Open Access

The influence of different methods of under-vine management on the structure of vegetation and the qualitative parameters of the grapes in the Moravian wine region

Tomáš Kopta
Tomáš Kopta
, 
Lucia Nedorost Ragasová
Lucia Nedorost Ragasová
, 
Radek Sotolář
Radek Sotolář
, 
Jozef Sedláček
Jozef Sedláček
, 
Vojtěch Ferby
Vojtěch Ferby
, 
Erika Hurajová
Erika Hurajová
 and 
Jan Winkler
Jan Winkler
   | Jul 22, 2024
Folia Horticulturae's Cover Image
About this article
Previous Article
Next Article
Cite
Article Category: ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Published Online: Jul 22, 2024
Page range: -
Received: Oct 28, 2023
Accepted: Jun 14, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/fhort-2024-0015
Keywords
© 2024 Tomáš Kopta et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Figure 1.

Meteorological conditions of the experimental site.
Meteorological conditions of the experimental site.

Figure 2.

Different under-vine treatments. (MECH, bare soil cultivated mechanically; HERB, bare soil with herbicide application; TEX, under-vine belt covered by black woven agrotextile; MULCH, green mulch – mowed grass; MONO, cover crop – monoculture; MIX, cover crop – mixture of plants).
Different under-vine treatments. (MECH, bare soil cultivated mechanically; HERB, bare soil with herbicide application; TEX, under-vine belt covered by black woven agrotextile; MULCH, green mulch – mowed grass; MONO, cover crop – monoculture; MIX, cover crop – mixture of plants).

Figure 3.

Graphical evaluation of NDVI in different treatments. NDVI, normalized difference vegetation index.
Graphical evaluation of NDVI in different treatments. NDVI, normalized difference vegetation index.

Figure 4.

Under-vine area covered by green vegetation (2022).
Under-vine area covered by green vegetation (2022).

Figure 5.

Ratio (2-year average) of selected plant groups coverage (Fabaceae, Poaceae, noxious weeds and the rest of dicotyledonous) per three evaluation terms.
Ratio (2-year average) of selected plant groups coverage (Fabaceae, Poaceae, noxious weeds and the rest of dicotyledonous) per three evaluation terms.

Figure 6.

Ordination diagram of CCA, describing the distribution of three categories of plant species and their coverage in the six different treatments (pseudo-F = 10.1, p = 0.002). CCA, canonical correlation analysis.
Ordination diagram of CCA, describing the distribution of three categories of plant species and their coverage in the six different treatments (pseudo-F = 10.1, p = 0.002). CCA, canonical correlation analysis.

Figure 7.

Botanical assessment of vegetation (A – number of species; B – number of families; C – number of Fabaceae; D – number of Poaceae; E – number of noxious weeds). LSD, least significant difference.
Botanical assessment of vegetation (A – number of species; B – number of families; C – number of Fabaceae; D – number of Poaceae; E – number of noxious weeds). LSD, least significant difference.

Coverage rate of each plant species in six under-vine treatments during three evaluation terms (July, August and September) in years 2021 and 2022.

Family Species Category* JULY 2021 AUGUST 2021 SEPTEMBER 2021
MECH HERB TEX MULCH MONO MIX MECH HERB TEX MULCH MONO MIX MECH HERB TEX MULCH MONO MIX
Amaranthaceae Amaranthus blitoides S. Watson 1
Amaranthus retroflexus L. 2 10 7 15 4 2 1 15 20 4 3 1 3 10 7
Atriplex patula L. 2
Chenopodium album L. 3 6 1 2 6 5 1 1 15 15 4 1 3 15 10
Chenopodium hybridum L. 2
Apiaceae Daucus carota L. 2
Asteraceae Artemisia vulgaris L. 3 1
Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. 3 1 10 12 1 5 5 15 5
Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronq. 2 1
Crepis biennis L. 2
Crepis tectorum L. 2
Erigeron annuus (L.) Pers. 3
Senecio vulgaris L. 1 1 1 1
Sonchus oleraceus L. 1 1
Taraxacum officinale (L.) Weber ex F. H. Wigg. 3 5 5 3 7 1 1 4 2 4 1 1 1 4
Tragopogon pratensis L. 2 1
Tripleurospermum inodorum (L.) Sch.Bip. 3 1 2 1 1
Brassicaceae Capsella bursa-pastoris L. 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 4 3
Sinapis alba L. 1
Thlaspi arvense L. 1
Caryophylaceae Arenaria serpyllifolia L. 1 1 1 2
Stellaria media (L.) Vill. 1 1 6
Convolvulaceae Convolvulus arvensis L. 3 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 8 3 2 8 4
Fabaceae Anthyllis vulneraria L. 1 5 10 10
Lotus corniculatus L. 2 3 5 7
Medicago lupulina L. 2 1 5 1 4 8 1 1 5
Onobrychis viciifolia Scop. 1
Trifolium pratense L. 1 1
Trifolium repens L. 1 10 40 8 40 1 3 20 70
Vicia tetrasperma (L.) Schreb. 1 1
Geraniaceae Erodium cicutarium (L.) L’Hér. 2 1
Geranium pusillum Brum. fil. 2 1 1 1 1 1
Lamiaceae Lamium amplexicaule L. 1
Lamium purpureum L. 1 1
Plantaginaceae Plantago major L. 1 1
Veronica polita Fries. 1 1 1
Poaceae Bromus hordeaceus L. 2 2 3 6 1 1 2 3 10 11 3 18 5
Bromus japonicus Thnub. 2
Bromus tectorum L. 2
Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop. 2 2 5 3 2 2 4
Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv. 2 1 1
Elytrigia repens (L.) Nevski 3 1
Festuca rubra L. 2 10
Hordeum murinum L. 2 1
Lolium perenne L. 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 6 6
Panicum miliaceum L. 3
Poa annua L. 1 1
Setaria pumila (Poir.) Roem. et Schult. 2 6 1 4 5 55 15
Setaria verticilata (L.) P. Beauv. 2 1 5 10 12 6 12 2 4
Setaria viridis L. 2 1 1 8 4 2 12 10 4 1
Polygonaceae Polygonum vulgare L. 2 5 1 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 7 4
Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea L. 2 1 1 4 1 8 1 3
Resedaceae Reseda lutea L. 1
Rosaceae Rosa canina L. 3
Solanaceae Datura stramonium L. 3
Solanum nigrum L. 2 1 1 1
Violaceae Viola arvensis Murray 1
Amaranthaceae Amaranthus blitoides S. Watson 1
Amaranthus retroflexus L. 2 5 1 6 1
Atriplex patula L. 2
Chenopodium album L. 3 1 2 2 2
Chenopodium hybridum L. 2
Apiaceae Daucus carota L. 2 1
Asteraceae Artemisia vulgaris L. 3
Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. 3 8 1 1 8 8 1 8 8 2 10 1 10 4
Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronq. 2
Crepis biennis L. 2
Crepis tectorum L. 2
Erigeron annuus (L.) Pers. 3
Senecio vulgaris L. 1 1
Sonchus oleraceus L. 1
Taraxacum officinale (L.) Weber ex F. H. Wigg. 3 2 4 3 5 6 3 7 4 4 3
Tragopogon pratensis L. 2
Tripleurospermum inodorum (L.) Sch.Bip. 3 1 2 3
Brassicaceae Capsella bursa-pastoris L. 1 1 1 1 3 3 2
Sinapis alba L. 1
Thlaspi arvense L. 1 3 1
Caryophylaceae Arenaria serpyllifolia L. 1 1 2 2
Stellaria media (L.) Vill. 1 2 7 6 1 2
Convolvulaceae Convolvulus arvensis L. 3 5 4 2 5 3 2 1 1 4 4 7 4 4 8 2 3 1 7
Fabaceae Anthyllis vulneraria L. 1 15 15 6
Lotus corniculatus L. 2 8 11 12
Medicago lupulina L. 2 3 2 10 25 2 3 7 7
Onobrychis viciifolia Scop. 1 1
Trifolium pratense L. 1
Trifolium repens L. 1 1 45 20 1 3 10 6 10 10
Vicia tetrasperma (L.) Schreb. 1 2 3 1 2
Geraniaceae Erodium cicutarium (L.) L’Hér. 2 2
Geranium pusillum Brum. fil. 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
Lamiaceae Lamium amplexicaule L. 1 1 2 1
Lamium purpureum L. 1
Plantaginaceae Plantago major L. 1
Veronica polita Fries. 1 1
Poaceae Bromus hordeaceus L. 2 15 10 3 15 10 2 2 2 1 4 1 12 12 1 2
Bromus japonicus Thnub. 2 1 1 1
Bromus sterilis L. 2
Bromus tectorum L. 2 3 2 1 5
Digitaria sanguinalis (L) Scop. 2 2 1 2 5 4
Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv. 2 2 1 1 1 2 10
Elytrigia repens (L.) Nevski 3 4 4
Festuca rubra L. 2
Hordeum murinum L. 2 2 2 3 1 10 1
Lolium perenne L. 2 8 4 3 20 13 4 5 6 3 55 35 15 4 3 40 55
Panicum miliaceum L. 3 2
Poa annua L. 1 1
Setaria pumila (Poir.) Roem. et Schult. 2 5 4 1 10 2 6
Setaria verticilata (L.) P. Beauv. 2 2 2 5 2 8 2 3 7
Setaria viridis L. 2 1 2 1 8 2 2 2 7 4
Polygonaceae Polygonum vulgare L. 2 1 1
Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea L. 2 2
Resedaceae Reseda lutea L. 1
Rosaceae Rosa canina L. 3 1 1
Solanaceae Datura stramonium L. 3
Solanum nigrum L. 2
Violaceae Viola arvensis Murray 1 2

Species composition of treatment MIX.

Species Variety Seed rate kg · ha−1 % share in mixture Final seed rate kg · ha−1
Trifolium repens L. f. silvestre Luke 15 35 5.25
Lotus corniculatus L. Leo 15 10 1.5
Medicago lupulina L. Ekola 15 50 7.5
Anthyllis vulneraria L. Pamír 15 5 0.75

Species identification in different treatments.

Treatment Predominant species in the vegetation cover
MECH Bromus hordeaceus L., Convolvulus arvensis L., Amaranthus retroflexus L., Taraxacum sect. Taraxacum, Lolium perenne L., Setaria pumila, Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop., Hordeum murinum L., Chenopodium album L.
HERB Bromus hordeaceus L., Setaria verticilata (L.) P. Beauv., Lolium perenne L., Setaria pumila (Poir)Roem. et Schult., Convolvulus arvensis L., Portulaca oleracea L., Setaria viridis (L.) P. Beauv., Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop., Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv., Amaranthus retroflexus L, Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop., Taraxacum sect. Taraxacum.
TEX Lolium perenne L., Convolvulus arvensis L., Bromus hordeaceus L.
MULCH Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop., Convolvulus arvensis L., Bromus hordeaceus L., Amaranthus retroflexus L, Stellaria media (L.) Vill.
MONO Lolium perenne L, Trifolium repens L., Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop., Amaranthus retroflexus L., Setaria viridis (L.) P. Beauv., Chenopodium album L., Bromus hordeaceus L., Medicago lupulina L., Taraxacum sect. Taraxacum, Convolvulus arvensis L., Setaria verticilata (L.) P. Beauv., Lotus corniculatus L.
MIX Trifolium repens L., Lolium perenne L., Anthyllis vulneraria L., Medicago lupulina L., Lotus corniculatus L., Amaranthus retroflexus L., Bromus hordeaceus L., Chenopodium album, Setaria viridis, Setaria verticilata, Taraxacum sect. Taraxacum, Convolvulus arvensis L.

Selected yield and uvological parameters.

Year Treatment Number of bunches per vine (pcs) Weight of bunches per vine (kg) Bunch weight (g) Berry weight (g) Number of berries in a cluster (pcs) Rachis weight (g)
2021 MECH 16.4 ± 1.5 abc 1.7 ± 0.1 a 103.0 ± 12.5 ab 1.7 ± 0.3 d 66.6 ± 13.7 a 4.0 ± 0.1 a
HERB 19.8 ± 1.9 d 2.1 ± 0.1 bc 115.2 ± 8.3 ab 1.1 ± 0.1 abc 95.8 ± 6.8 cd 6.0 ± 0.7 b
TEX 18.8 ± 0.8 cd 1.9 ± 0.04 ab 97 ± 6.3 a 1.4 ± 0.4 bc 76.4 ± 12.4 ab 4.1 ± 0.3 a
MULCH 18.8 ± 2.5 cd 2 ± 0.2 ab 110.1 ± 4.3 ab 1.2 ± 0.4 abc 84 ± 18.9 bc 4.6 ± 0.1 a
MONO 20.2 ± 1.8 d 2.4 ± 0.1 d 120.9 ± 3.7 ab 1.0 ± 0.2 ab 117.0 ± 3.1 e 6.3 ± 0.2 bc
MIX 19.2 ± 3.1 d 2.3 ± 0.1 cd 119.2 ± 12.2 ab 1.1 ± 0.1 abc 107.0 ± 3.9 de 7.0 ± 0.1 c
2022 MECH 15.0 ± 2.3 a 1.8 ± 0.2 a 112.8 ± 7.3 ab 1.0 ± 0.1 a 121.6 ± 10.4 e 6.8 ± 0.5 bc
HERB 15.2 ± 2.8 a 2.5 ± 0.3 d 162.6 ± 23.1 c 1.3 ± 0.2 abc 154.2 ± 12.5 f 6.8 ± 0.5 c
TEX 16.0 ± 2.3 ab 2.3 ± 0.3 cd 139.5 ± 25.6 bc 1.0 ± 0.4 a 188.0 ± 14.6 h 9.2 ± 0.7 d
MULCH 14.0 ± 0.7 a 2.5 ± 0.04 d 173.8 ± 45.3 c 1.4 ± 0.2 cd 161.0 ± 13.3 fg 9.4 ± 0.5 d
MONO 19.8 ± 2.9 d 2.4 ± 0.3 d 122.3 ± 29.3 ab 1.0 ± 0.2 ab 117.0 ± 11.5 e 6.0 ± 0.5 b
MIX 18.4 ± 1.8 bcd 3.2 ± 0.3 e 215.9 ± 84.2 d 1.4 ± 0.3 c 173.0 ± 16.3 gh 9.7 ± 1.8 d

Analytical parameters of grapes.

Year Treatment YAN (mg · L−1) Sugar content (glucose + fructose) (g · L−1) Acid content (g · L−1) Malic acid (g · L−1) Tartaric acid (g · L−1) Citric acid (g · L−1) PH
2021 MECH 211.7 ±4.3 cd 240.6 ± 4.0 fg 7.2 ±0.1 c 3.6 ± 0.1g 7.6 ± 0.03 ef 0.25 ±0.01 f 3.5 ±0.03 be
HERB 150.4 ± 3.5 b 243.7 ± 1.0 g 6.9 ± 0.7 c 3.1 ± 0.2 f 7.4 ± 0.5 de 0.18 ± 0.02 c 3.6 ±0.1 c
TEX 221.8 ± 4.7 d 238.0 ± 2.9 fg 8.2 ± 0.2 d 3.7 ± 0.05 h 8.2 ± 0.01 h 0.22 ±0.01 de 3.5 ± 0.02 abc
MULCH 344.4 ± 14.2 f 204.6 ±8.9 a 9.3 ± 0.7 e 5.9 ±0.1 k 8.3 ±0.1 h 0.24 ± 0.02 ef 3.4 ±0.1 a
MONO 268.9 ± 2.0 e 207.8 ±3.1 ab 8.5 ± 0.4 d 4.8 ± 0.02 j 7.9 ± 0.01 fg 0.23 ± 0.01 def 3.5 ±0.01 abc
MIX 278.7 ± 1.1 e 208.9 ± 2.3 ab 8.7 ± 0.2 d 4.3 ± 0.03 i 8.1 ±0.1 gh 0.21 ±0.01 d 3.4 ± 0.03 ab
2022 MECH H9±l.8a 227.9 ± 1.8 de 4.2 ±0.1 ab 0.6 ± 0.04 a 7.5 ±0.04 de 0.10 ±0.01 a 3.8 ± 0.2 ef
HERB 162.1 ± 5.4 b 221.06 ±3.4 cd 4.6 ± 0.4 ab 1.1 ± 0.03 c 6.7 ± 0.3 b 0.15 ± 0.01b 3.6 ±0.1 c
TEX 152.4 ± 6.5 b 232.5 ± 10.2 ef 4.7 ±0.1 b 0.8 ±0.01 b 7.3 ± 0.01 cd 0.10 ±0.01 a 3.5 ±0.01 abc
MULCH 218 ± 12.8 d 210.7 ± 2.0 ab 4.2 ± 0.02 a 1.7 ±0.01 e 7 ± 0.02 c 0.15 ± 0.01b 3.9 ± 0.02 f
MONO 201 ± 4.6 c 216.1 ±3.0 be 4.2 ± 0.01 ab 0.8 ± 0.03 ab 7.5 ±0.02 de 0.10 ±0.01 a 3.6 ± 0.02 cd
MIX 214.1 ± 11.4 d 220.9 ± 7.8 cd 4.7 ±0.1 ab 1.3 ± 0.02 d 6.3 ±0.1 a 0.11 ±0.01 a 3.7 ± 0.01 de

Treatment description.

Abbreviation Treatment Description
MECH Bare soil cultivated mechanically Weed control in the under-vine area was carried out by using a mechanical blade weeder (three times per year)
HERB Bare soil with herbicide application Weed control in the under-vine area was carried out by applying herbicide (Glyphosate) at a rate of 4 L · ha−1 on the following dates: 31/04, 17/06, 12/08 in 2021 and 13/04, 29/06, 4/08 in 2022
TEX Textile mulch The under-vine belt was covered by black woven agrotextile (90 g) made of polypropylene with UV stabilisation with a width of 60 cm
MULCH Green mulch – mowed grass Under-vine area with a width of 60 cm was covered with a layer of cut grass at a height of 30 cm during June every year
MONO Cover crop – monoculture Microclover (Trifolium repens ‘Pipolina’) were sown manually on 07/04 2021 at a seed rate of 15 kg · ha−1 on a 60 cm-wide strip in the under-vine area
MIX Cover crop – a mixture of plants Plants from the Fabaceae family were sown manually on 07/04 2021 on a 60 cm-wide strip in the under-vine area, as shown in Table 2
eISSN:
2083-5965
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
2 times per year
Journal Subjects:
Life Sciences, Plant Science, Zoology, Ecology, other
Journal RSS Feed