction in the use of phytosanitary inputs, viticulture, like all crops today, is facing new demands. Work on system experimentation will have to take these new demands into account, and not be limited solely to reducing the use of plant protection products. These constraints may come from society and be imposed on production, as was the case for plant protection products. The main constraints concern the environmental impact of farming. The production of greenhouse gases has to be reduced by limiting the amount of energy used and storing carbon in the soil. The impact of farming practices on natural biodiversity is also strongly questioned today. Other subjects are also likely to appear on the public agenda in the near future, such as air pollution, whether from plant protection products (whereas current concerns are mainly about water and residues in food), particulates (linked to diesel engines), dust (linked to wind erosion of bare soil), etc. Although these subjects are not yet topical, it is essential to take them into account when trying to project what viticulture could be like in 25 years’ time. In addition, a number of issues have more to do with actual production, and it is of course important to take them into account when designing new systems. In a context of global warming, these new systems will have to be adjusted to the new conditions and be resilient to the possible emergence of new pests. The production potential of the vines must also be preserved, whether in terms of soil balance (conservation of organic matter, biodiversity, limitation of erosion phenomena…) or dieback phenomena (grapevine trunk diseases, Flavescence Dor\u00e9e<\/em>, virus diseases, etc.). Of course, it is illusory to believe we can design a system capable of taking all these issues equally into account, and prioritization is necessary at the design stage. On the other hand, it will be essential to assess the impact of the systems on all these points, at least at the design stage, and if possible once the system has been tested using real data. Here, methods such as Life Cycle Assessment are particularly useful.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n When designing a system, there are three levels of levers: efficiency, substitution and redesign. The first consists in doing better what is already being done (reducing the dosage of plant protection products, for example), the second in replacing one practice by another (plant cover instead of chemical weeding), and the third in radical, in-depth modification of the system (grafting vines on phylloxera-tolerant rootstocks). This classification takes into account an incremental modification of the system, the particularity of the \u201credesign\u201d levers being that they impact the system at several levels and call into question the whole way a vineyard is tended. In order to design truly innovative systems, it is necessary to prioritize the redesign levers. Then, if possible, substitutions can take place, after which, lastly, efficiency levers can be mobilized to optimize the functioning of the system. There are various redesign levers. <\/p>\n The main ones are: \u2022 Varietal resistance \/ tolerance<\/strong> \u2022 Choice of plant material<\/strong> \u2022 Vineyard architecture<\/strong> \u2022 Biocontrol products<\/strong> \u2022 Biological regulation<\/strong> \u2022 Companion plants<\/strong> \u2022 Crop combination<\/strong> \u00a0<\/p>\n One of the main lessons of the early DEPHY EXPE projects is that the systems designed did not go as far as they could have gone, or rather that they were overtaken in some cases by producers. This is due to two factors: most of the trials were set up on existing vines to avoid wasting time on planting and entering production. Moreover, since a transfer to the winegrowers in the short or medium term was envisaged, a certain number of limiting technical factors (e.g. limited investment in equipment) or psychological factors (“Winegrowers will never do that! “) became apparent. With hindsight, it transpires that winegrowers are more adventurous than we could ever have thought, and that the transfer of results no longer takes place in the form of systems but in the form of design principles. For these reasons, it seems important to us today that at least some of the experimental sites should go as far as possible, and be designed from the planting stage. The important thing is to show that systems that dramatically reduce the use of plant protection products (to the point of not using them at all) are possible, even if this results in a change in the type of product.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n The prospects for system design are many, and the systems to be experimented with even more numerous. They provide an idea of the potential diversity of viticultural systems in 20, 30 or 50 years\u2019 time. Winegrowers have already shown that they were capable of adapting to radical changes in their production systems at the time of the phylloxera crisis. Today, we can anticipate these system changes so that they do not come about the painful way. However, these new systems raise more than solely technical questions: they may call into question the very manner of production, or the typicity of the products, and changes at the level of the viticultural sector itself are needed to allow these diverse systems to coexist. <\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u2022 Future cropping systems will have to respond to numerous challenges over and beyond a simple reduction in the use of plant protection products. \u00a0<\/p>\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" It is crucial to design innovative viticultural systems to respond to the challenges facing winegrowing<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":17229,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"on","_et_pb_old_content":" [et_pb_section bb_built=\"1\" admin_label=\"section\"][et_pb_row admin_label=\"row\" background_position=\"top_left\" background_repeat=\"repeat\" background_size=\"initial\"][et_pb_column type=\"4_4\"][et_pb_text use_border_color=\"off\" background_position=\"top_left\" background_repeat=\"repeat\" background_size=\"initial\" _builder_version=\"3.7\"]<\/p> Les techniques modernes de g\u00e9notypage et d\u2019analyse de l\u2019ADN ont r\u00e9volutionn\u00e9 l\u2019amp\u00e9lographie. Elles permettent de diff\u00e9rencier les grands groupes au sein de l\u2019esp\u00e8ce\u00a0Vitis vinifera<\/em>\u00a0et de distinguer les vari\u00e9t\u00e9s sans attendre le d\u00e9veloppement des plants.<\/strong><\/p> Le terme amp\u00e9lographie vient du grec \u00abampelos\u00bb qui signifie vigne et de \u00abgraphie\u00bb qui se rapporte \u00e0 la description. Propos\u00e9 pour la premi\u00e8re fois en 1661 par le Docteur Sachs dans l\u2019ouvrage Ampelographia, ce terme regroupe aujourd\u2019hui \u00e0 la fois la description et l\u2019identification des c\u00e9pages, l\u2019\u00e9tude de leur \u00e9volution et des relations qui existent ente eux et la connaissance de leur comportement vis \u00e0 vis du milieu (aptitudes culturales et oenologiques). Pendant longtemps, l\u2019amp\u00e9lographie ne s\u2019est bas\u00e9e que sur l\u2019observation visuelle de la vigne, en particulier sur la morphologie des feuilles, des rameaux et des grappes. Parmi une centaine de descripteurs codifi\u00e9s pour d\u00e9crire les diff\u00e9rents organes de la vigne,\u00a014 descripteurs primaires prioritaires ont \u00e9t\u00e9 retenus par l\u2019OIV pour leur bon pouvoir discriminant entre les vari\u00e9t\u00e9s. Plus r\u00e9cemment, l\u2019amp\u00e9lographie s\u2019est dot\u00e9e de nouveaux outils comme la chimiotaxonomie (\u00e9tudes des compos\u00e9s du m\u00e9tabolisme secondaire) ou les marqueurs biochimiques (isozymes). La v\u00e9ritable r\u00e9volution est n\u00e9e de l\u2019incorporation \u00e0 l\u2019amp\u00e9lographie de techniques g\u00e9n\u00e9tiques \u00e0 partir des ann\u00e9es 1990. Le marquage mol\u00e9culaire et le s\u00e9quen\u00e7age de l\u2019ADN ont permis d\u2019avoir acc\u00e8s non seulement au ph\u00e9notype mais aussi directement au g\u00e9notype de fa\u00e7on pr\u00e9coce sans avoir besoin d\u2019attendre un d\u00e9veloppement complet de la plante. L\u2019ADN n\u00e9cessaire pour ce type d\u2019analyse peut \u00eatre extrait \u00e0 partir de quelques dizaines de milligrammes de mat\u00e9riel v\u00e9g\u00e9tal et de n\u2019importe quel organe ou partie de la plante (feuilles, baies, sarments, racines...)<\/p> [\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text admin_label=\"Lire la suite\" _builder_version=\"3.7\" saved_tabs=\"all\"]<\/p> Qu'est-ce que l'ADN et comment est-il structur\u00e9 ?<\/strong><\/p> L\u2019acide d\u00e9soxyribonucl\u00e9ique, ou ADN, est une mol\u00e9cule, pr\u00e9sente dans toutes les cellules vivantes, qui renferme l\u2019ensemble des informations n\u00e9cessaires au d\u00e9veloppement et au fonctionnement d\u2019un organisme. C\u2019est aussi le support de l\u2019h\u00e9r\u00e9dit\u00e9 car il est transmis lors de la reproduction, de mani\u00e8re int\u00e9grale ou non. Il porte donc l\u2019information g\u00e9n\u00e9tique et constitue le g\u00e9nome des \u00eatres vivants. L\u2019ADN d\u00e9termine la synth\u00e8se des prot\u00e9ines, par l\u2019interm\u00e9diaire de l\u2019ARN. Cette double h\u00e9lice est compos\u00e9e de s\u00e9quences de nucl\u00e9otides constitu\u00e9s d\u2019un groupe phosphate li\u00e9 \u00e0 un sucre, le d\u00e9soxyribose, lui-m\u00eame li\u00e9 \u00e0 une base azot\u00e9e. Il existe quatre bases azot\u00e9es diff\u00e9rentes dont la cytosine (not\u00e9e C) et la thymine (not\u00e9e T) de la famille des pyrimidines et l\u2019ad\u00e9nine (not\u00e9e A) et la guanine (not\u00e9e G) de la famille des purines. Dans les cellules v\u00e9g\u00e9tales, l\u2019ADN est localis\u00e9 dans le noyau et dans les chloroplastes. Les chloroplastes sont des organites essentiels qui permettent de capter la lumi\u00e8re \u00e0 l\u2019origine de la photosynth\u00e8se.<\/p> A quelles techniques l'amp\u00e9lographie mol\u00e9culaire fait-elle appel ?<\/strong><\/p> L\u2019amp\u00e9lographie mol\u00e9culaire fait appel \u00e0 l\u2019analyse de plusieurs types de marqueurs sur l\u2019ADN, qui permettent de diff\u00e9rencier les individus avec certitude :<\/p> Qu'a permis d'apprendre l'amp\u00e9lographie mol\u00e9culaire sur l'origine de la vigne?<\/strong><\/p> Les travaux r\u00e9alis\u00e9s par l\u2019\u00e9quipe de Jean-Pierre P\u00e9ros de l\u2019INRA de Montpellier ont permis de mettre en \u00e9vidence le caract\u00e8re ancestral des esp\u00e8ces de vigne asiatiques qui seraient \u00e0 la fois \u00e0 l\u2019origine de l\u2019esp\u00e8ce europ\u00e9enne Vitis vinifera et des esp\u00e8ces am\u00e9ricaines. En ce qui concerne ces derni\u00e8res, il se serait produit deux \u00e9v\u00e9nements distincts de dispersion depuis l\u2019Eurasie vers l\u2019Am\u00e9rique : un \u00e9ven\u00e9ment \u00e0 l\u2019origine des esp\u00e8ces du centre et de l\u2019Est (Vitis labrusca, Vitis riparia,<\/em>\u00a0Vitis rupestris<\/em>\u00a0et\u00a0Vitis berlandieri<\/em>), l\u2019autre \u00e0 l\u2019origine des esp\u00e8ces californiennes (Vitis californica<\/em>). L\u2019analyse des micro-satellites a permis \u00e9galement de diff\u00e9rencier les vraies vignes sauvages europ\u00e9ennes\u00a0(Vitis vinifera subsp. sylvestris)<\/em>\u00a0appel\u00e9es aussi lambrusques des vari\u00e9t\u00e9s cultiv\u00e9es. Au sein de ce compartiment cultiv\u00e9, ces analyses ont permis de r\u00e9partir objectivement les vari\u00e9t\u00e9s en cinq grands groupes g\u00e9ographiques en relation avec leurs aptitudes.<\/p> Qu'a permis d'apprendre l'amp\u00e9lographie mol\u00e9culaire sur les liens de parent\u00e9 entre c\u00e9pages ?<\/strong><\/p> L\u2019analyse par micro-satellites des 2300 c\u00e9pages traditionnels conserv\u00e9s au Domaine de Vassal (INRA de Marseillan) a permis de constituer une base de donn\u00e9es compl\u00e8te et unique dans son genre. Lorsque sur l\u2019ensemble des marqueurs d\u2019une vari\u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e9tudi\u00e9e, on peut trouver par comparaison deux autres c\u00e9pages ayant chacun la moiti\u00e9 des valeurs d\u00e9termin\u00e9es, il existe une forte probabilit\u00e9 que par croisement ces deux c\u00e9pages aient donn\u00e9 naissance au troisi\u00e8me. Il est m\u00eame parfois possible de d\u00e9terminer pour un croisement donn\u00e9 quel est le p\u00e8re d\u2019o\u00f9 provient le pollen et la m\u00e8re qui a port\u00e9 le fruit. En effet, c\u2019est la m\u00e8re qui fournit au futur descendant, l\u2019ensemble de sa \u00abmachinerie m\u00e9tabolique\u00bb en particulier ses chloroplastes. Ces derniers contiennent \u00e9galement de l\u2019ADN sur lequel on a pu d\u00e9terminer certains marqueurs g\u00e9n\u00e9tiques.<\/p> Il a ainsi \u00e9t\u00e9 montr\u00e9 que le Gouais B, vari\u00e9t\u00e9 blanche sans grand int\u00e9r\u00eat oenologique, \u00e9tait un g\u00e9niteur important de nos c\u00e9pages. Par exemple, par croisement avec un Pinot, il a engendr\u00e9 le Chardonnay B, l\u2019Aligot\u00e9 B, l\u2019Auxerrois B, le Melon B et le Gamay N. Avec d\u2019autres parents souvent inconnus, il est \u00e9galement \u00e0 l\u2019origine entre autre de la Jacqu\u00e8re B, du Grolleau N, du\u00a0Colombard B, du Riesling B ou m\u00eame du\u00a0Saint-C\u00f4me B\u00a0aveyronnais. Plus r\u00e9cemment, une \u00e9tude men\u00e9e par Jean-Michel Boursiquot et d\u2019autres collaborateurs, publi\u00e9e fin 2008 dans une revue scientifique australienne, a permis d\u2019identifier la parent\u00e9 du Merlot N. Lors de prospections r\u00e9alis\u00e9es dans des vieilles parcelles de vignes en Bretagne et dans les Charentes, un c\u00e9page original et inconnu des collections a pu \u00eatre identifi\u00e9 : la Magdeleine noire des Charentes. Les analyses ont confirm\u00e9 que ce c\u00e9page tr\u00e8s ancien \u00e9tait la m\u00e8re du Merlot N et du\u00a0Cot N\u00a0(Malbec). On savait \u00e9galement que le\u00a0Prunelard N\u00a0et le Malbec \u00e9taient apparent\u00e9s sans conna\u00eetre le sens de filiation. On sait dor\u00e9navant que le Prunelard N est le p\u00e8re du Malbec. Le sh\u00e9ma ci-dessous (figure 1) issu de la publication illustre quelques liens de parent\u00e9 entre les c\u00e9pages.<\/p> \u00a0Quels sont les exemples les plus marquants d'identification vari\u00e9tale r\u00e9ussie \u00e0 l'aide de l'amp\u00e9lographie mol\u00e9culaire ?<\/strong><\/p> En 2009, Jean-Michel Boursiquot et Laurent Audeguin du P\u00f4le Mat\u00e9riel V\u00e9g\u00e9tal de l\u2019IFV, ont pu mettre en \u00e9vidence, un faux Albarinho B lors d\u2019une mission en Australie. Depuis de nombreuses ann\u00e9es, les viticulteurs locaux croyaient cultiver cette vari\u00e9t\u00e9 originaire de la fa\u00e7ade ouest de la p\u00e9ninsule ib\u00e9rique mais rapidement nos coll\u00e8gues ont d\u00e9termin\u00e9 qu\u2019il s\u2019agissait en fait du Savagnin B. Ce r\u00e9sultat a \u00e9t\u00e9 confirm\u00e9 peu de temps apr\u00e8s leur retour en France, gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 l\u2019analyse g\u00e9n\u00e9tique d\u2019ADN pr\u00e9lev\u00e9 sur place et apr\u00e8s confrontation aux bases de donn\u00e9es existantes (IFV, INRA). Pour l\u2019anecdote, la m\u00eame histoire s\u2019\u00e9tait d\u00e9j\u00e0 produite au Chili pr\u00e8s de vingt ans auparavant et bien avant l\u2019utilisation des marqueurs g\u00e9n\u00e9tiques. La Carmen\u00e8re N y avait longtemps \u00e9t\u00e9 confondue par les viticulteurs avec le Merlot N. Dans la r\u00e9gion, ces techniques ont permis \u00e0 l\u2019IFV Sud-Ouest d\u2019identifier toutes les anciennes vari\u00e9t\u00e9s maintenues dans les conservatoires r\u00e9gionaux et d\u2019introduire dans les collections des c\u00e9pages originaux qui n\u2019y figuraient pas tels le Moural N de l\u2019Aveyron, le Bouysselet B de Fronton et d\u2019autres vari\u00e9t\u00e9s sans d\u00e9nomination \u00e0 ce jour... .<\/p> L'amp\u00e9lographie mol\u00e9culaire permet-elle de distinguer les clones ?<\/strong><\/p> Pour l\u2019instant, l\u2019amp\u00e9lographie mol\u00e9culaire ne permet pas de distinguer les clones d\u2019un m\u00eame c\u00e9page, car il existe tr\u00e8s peu de diff\u00e9rence intra-vari\u00e9tale au niveau des micro-satellites. Cependant, les nouvelles m\u00e9thodes de s\u00e9quen\u00e7age de l\u2019ADN \u00e0 tr\u00e8s haut d\u00e9bit permettent maintenant d\u2019envisager le res\u00e9quen\u00e7age du g\u00e9nome de diff\u00e9rents individus. Cette approche a \u00e9t\u00e9 choisie pour essayer de d\u00e9tecter les diff\u00e9rences g\u00e9n\u00e9tiques pouvant exister entre clones. Au cours d\u2019une th\u00e8se men\u00e9e par Gr\u00e9gory Carrier dans le cadre de l\u2019UMT G\u00e9no-Vigne\u00ae et encadr\u00e9e par l\u2019IFV, Montpellier SupAgro et l\u2019INRA, trois clones de Pinot Noir ont \u00e9t\u00e9 analys\u00e9s. Les r\u00e9sultats ont permis de mettre en \u00e9vidence le r\u00f4le pr\u00e9pond\u00e9rant des \u00e9l\u00e9ments mobiles (r\u00e9tro-transposons) dans le polymorphisme g\u00e9n\u00e9tique d\u00e9tect\u00e9 entre ces clones. Sur cette base, une analyse pr\u00e9liminaire de diversit\u00e9 \u00e0 l\u2019aide de marqueurs SSAP a permis d\u2019obtenir des profils uniques pour tous les clones de Pinot Noir en collection. Cependant, une s\u00e9lection de ces marqueurs et une validation de leur stabilit\u00e9 et de leur r\u00e9p\u00e9tabilit\u00e9 doivent encore \u00eatre r\u00e9alis\u00e9es avant de pouvoir envisager une identification fiable des diff\u00e9rents clones.<\/p> [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>","_et_gb_content_width":"","_relevanssi_hide_post":"","_relevanssi_hide_content":"","_relevanssi_pin_for_all":"","_relevanssi_pin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_unpin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_include_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_exclude_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_no_append":"","_relevanssi_related_not_related":"","_relevanssi_related_posts":"","_relevanssi_noindex_reason":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[139],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17516","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-environment"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.vignevin.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17516","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.vignevin.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.vignevin.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.vignevin.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.vignevin.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17516"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.vignevin.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17516\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.vignevin.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/17229"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.vignevin.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17516"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.vignevin.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17516"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.vignevin.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17516"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
It is crucial to design innovative viticultural systems to respond to the current and future challenges facing winegrowing: to reduce the use of plant protection products, but also global warming, dieback, impact on biodiversity, etc… Viticultural systems were designed in very different contexts from today\u2019s, and optimizing them technique by technique is beginning to reach its limits. Numerous levers are available to respond to these multiple challenges: biocontrol products, new technologies, varietal resistance, vineyard architecture, biological regulation, companion plants, crop combinations. All these levers need to be combined, which opens up numerous windows on a future in which winegrowing systems will undoubtedly be much more diversified than today.<\/p>\nIntroduction <\/strong><\/h5>\n
What must be the objectives of new systems that are designed today?<\/strong><\/h5>\n
What leverage do we have for going further in designing systems that make little use of plant protection products?<\/strong><\/h5>\n
\u2022 New technologies<\/strong>
The prospects opened up by new technologies for agriculture are numerous. As regards the creation of new systems, when new technologies make it possible to imagine new ways of doing things they are a genuine source of progress. For example, technologies that allow much more frequent passes can open up design possibilities: robots can pass every week to do very light tillage, allowing weed control without disturbing the soil. Similarly, the use of fixed sprinklers to carry out treatments can make it possible to use biocontrol products with very low persistence by applying them every three days. Finally, disease detectors in the vineyard could make it possible to detect the first symptoms at an early stage, and to adapt the decision-making rules to the real situation in the vineyard. These are still far from being a reality, however.<\/p>\n
This lever is undoubtedly one of the most promising for managing mildew and powdery mildew. Nevertheless, many questions remain unanswered: how can we ensure the durability of resistance? How can we manage diseases against which varieties are not resistant, but for which protection was provided by anti-mildew and\/or anti-powdery mildew agents? And most importantly, will these varieties succeed in making their mark in a market where the grape variety is one of the main selling points? <\/p>\n
In addition to resistant varieties, the choice of grape variety, clone and rootstock can help to limit disease susceptibility and compensate for yield reductions linked to the establishment of plant cover. <\/p>\n
The vine is a creeper, which gives it great flexibility of shape. Most modern vineyards are trellised, with the number of buds varying roughly from 10 to 25 per vine. However, other modes of canopy management can be envisaged. Minimal\/semi-minimal management methods have been developed, rather for productive vineyards with low added value with a view to reducing costs, but they could be worthwhile in more limiting contexts. <\/p>\n
Many biocontrol products are now available for a number of pests. They are often presented as alternatives to conventional plant protection products, and as such fall rather into the \u201csubstitution\u201d category. Nevertheless, for many products, application in combination with a half-dose of a crop protection product is probably not the best approach. The case of plant defence stimulators (PDS) is particularly emblematic. While products are beginning to arrive on the market, we still know very little about how they work. In particular, it is unclear whether they should be applied at the time of the pest attack, just before, or several weeks before, to give the plant time to react. <\/p>\n
Biological control of pests by means of beneficial organisms is becoming widespread. While it is very effective for some pests (mites have not been a problem in viticulture since treatments for predatory mites went out of use), for others it requires a constant supply of new beneficial organisms on the plot. The ideal solution would be to acclimatise beneficial organisms to the vineyard plots or immediate surroundings so as to manage other pests and diseases. For example, green leafhopper populations can be regulated by parasitoids of the genus Anagrus. Similarly, powdery mildew could be reduced by the presence of hyperparasites of the genus Ampelomyces on the plot. <\/p>\n
Companion plants are plants grown to perform a function in the system, but which are not harvested. In viticulture, grass and green manure are the main companion plants used. However, other types of plant can be envisaged: relay plants that help maintain the companion plants on the plot, trap plants that attract pests, repellent plants… This domain is still largely unexplored in viticulture. <\/p>\n
When companion plants are harvested, we talk of crop combination. Besides the technical utility of the crop, it also provides an additional source of income for the winegrower. One can also imagine systems of collaboration between farmers, so that the winegrower does not have to learn how to manage an additional type of production, if this is worthwhile for the producer of the additional crop. For example, combined cropping projects for vines and thyme are being developed. All these levers open up interesting perspectives, but it is by combining them into a coherent whole that we design innovative systems. Several levers can contribute to the same objective, allowing partially effective levers to solve problems for which they would be insufficient individually.<\/p>\nWhat will future projects for the experimentation of winegrowing systems look like?<\/strong><\/h5>\n
Conclusions<\/strong><\/h5>\n
What we have to remember<\/strong><\/h5>\n
\u2022 The levers for achieving this are many and varied
\u2022 However, implementing them will bring about radical change in the viticultural systems, leading to modifications at the level of the plots, farms and even the sector as a whole.<\/p>\n