Study

Effects of Various Vineyard Floor Management Techniques on Weed Community Shifts and Grapevine Water Relations

  • Published source details Steenwerth K.L., Calderón-Orellana A., Hanifin R.C., Storm C. & McElrone A.J. (2016) Effects of Various Vineyard Floor Management Techniques on Weed Community Shifts and Grapevine Water Relations. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 67, 153-162

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Pest regulation: Plant or maintain ground cover in orchards or vineyards

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Crop production: Plant or maintain ground cover in orchards or vineyards

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Water: Plant or maintain ground cover in orchards or vineyards

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland
  1. Pest regulation: Plant or maintain ground cover in orchards or vineyards

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2008–2010 in an irrigated vineyard in the San Joaquin Valley, California, USA, found less weed diversity in plots with cover crops between the vine rows, compared to resident vegetation. Implementation options: Less weed diversity was found in plots with cover crops between the vine rows, compared to resident vegetation (6–7 vs 10 species; other data on diversity reported as indices). Similar weed diversity was found in plots with different mixtures of cover crops (6–7 species). Methods: Cover crops (2.5 m width) were grown in the alleys between the vine rows (3.1 m width) on 16 plots (two alleys/plot, 190 vines/row), and resident vegetation was allowed to grow on 8 plots, over the winter. There were two combinations of cover crops (oats only, or oats and legumes, seeded in November, on 8 plots each). All plots were mown in spring and tilled (15–20 cm depth) in spring, summer, and autumn. Herbicide was used to control weeds in the vine rows (50 cm width), but not in the alleys. Weeds were sampled in the alleys, in April each year, at 4 m intervals on 40 m transects.

     

  2. Crop production: Plant or maintain ground cover in orchards or vineyards

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2008–2010 in an irrigated vineyard in the San Joaquin Valley, California, USA (same study as (10)), found lower titratable acidity in grapes from plots with seeded cover crops between the vine rows, compared to resident vegetation. Implementation options: Grapes of similar quality were found in plots with cover crops or resident vegetation between the vine rows (23–25 oBrix; pH 3.3–3.6; 107–135 g/100 grapes; 25–33 g sugar/100 grapes), except that lower titratable acidity was found in grapes from plots with cover crops, in one of three years (2008: 5.7–5.9 vs 6.8 mg/L). Methods: Cover crops (2.5 m width) were grown in the alleys between the vine rows (3.1 m width) on 16 plots (two alleys/plot, 190 vines/row), and resident vegetation was allowed to grow on 8 plots, over the winter. There were two combinations of cover crops (oats only, or oats and legumes, seeded in November, on 8 plots each). All plots were mown in spring and tilled (15–20 cm depth) in spring, summer, and autumn. Herbicide was used to control weeds in the vine rows (50 cm width), but not in the alleys. Vines were drip-irrigated (60–70% of evapotranspiration).

  3. Water: Plant or maintain ground cover in orchards or vineyards

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2008–2010 in an irrigated vineyard in the San Joaquin Valley, California, USA, found that grape vines used similar amounts of water, and soils had similar water contents, in plots with cover crops or resident vegetation between the vine rows. Implementation options: Similar amounts of water were used by grape vines in plots with cover crops or resident vegetation between the vine rows (midday stem water potential: –1.6 to –0.6 MPa). Similar amounts of water were found in soils between the vine rows with cover crops or resident vegetation, in most comparisons (soil water content: 15–34%). Methods: Cover crops were grown in the alleys (2.5 m width) between the vine rows (3.1 m width) on 16 plots (two alleys/plot, 190 vines/plot), and resident vegetation was allowed to grow on 8 plots, over the winter. There were two combinations of cover crops (oats only, or oats and legumes, seeded in November, on 8 plots each). All plots were mown in spring and tilled (15–20 cm depth) in spring, summer, and autumn. Herbicide was used to control weeds in the vine rows (50 cm width). Vines were drip-irrigated (60–70% of evapotranspiration). Soil water content was measured every 1–2 weeks, and stem water potential was measured every 2–3 weeks, during the growing season in 2008–2009 (frequency domain reflectometry, 0–110 cm depth).

     

Output references

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust