Agdex 241/10

Grapevine Management Guide

200708
Prepared by Tony Somers District Horticulturist NWGIC Tocal PATERSON and Leo Quirk Extension Viticulturist NWGIC McKeown Drive WAGGA WAGGA

Acknowledgments
We would like to acknowledge the valuable contributions made by many members of the Australian wine industry in the preparation of this publication. Particular thanks to staff from: Department of Primary Industries Victoria Primary Industries and Resources South Australia NSW Department of Primary Industries Charles Sturt University Australian Wine Research Institute Swinburn University of Technology State Vine Improvement Groups South Australian Research and Development Institute The National Grapevine Trunk Diseases Program (CRCV) University of Western Sydney Cooperative Research Centre for Viticulture Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation NSW Wine Industry Association

Produced by NSW Department of Primary Industries, October 2006 Editing: Ann Munroe, Warriewood NSW Cover Photo: Andrew Loch The State of New South Wales NSW Department of Primary Industries 2007 ISSN 10367551 This publication is copyright. Except as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Commonwealth), no part of the publication may be reproduced by any process, electronic or otherwise, without the specific written permission of the copyright owner. Neither may information be stored electronically in any form whatever without such permission.
DISCLAIMER This document has been prepared by the author for NSW Department of Primary Industries, for and on behalf of the State of New South Wales, in good faith on the basis of available information. While the information contained in the document has been formulated with all due care, the users of the document must obtain their own advice and conduct their own investigations and assessments of any proposals they are considering, in the light of their own individual circumstances. The document is made available on the understanding that the State of New South Wales, the author and the publisher, their respective servants and agents accept no responsibility for any person, acting on, or relying on, or upon any opinion, advice, representation, statement of information, whether expressed or implied in the document, and disclaim all liability for any loss, damage, cost or expense incurred or arising by reason of any person using or relying on the information contained in the document or by reason of any error, omission, defect or mis-statement (whether such error, omission or mis-statement is caused by or arises from negligence, lack of care or otherwise). Whilst the information is considered true and correct at the date of publication, changes in circumstances after the time of publication may impact on the accuracy of the information. The information may change without notice, and the State of New South Wales, the author and the publisher and their respective servants and agents are not in any way liable for the accuracy of any information contained in this document. Recognising that some of the information is provided by third parties, the State of New South Wales, the author and the publisher take no responsibility for the accuracy, currency, reliability and correctness of any information included in the document provided by third parties. The product trade names in this publication are supplied on the understanding that no preference between equivalent products is intended and that the inclusion of a product does not imply endorsement by NSW Department of Primary Industries over any other equivalent product from another manufacturer. ALWAYS READ THE LABEL Users of agricultural (or veterinary) chemical products must always read the label and any permit before using the product, and strictly comply with the directions on the label and the conditions of any permit. Users are not absolved from compliance with the directions on the label or the conditions of the permit by reason of any statement made or not made in this publication.

Contents
Welcome ..................................................................................................................... 4 Staff 200708 ............................................................................................................. 5 National Wine and Grape Industry Centre: a unique focus ........................................ 12 Hot topic: Climate change and viticulture ................................................................. 20 Australian winegrape outlook 200711 ..................................................................... 22 Downy mildew management .................................................................................... 38 Grapevine nutrition ................................................................................................... 41 Integrated weed management and desuckering ........................................................ 47 Spray application in vineyards ................................................................................... 56 Bud fruitfullness assessments in grapevines ............................................................... 68 Phylloxera .................................................................................................................. 73 Organic management of mite pests .......................................................................... 78 Natural enemies in the vineyard: whats eating your pests? ...................................... 80 Sourcing grapevine planting material ........................................................................ 88 Appendix 1 Agrochemicals registered for use in Australian viticulture 200708 .............................................................................. 91 Appendix 2 Internet sites for wine and grape industries ...................................... 102 Appendix 3 Where to buy your planting material ............................................... 106

Welcome
Welcome to the 200708 Grapevine Management Guide. The Grapevine Management Guide is a pivotal publication for the National Wine and Grape Industry Centre (NWGIC), as it communicates our support for industry best practices. At NWGIC we are developing our capacity, thanks to our partnership with the Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation (GWRDC) through the Winegrowing Futures Program and industry support. As a result of this you will note the addition of several new staff members to the Centre. We would like welcome every new member to the Centre, and in particular our new Director Professor Thomas Henick-Kling. Thomas joins the centre from Cornell University. He is a world expert in wine microbiology, and his knowledge and expertise will be great assets to the Centres future operations. Integration of the services offered by the NWGIC partnership will increase the international competitiveness of the Australian wine industry by developing improved viticultural production systems that increase economic and environmental sustainability. In this edition we cover many topical subjects. We look forward to working with industry in the challenging times we are all facing.

We anticipate that the increase in the resources and staffing at NWGRC that has partly resulted from the Winegrowing Futures program will support future investment in the research and development needs of the Australian wine grape industry.

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the role of the The National Wine and Grape Industry Centre

The Partners

Outputs

Research

The NSW Wine Industry Association represents the interests of the wine industry in New South Wales

Extension

Leading provider of information for the agricultural sector

Education

Leading provider of education for the wine industry

Training

Staff 200708
Director Professor Thomas Henick-Kling NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4137 Fax: 02 6933 4068 E-mail: thenick-kling@csu.edu.au Dr Ron Hutton NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2108 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: ron.hutton@dpi.nsw.gov.au Associate Professor Chris Steel CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2721 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: csteel@csu.edu.au Mr Chris OConnell NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4015 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: christopher.oconnell@dpi.nsw.gov.au Professor Geoffrey Scollary NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4030 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: gscollary@csu.edu.au

Deputy Director

Acting Head of School

Facilities Manager

Professor Oenology

Professor Winegrowing Professor Jim Hardie Innovation NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2016 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: jhardie@csu.edu.au Viticulture Research: Vine Physiology Dr John Gray CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2728 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: jgray@csu.edu.au Dr Dennis Greer CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2725 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: dgreer@csu.edu.au Dr Bruno Holzapfel NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4023 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: bruno.holzapfel@dpi.nsw.gov.au

Viticulture Research: Plant Physiology

Viticulture Research: Rootstock Physiology Vine reserves and Nutrition

Viticulture Research: Entomology

Dr Andrew Loch NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4082 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: andrew.loch@dpi.nsw.gov.au Associate Professor John Louis CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2543 Fax: 02 6933 2733 E-mail: jlouis@csu.edu.au Dr Loothfar Rahman NWGIC LOCKED BAG 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4024 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: loothfar.rahman.@dpi.nsw.gov.au Dr Suzy Rogiers NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2436 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: suzy.rogiers@dpi.nsw.gov.au Mr Graeme Sanderson PO Box 62 Dareton NSW 2717 Phone: 03 5027 4409 Fax: 03 5027 4319 E-mail: graeme.sanderson@dpi.nsw.gov.au Dr Sandra Savocchia CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4341 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: ssavocchia@csu.edu.au Dr Jason Smith CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4178 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: jasmith@csu.edu.au Dr Dejan Tesic CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4152 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: dtesic@csu.edu.au Dr Melanie Weckert NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2720 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: melanie.weckert@dpi.nsw.gov.au

Precision Viticulture

Viticulture Research: Pathology

Viticulture Research: Berry Development

Viticulture Research

Viticulture Research Pathology

Viticulture Research: Rootstock Physiology Vine Reserves

Viticulture Research

Viticulture Research: Pathology

Viticulture Extension, Mudgee

Mr Clarrie Beckingham PO BOX 1191 Mudgee NSW 2850 Phone: 02 6372 4700 Fax: 02 6372 6870 E-mail: clarrie.beckingham@dpi.nsw.gov.au Mr Jeremy Bright LMB 21 Orange NSW 2800 Phone: 02 6391 3822 Fax: 02 6391 3883 E-mail: jeremy.bright@dpi.nsw.gov.au Mr Julian Connellan PO Box 1087 Griffith NSW 2680 Phone: 02 6960 1315 E-mail: julian.connellan@dpi.nsw.gov.au Mrs Julie Dart PO Box 3 Tumut NSW 2720 Phone: 02 6947 4188 Fax: 02 6947 4149 E-mail: julie.dart@dpi.nsw.gov.au Mr Shayne Hackett Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2723 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: shayne.hackett@dpi.nsw.gov.au Mr Gregory Moulds PO Box 62 Dareton NSW 2717 Phone: 03 5019 8412 Fax: 03 5027 4319 E-mail: gregory.moulds@dpi.nsw.gov.au Mr Leo Quirk Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4074 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: leo.quirk@dpi.nsw.gov.au Mr Tony Somers CB Alexander College Tocal Road Paterson NSW 2421 Phone: 02 4939 8957 Fax: 02 4939 8950 E-mail: anthony.somers@dpi.nsw.gov.au Associate Professor Malcolm Allen CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2433 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: mallen@csu.edu.au

Viticulture Extension, Central Ranges, Southern Highlands (and South Coast)

Viticulture Extension, Riverina

Viticulture Extension, Tumbarumba

Viticulture Extension South West Slopes

Viticulture Extension, Sunraysia

Viticulture Extension, South West Slopes

Viticulture Extension, Hunter Valley, New England, North West and North Coast

Wine Science / Wine Production

Wine Science / Wine Production

Mr Nick Bulleid, MW Hatherleigh Laggan NSW 2583 Phone: 02 4837 3355 Fax: 02 4837 3335 E-mail: hatherleigh2@bigpond.com Mr John Blackman CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4186 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: jblackman@csu.edu.au Dr Andrew Clark CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4181 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: aclark@csu.edu.au Mr Trevor Delves CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2431 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: tdelves@csu.edu.au Mr Michel Meunier CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4173 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: mmeunier@csu.edu.au Dr Paul Prenzler CSU Locked Bag 675 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2978 Fax: 02 6933 2737 E-mail: pprenzler@csu.edu.au Mr Leigh Schmidtke CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4025 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: lschmidtke@csu.edu.au Dr Anthony Saliba Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2306 E-mail: asaliba@csu.edu.au Dr Simon Clarke Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2157 E-mail: siclarke@csu.edu.au

Wine Science / Wine Production

Wine Science / Wine Production

Wine Science / Wine Production

Wine Science / Wine Production

Wine Science / Wine Production

Wine Science / Wine Production

Sensory Scientist

Research Associate

Research Associate

Mr Stewart Field CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2157 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: stfield@csu.edu.au Dr Andrew Hall CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2744 Fax: 02 6933 2737 E-mail: ahall@csu.edu.au Dr Wayne Pitt CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2157 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: wpitt@csu.edu.au Dr Danielle Ryan CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4382 Fax: 6933 3273 E-mail: dryan@csu.edu.au Dr Laurie Rebiere CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2157 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: lrebiere@csu.edu.au Ms Edwina Blackney CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4712 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: eblackney@csu.edu.au Mrs Jennifer Bullock CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 6933 4455 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: jbullock@csu.edu.au Mrs Lindsay Greer CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4079 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: lgreer@csu.edu.au Mrs Rujuan Huang NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2859 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: rhuang@csu.edu.au

Research Associate

Research Associate

Research Associate

Research Associate

Technical Officer

Technical Officer

Technical Officer

Technical Officer

Technical Officer (Scientific)

Ms Marion Kater CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4312 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: mkater@csu.edu.au Mr Robert Lamont NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4172 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: robert.lamont@dpi.nsw.gov.au Ms Helen Pan CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4396 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: hpan@csu.edu.au Ms Sylvie Sicard CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4712 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: ssicard@csu.edu.au Ms Emily Rouse CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4396 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: erouse@csu.edu.au Ms Alison Deegenaars NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4343 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: alison.deegenaars@dpi.nsw.gov.au

Technical Officer

Technical Officer

Technical Officer

Experimental Winemaker

Education and Training

Administrative Support Mrs Yvonne Elliott NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2508 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: yvonne.elliott@dpi.nsw.gov.au Administration Assistant Ms Julie MacLeod CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2113 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: jmacleod@csu.edu.au Mrs Barbara Matthes CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2719 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: bmatthes@csu.edu.au

Executive Officer Winegrowing Futures Program

10

Administration Officer

Rhonda Thomson CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2714 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: rthomson@csu.edu.au Ms Jenny White CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 4342 Fax: 02 6933 4429 E-mail: jewhite@csu.edu.au Ms Marina Alonso CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2158 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: malonso@csu.edu.au Ms Celia Barril CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2158 Fax: 02 6933 4068 E-mail: cbarril@csu.edu.au Mr Yann Guisard CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6365 7889 E-mail: yguisard@csu.edu.au

Secretary to Head of School

Post-graduate Student

Post-graduate Student

Post-graduate Student

Post-graduate Student, Ms Aude Gourieroux Bunchstem CSU Locked Bag 588 Development Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2158 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: agourieroux@csu.edu.au Post-graduate Student Mr Michael Yu Qiu CSU Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2158 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: yqiu@csu.edu.au Mr Markus Muller NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2158 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: mmuller@csu.edu.au Ms Nicola Wunderlich NWGIC Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2678 Phone: 02 6933 2158 Fax: 02 6933 2107 E-mail: nwunderlich@csu.edu.au

Post-graduate Student

Post-graduate Student

11

Wine National Wine and Grape Industry Centre: a unique focus

The success of the Australian wine industry can be attributed to the innovative culture of its viticulturists and winemakers. The confidence shown by Australian viticulturists and winemakers in adopting new technologies is based on the strength of the education and research programs that are provided by the wine industry nationally. For continued growth of the wine industry, all stages of the supply chain from wine-grape growing to wine marketing must remain internationally competitive. This requires an innovative industry culture that depends on research, education, knowledge management and vocational training. The National Wine and Grape Industry Centre (NWGIC) is gaining a reputation as one of Australias most respected wine industry research centres. It is located at Wagga Wagga in NSW and is a partnership between the NSW Department of Primary Industries (DPI), Charles Sturt University (CSU) and the NSW Wine Industry Association. The centre employs more than 40 staff in research, education, training and extension. Staff are principally based at the Centre in Wagga, but some are also located in key wine-growing regions across NSW, including Dareton, Griffith, Tumut, Orange, Mudgee and the Hunter Valley. The NWGIC adds value to industry through its excellence in education and research. It extends support to viticulturists and winemakers by providing quality programs in training as well as excellent communication, through its extension programs, to the Australian grape and wine industry. With research widely acknowledged as crucial to the continuing success of the States wine industry, the NWGIC is breaking new ground in viticulture and wine research. Researchers are looking at the interactions between soil, water and climate and the influence of regionality on grape production and wine quality. This work is set against studies to better match consumer preferences for the desirable aromas and wine flavours that typify regional wine styles across the range of premium table wines produced in the widely varying climatic zones of NSW.

Regional researchnational outcomes

The Centre recently entered into a $30 million Winegrowing Futures Project (WFP) aimed at bolstering wine and viticulture research in NSW. Block funding of $13.6 million until December 2010 has been invested by the Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation (GWRDC) from grower levies as a result of similar in-kind co-investment in the initiative by the Centres research partners, CSU and DPI NSW. Financial and in-kind support is also provided through regional grower associations. This recognises the leading role played by the NWGIC in, for example, improving best-practice viticultural management practices to meet specified wine quality targets that meet consumer demand while simultaneously improving the environmental sustainability of the industry. The WFP seeks to ensure that research and extension activities lead to commercial success in the marketplace through improvements in the wine industrys competitiveness and profitability. To achieve this goal, another 17 staff have been employed as a result of this initiative. Better quality grapes, healthier and more productive vines, and vineyard water savings are among the key outcomes to be delivered to the Australian grape and wine industry under the WFP. Researchers based at the Centre will oversee trials at field sites on grower properties in the major winegrape growing regions of NSW. Some of this research will be regionally specific; other aspects will have relevance to the Australian wine industry as a whole. The NWGIC is now generating some of the most exciting research in the wine industry at both national and international levels. The Centre remains committed to the enhancement of viticultural and

Research: the key to the industrys future

Research drives the profitability and productivity of the wine industry by tackling the goal of providing a product that meets consumer demand. Each year millions of dollars are invested into grape and wine research in NSW, and the States wine consumers and rural and regional communities in which the industry is based ultimately enjoy the benefits of this investment.

12

oenological practices for the continued improvement of the wine industry. Strong links have been established with industry to ensure that the research is applicable, timely and easily adopted, and adds value to the end-product. The Centres Research, Development and Extension programs focus on studies ranging from the grapevine root zone and vine behaviour in variable environments to wine quality and consumer acceptance of the finished product. A common thread to all investigations is the implementation of sustainable vineyard management practices to maximise production efficiency and minimise the off-farm impacts of viticulture on the environment. The key WFP research themes currently receiving attention are: vine health and the environment seasonal impacts on vine productivity and grape composition optimising resource use and protecting the environment matching wine composition to consumers knowledge management and capacity-building.

determine the factors that influence the development of fungal diseases of vines develop models for predicting disease outbreaks determine control measures develop ways of predicting replanting problems. Collaborators in this research include the Hunter Valley Vineyard Association, Mudgee Winegrape Growers Association, North Coast Winegrowers Association, University of Adelaide, University of Western Sydney and Bayer Crop Sciences.

Seasonal impacts on vine productivity and grape composition

Physiological stresses have a lasting influence on the variability of grapevine yields and berry quality. Grapevines, for instance, require root and wood reserves to develop a canopy early: soil conditions especially water and soil temperatureaffect how these reserves are mobilized and move to the top of the vine. Climate and vine management will also influence the uptake of nutrients, affecting this seasons performance as well next seasons. This performance dictates not only vine vigour but also reproduction, yield and grape composition. Research will seek to: enhance understanding of nutrient and carbohydrate reserve dynamics in root growth and vine perenniality determine the influence of selected climates on vine and berry development improve our knowledge of water movement through vines and bunches optimise nutrient application and ameliorate environmental stresses to enhance vine performance and improve berry composition. Collaborators include CSIRO, University of Adelaide and Washington State University.

Vine health and the environment

The vine health theme addresses diseases and management of the grapevine. Bunch rots, young vine decline and diseases of the wood are the focus of this area of Winegrowing Futures research. Bunch rot of grapes, for instance, is classically associated with the disease grey mould, caused by the fungus Botrytis cinerea. However, bunch rotting can be caused by a wide variety of organisms including fungi, yeasts and bacteria. Several organisms can be isolated from the same bunch of grapes and even a single berry. Further work has shown that some bunch rots are common in sub-tropical areas, whereas grey mould is associated with cooler climates. Although certain factors are known to predispose vine tissues to disease, options for managing them such as use of fungicides, biocontrol agents or changed cultural practicesare largely unknown. This research area will: elucidate the organisms responsible for bunch rot, young vine decline and trunk diseases of vines improve disease detection

Optimising resource use and protecting the environment

Efficient use of water is a key focus of this research theme. The impact of irrigation on yield and fruit composition in red wine grape varieties is well understood, but little is known about the impact of irrigation on vine growth, yield and flavour profiles in white wine grape varieties. Growers want to know
13

how this can be managed to minimise water use while maximising yield for desired quality traits. Remote-sensing techniques will help model vineyard water use and predict yield. Spatial data will also be gathered on factors such as shoot length and canopy size and shape. Models will be developed to give preliminary yield forecasts 15 months before vintage, with regular revisions until harvest. Data on climate and weather events could also be included. This research theme will: compare the use of different moisture sensors reduce the environmental impacts of irrigation and fertilisers reduce water inputs model and predict grapevine yield identify zonal variability within vineyards offer cost savings over existing industry best practice make data available to CSIRO for further modelling.

techniques on the relationship between flavour profiling and consumer sensory response.

Knowledge management and capacity building

This theme combines all the components of the entire WFP and is the one for which communication of the research outputs as outcomes for improved industry production practice will be delivered. Keeping all sectors of the industry informed is an essential part of the WFP operating plan. A national communications strategy will be developed to ensure timely delivery of the benefits and information flowing from the WFP. To achieve this, a new position of National Viticulture Extension Coordinator, to be based at Wagga Wagga, has been created to help improve the flow of information to wine-grape growers across Australia. The role of this position is to identify issues of high regional priority in collaboration with wine-grape grower and wine producer associations and to develop and implement effective communication processes, demonstration trials and training opportunities across the nation. This new national extension communicator position will link separate State and privately funded viticulture extension networks with sources of information from researchers in Australia and abroad. A national approach to extension will ensure access to best practice materials across the country and consistency in the information being delivered to industry. The aim is to promote innovation within the Australian wine growing community by drawing on the outputs of current research and development, and other knowledge in the field. This targeted, regionally-based approach will be supported by broad communication of topical information emerging from the WFP and from other research projects conducted by the NWGIC and other research and extension organisations in Australia. Projected WFP outcomes include: development of an active world-class research portfolio with information and opportunities constantly assessed by, and made available to, industry improved detection and identification of wood and bunch diseases and a reduction in populations of bunch rot organisms in vineyards development of vineyard management strategies for improved utilisation of vine nutrients

Matching wine composition to consumers

The most experienced wine judges often have marked differences of opinion about wine quality. But what about consumers? This research area will explore the use of sensory panels to predict consumer preferences. Panels of potential consumers with varying amounts of wine-drinking experience can be used to taste a selection of wines and score wines for attributes such as perceived wine quality and preference. The aim here is to develop a model that can be used to assess consumer expectations of different grape varieties and wine styles. There is evidence to suggest that grape berries are influenced by the sites they grow in. Semillon is an important variety in NSW, but its wine style has not yet been defined. Trained panels that include winemakers and other wine professionals will taste a variety of Hunter Valley Semillons and rank such attributes as intensity, cleanness, aroma and palate. Panels of less experienced consumers will then consider broader issues, such as the question of wine quality and preference during aging. Collaborators in this research theme include the Hunter Valley Vineyard Association, Riverina Winemakers Association and CSIRO. The experience of researchers in France will be sought for their expertise in studying the effect of site conditions on vines. Researchers from Spain will help develop

14

 a reduction in the environmental and ecological impacts of irrigation and fertiliser use on vineyards improvements to Semillon grape and wine quality while maintaining or increasing yield improved matching of wines to consumer expectations.

the Hunter Valley and Mudgee wine regions of NSW were surveyed for the presence of Botryosphaeria. Here we report the results of the identification and pathogenicity screening of the species isolated from eastern Australia. Botryosphaeria spp. were isolated from up to 80% of all samples collected. Other grapevine pathogens were also isolated. Botryosphaeria spp. may be responsible for grapevine decline in these regions. However, there is a possibility that the decline is due to a complex of pathogens rather than one organism, since other wood-inhabiting fungi were isolated. To date, four species of Botryosphaeria (B. obtusa, B. parva, B. dothidea and B. rhodina) were identified on the basis of morphological characteristics and DNA sequencing. Botryosphaeria obtusa was the most abundant (>93%), followed by B. parva (about 5%). Botryosphaeria dothidea and B. rhodina were isolated occasionally. All four species were pathogenic on detached Chardonnay canes, with lesion lengths varying under different temperatures. Trials have been established to confirm the pathogenicity of Botryosphaeria spp. in potted and field-grown grapevines. Contacts: Y. Qiu, S. Savocchia, C.C. Steel, G. Ash.

Summary of selected NWGIC Project activities

Prevalence of bunch rots in the Hunter and Hastings valleys
High summer rainfall and warm temperatures when grapes ripen can cause a range of non-Botrytis bunch rots to develop, resulting in serious quality and yield loss. Bitter rot caused by Greeneria uvicola and ripe rot caused by Colletotrichum acutatum are frequently isolated from subtropical regions, causing bitter taints in both grape juice and wine at low levels of infection. Other fungal pathogens also occur and form part of a bunch rot complex. In 2007, two vineyards in the Hastings Valley and one in the lower Hunter Valley, NSW, were surveyed at harvest for the prevalence of bunch rots. These regions received 109 mm and 32 mm rainfall, respectively, in the 6 weeks before harvestboth less than the seasonal average. Alternaria spp. and Pestalotia spp. were the predominant fungi isolated from berries and leaves at all sites. Colletotrichum was isolated only from the Hastings Valley in both leaves and berries, at very high levels. Greeneria was isolated only from the Hunter Valley, where Botryosphaeria was also isolated from leaves at this site. The incidence of fungi considered as saprophytes or as opportunistic pathogens (Alternaria, Pestalotia and Fusarium) differed little between sites. Fungi on vegetative tissues may act as an inoculum source for subsequent bunch rot infection. Contacts: L.A. Greer, C.C. Steel, S. Savocchia

Presence of Eutypa lata in grapevines from the Riverina region, NSW

Eutypa dieback, caused by the fungus Eutypa lata (anamorph: Libertella blepharis) is a serious disease of grapevines in Australia. With losses thought to exceed A$20 million annually (Sosnowski et al. 2005), the fungus generally infects vines through pruning wounds, subsequently colonising the xylem tissue, cambium and phloem and eventually girdling the vine as a result of canker formation around infected wounds. Symptoms, which are thought to be caused by phytotoxic compounds produced by the fungus, include stunted shoots with shortened internodes and small distorted, chlorotic leaves. A characteristic wedge-shaped zone of dead wood is also common in the trunks of infected vines. In the absence of intervention vines may eventually die, severely affecting vineyard productivity and longevity (Munkvold et al. 1994). Four isolates of a fungus, conforming to Carters (1991) morphological descriptions of Eutypa lata, were isolated from wood tissue collected from symptomatic vines. Microscopic examination revealed the presence of conidia conforming to descriptions of Libertella blepharism (Carter 1991), the anamorph of Eutypa lata. Molecular identification of Eutypa lata was confirmed by the amplification of a ~650-bp fragment using

Evaluating the pathogenicity of Botryosphaeria species isolated from declining grapevines in eastern Australia
Species of Botryosphaeria have frequently been reported to be associated with grapevine canker disease. Of 11 species recorded on grapevines worldwide, six have been reported in Australian vineyards. Considerable effort has been directed towards the differentiation and identification of the species, but their pathogenicity towards grapevines is not fully understood. In 2005, declining grapevines in

15

species-specific primers (Lardner et al. 2005), and also by comparison of internal transcribed spacer sequences with published records. During the study Eutypa lata was isolated from 4% of vines surveyed; Botryosphaeria (32%) and Phomopsis (14%) were also present in the region. This is the first report of Eutypa lata, the causal agent of Eutypa dieback, in the Riverina wine region of NSW. Although prominent in South Australian vineyards, Eutypa lata has not been reported north of Wentworth, approximately 20 km from Mildura in Victoria (T. Wicks, personal communication). Extensive surveys conducted in the Hunter Valley and Mudgee regions also failed to isolate Eutypa lata, and many researchers believe that differences in the environmental conditions between the two regions may play an important role in the incidence and distribution of the fungus. Vigilant monitoring, protection of pruning wounds from infection, and removal of dead infected wood from the vineyard remain the best methods of managing the disease (Loschiavo et al. 2007). Contacts: W.M. Pitt, Y. Qiu, S. Savocchia, C.C. Steel, M.R. Sosnowski

Permanent swards increase soil microbial counts in two Australian vineyards

Continuous plant cover from a permanent sward can be an important source of soil organic matter. We investigated the effects of continuous plant cover on soil microbes in two drip-irrigated (under-vine) NSW vineyards. At both sites, the level of hot-water-extractable carbon (HWC) was significantly higher in vegetated (sward) soil than in bare soil. Bacterial counts were higher in sward plots than in bare plots (50% to 265% higher at Wagga Wagga and 86% to 414% higher at Tumbarumba). Fungal counts and counts of pseudomonad bacteria, bacteria that grow in carbon-rich or carbon-poor environments, and cellulose-degrading bacteria were positively correlated with HWC. At the higher-rainfall Tumbarumba site, the inter-row bulk density was 6% lower in the sward plots than in the bare plots. Contacts: M. Weckert, L. Rahman and R. Hutton

Molecular characterisation of Colletotrichum acutatum from grapes in Australia

Ripe rot, a bunch rot disease of wine grapes in subtropical Australia, causes yield loss and off flavour in wine. Two species of fungus, Colletotrichum acutatum and C. gloeosporioides, have been implicated in ripe rot of grapes. This research aimed to confirm the identity of ripe-rot isolates and to study the genetic diversity among isolates in Australia. PCR (polymerase chain reaction) amplification with species-specific primers confirmed the identity of the 43 isolates previously identified by morphological taxonomy as C. acutatum. RAPD (random amplification of polymorphic DNA)-PCR data indicated a high level of genetic similarity among the grape isolates from northern NSW and QLD, whereas those from the Shoalhaven formed two distinct groups. Ripe rot isolates tested were identified as C. acutatum and not C. gloeosporioides. The pathogen, spreading across the subtropical region of Australia, probably originates from a single source. However, isolates from the Shoalhaven Valley showed a degree of genetic diversity. Contacts: R. Huang, M.A. Weckert, C.C. Steel and C.L. Blanchard

Xylem sap flow through Semillon grapevines grown under heat and water stress
Semillon is a wine grape variety that is susceptible to the high light, temperature and vapour pressure deficit (VPD) conditions characteristic of the warm grape-growing regions of Australia. Symptoms of stress include leaf burn, arrested shoot growth, decreased berry size, and altered berry flavour and aroma. To investigate the cause of these symptoms, we performed a study to determine whether the observed vine response was due to the direct effect of temperature or the extreme VPDs that accompany hot weather. In the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area of NSW, dripand neighbouring flood-irrigated blocks of Semillon vines were monitored during the ripening period. Soil tension was measured with Watermark soil moisture sensors installed at depths of 25, 50, 75 and 100 cm. Transpiration was measured by the heat pulse technique with Greenspan sap-flow sensors and an ADC open gas exchange system. Pre-dawn leaf water potentials were measured with a Scholander-type pressure chamber. Soil tensions did not exceed 20 kPa at root zone depths of 25 to 100 cm, and the readily available water (RAW) was near 100% throughout the 2-month period immediately before harvest. Average soil tensions recorded in the root zone of the floodirrigated vines were 90 to 200 kPa, and the RAW was less than 10% during most of the ripening period.

16

Daytime vine-sap flow in these vines was less than half that of vines from the drip-irrigated block, despite the fact that the flood-irrigated vines had larger canopies. Leaf margins were burnt, and the predawn leaf water potential before irrigation indicated that vine water status had not recovered during the night. At harvest, berries were shrivelled and had lower fresh weights than berries from the dripirrigated block. Inadequate soil moisture during a warm ripening period caused leaf burn and poor quality fruit in Semillon. Therefore, to maintain vine health and optimal berry composition, soil moisture monitoring and adequate irrigation scheduling are required. Contacts: S. Rogiers, R. Hutton, D. Greer, A. Somers and P Hutchinson .

growth, reduced fruitfulness, delayed ripening and increased pressure from fungal diseases. Commonly used fertilisers such as urea and calcium nitrate also contain highly mobile forms of nitrogen, so the potential for nitrogen movement from the vineyard to ground water or surrounding waterways is increased with high fertiliser applications. Efficient management of nitrogen fertilisers therefore depends on matching applications to ensure an adequate, but not excessive, supply to the vine. Nitrogen use efficiency can also be improved by timing applications to match periods of high root uptake, and by managing irrigation to minimise the loss of nitrogen through surface run-off or deep drainage below the root-zone. The aim of this study was to identify strategies for minimising the environmental impact of nitrogen fertiliser use while maintaining the productivity of irrigated vineyards. Three furrow- and three drip-irrigated Chardonnay vineyards on three soil types in the Riverina were selected for the study. Instrumentation was installed to record soil moisture at 25, 50, 75 and 100 cm (gypsum blocks, Watermark Sensors and Envirosmart capacitance probes) and allow the collection of soil solution samples (ceramic cup samplers evacuated to 60 kPa following irrigation or rainfall events) for later determination of nitrate and nitrite (NOx) concentrations. Surface runoff was collected in one furrow-irrigated vineyard with an ISCO storm monitoring system. In each of the drip-irrigated vineyards, replicated instrumentation was installed at one main site and at two satellite sites. In the furrow-irrigated vineyards one main site and two satellites sites were established at each end of the block. At all sites, soil solution NOx concentrations, soil moisture, vine nutritional status and fruit composition were monitored over two seasons (200405 and 200506). The concentration of N in the petioles at flowering provides an indication of the overall N status of the vine (Robinson et al., 1997). Juice amino acids, which are used by yeasts during fermentation, can also be used as an indicator of vine N requirements. Petiole N concentrations increased with increasing N application rates, but amino N remained constant at above 50 kg N/ha. Yield did not increase with higher N application rates, suggesting that the average 70 kg N/ha applied across all test sites was more than required to maintain productivity. The petiole N and juice amino acid concentrations indicated that this amount of N was just adequate.

Heat stress: does it affect sugar accumulation in Semillon grapes?

Heat events >40 C during the ripening stage of berry development are believed to impede sugar accumulation in Semillon berries. No data to support this hypothesis were available, so we investigated whether heat affected berry development. Shade (shadecloth) and micro-sprinkler cooling treatments (hydrocooling) were used to create different canopy temperature environments. Canopy, leaf and bunch temperatures were monitored with infra-red radiation sensors and thermocouples, and gas exchange (photosynthesis and transpiration) was measured periodically. Shoots and bunches were harvested for dry matter allocation and berry assessment. Shaded vines had lower shoot weights than exposed vines but similar bunch dry weights. Bunch fresh weights were about 20 g higher in the shaded vines. Total acidity and % soluble solids varied slightly, but there was no difference in pH. Shading significantly reduced the number of times canopy temperatures exceeded 35 C. Compared with fully exposed vines, in vines under shade there were some changes in terms of shoot transpiration but not berry composition. Further work is required to address the hypothesis. Contacts: D. Greer, S. Clark and S. Sicard

Nitrogen management in irrigated vineyards: meeting vine nutritional requirements and minimising environmental impact
Nitrogen is the nutrient most commonly applied in viticulture and is essential for normal vine growth and fruit development. However, high applications of nitrogen fertiliser can result in excessive vegetative

17

Soil solution NOx concentrations at 1 m in the root zone were higher under furrow than drip, and higher than in surface runoff water (0.01 to 8.3 mg/L). These measurements do not allow total losses to be quantified, but they suggest that the management of N fertilisers and irrigation could be improved to minimise the movement of N below the root zone. However, less than 5% of irrigation water applied to furrow-irrigated vines left the vineyard as surface runoff. Annual N loss was only 0.3 kg N/ha, indicating that surface N loss was minor relative to fertilizer input. On average, deep drainage from drip-irrigated vineyards was minimal (0.61 ML/ha) during the irrigation period of either season, so the potential for N loss was low. Application rates of 40 to 50 kg N/ha were sufficient for optimal vegetative and juice N concentrations. Higher rates did not result in an increase in yield. N applications should be split between pre-bloom and post-harvest to match root growth periods and avoid single large applications that increase the N leaching risk. Greater use of standard plant tissue analysis should be encouraged to refine N application rates and allow adjustments from season to season. Likewise, greater use of soil moisture monitoring should also be encouraged to determine when irrigation is required and thus minimise deep drainage losses. Contacts: J. Smith, B. Holzapfel, K. Barlow, W. Bond, E. Blackney, P Hutchinson and R. Hutton. .

glucose and fructose. The predominant reserve is starch, which can be seen when the tissue is stained with iodine. Starch content decreases following budbreak as carbohydrates are used to support new shoot growth, but it recovers following the flowering and late ripening period of the annual growth cycle. However, the dynamics of reserve accumulation vary considerably among vineyards, depending on yield, irrigation practice and the length of the post-harvest period. It also appears that the capacity of the vine for photosynthesis during the ripening period is an important factor in determining the extent of reserve replenishment. Consequently, weather conditions during ripening may induce common seasonal fluctuations in reserve status across vineyards at the regional level. More information on how environmental factors and crop load influence whole-vine carbon balance is required to properly understand the seasonal dynamics of reserve accumulation. An additional factor that needs consideration is the extent to which the relative sink strength of reserves change during the season. Contacts: J. Smith, L. Quirk, S. Field, R. Lamont, B. Holzapfel

Effect of micro-oxygenation on sensory perception of Shiraz oaked with oak chips

The practice of using oak barrels to improve the quality of wine was adopted by winemakers long before the phenomenon was experimentally validated (Singleton, 1995). Maturing wine in new oak barrels can be up to twice as costly as using barrel-alternatives such as chips or staves (Paul, 2002). The tradeoff is that barrel-alternatives are thought to impart an unnatural flavour profile that includes higher levels of bitterness and astringency (Gutierrez Alonso, 2002), generally accepted as negative wine flavours. A technique called micro-oxygenation (MO) may hold the key to managing this trade-off. However, no study has yet examined whether MO influences the sensory properties of wine oaked with barrel-alternatives. If MO is found to mediate a more acceptable sensory profile in barrel-alternatives, then the use of MO combined with barrel-alternatives could substantially reduce the cost of high-quality winemaking. Repeated measures ANOVA (analysis of variance) revealed that MO significantly reduced perceived bitterness. The effect of MO across all sensory descriptors was moderate. It followed a consistent (and statistically significant) trend in reducing the perceived intensity of each descriptor. Although the reduction in some cases was small, this result suggests that although MO may reduce the negative flavours imparted by barrel-alternatives, it may also reduce positive flavours.

Understanding the impact of environment and management practice on carbohydrate reserve accumulation and the possible consequences for vine productivity
Carbohydrate reserves are stored in the perennial parts of the vine and used to support growth requirements until sufficient leaf area is attained in spring to meet carbon demands from photosynthesis. Research has shown that the amount of reserves stored before leaf-fall can be influenced by management practice and climatic conditions, and that this may alter vine vigour or yield in the following season. Our work has three main objectives: (1) to understand the dynamics of reserve accumulation in relation to management and climatic effects on vine carbon balance; (2) to determine the impact of reserve status on reproductive development and yield in the following season; and (3) to evaluate practical methods for manipulating reserve accumulation as a means of managing yield and fruit composition in the following season. Grapevines store carbohydrates in the form of starch and a sugar fraction consisting mainly of sucrose,

18

MO is used in winemaking to reduce the artificial flavours introduced from using oak chips and unwanted fruit or fermentation aromas. Results have shown that bitterness and possibly other negative flavours are reduced by MO. However, MO also reduced other, potentially positive flavours such as cherry and stewed plums. The reduction in intensity of these characters is small but should be considered when MO is used as a technique to reduce negative flavours. Contacts: L. Schmidtke, A. Saliba and J. Blackman

References
Carter M.V. (1991). The status of Eutypa lata as a pathogen. Phytopathological Paper 32, C.A.B. International Mycological Institute, Wallingford, Oxon, England. Gutierrez Alonso V.L. (2002). Sensory descriptive analysis between white wines fermented with oak chips and in barrels. Journal of Food Science 67: 24152419. Lardner R., Stummer B.E., Sosnowski M.R., Scott E.S. (2005). Molecular identification and detection of Eutypa lata in grapevine. Mycological Research 109: 799808. Loschiavo A., Sosnowski M., Wicks T. (2007). Incidence of Eutypa dieback in the Adelaide hills. The Australian and New Zealand Grapegrower and Winemaker, 519: 2629. Munkvold G.P., Duthie J.A., Marois J.J. (1994). Reductions in yield and vegetative growth of grapevines due to Eutypa dieback. Phytopathology 84: 186192. Robert P. (2002). Micro-oxygenation: Where to Now? Proceedings of Seminar on Use of Gases in Winemaking, held in Adelaide, South Australia. Australian Society of Viticulture and Oenology pp. 1822. Robinson J.B., Treeby M.T., Stephenson R.A. (1997). Fruits, vines and nuts. In Plant Analysis: An Interpretation Manual. D.J. Reuter and J.B. Robinson (Eds), pp. 249382. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Australia. Singleton V.L. (1995). Maturation of wines and spirits: comparisons, facts, and hypotheses, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 46: 98115. : Sosnowski M., Wicks T., Edwards J., Scott E., Lardner R. (2005). Whats happening in the world of grapevine trunk diseases? The Australian and New Zealand Grapegrower and Winemaker 498: 1821.

Consumer preferences for Hunter Valley Semillon

Hunter Valley Semillon is well known within the wine industry for its clean flavour profiles and has performed with distinction in wine shows. This variety has been prominent, but some say that the varietys domestic sales volume is not commensurate with the success it has achieved at wine shows. Although Hunter Valley Semillon is widely referred to as an iconic wine style, less is known about the exact flavour profile that consumers prefer, and less again is known about demographic or other clusters for preference. To further investigate the flavour profile of Hunter Semillon and identify consumer preferences that are linked to the style of these wines, consumer preference mapping is being used to identify the flavours that consumers like and dislike in Hunter Valley Semillon wines. Consumer preference data will be combined with descriptive analysis performed by a trained sensory panel to identify the flavours that most influence consumer predilection (and theoretically, re-buy behaviour). The study will collect consumer responses from Sydney and Wagga Wagga, thereby enabling a comparison between rural- and city-based consumers. Consumers will need only to indicate how much they like a wine or to pick their favourite and least favourite wines from the selectiona technique known as best-worst. Both of these methodologies will be compared; it is expected that the best-worst technique will be easier for consumers to understand and that more reliable and robust data will result. Contacts: A. Saliba, J. Blackman and G. Scollary

19

Hot topic: Climate change and viticulture

GREGORY MOULDS , DISTRICT HORTICULTURIST ( VITICULTURE ), NSW DPI , DARETON

Climate change or climate variability will affect all areas of viticulture production: the production areas, the varieties grown and how they are grown, and the yields and quality of grapes harvested. There will be positive benefits and negative benefits of these changes; most are yet to play out over a period long enough to make accurate predictions. The real and likely impacts may be indicted in trends over the last few seasons rather than over the last 10 to 15 years. What is known is that there will be an increase in temperature of 2C or more, with a 10 per cent decrease in rainfall. The type of impact will vary depending on the grape sector that producers are ini.e. whether they are in the dried fruit, table, or wine production sectors. Within these sectors the amount or degree of climate change and its impact will vary from area to area, depending on many factors.

What is likely to happen in production regions?

adoption of alternative sustainable practices changes to pest and disease spraying programs smaller production regions, and establishment in new regions larger vineyards reduced yield per hectare changes in the varieties grown application of less water per hectare greater use of technically-based decision information increased use of frost-mitigation practices.

What will happen in short term, or is happening now?

earlier bud burst earlier flowering shorter maturity period earlier harvests fruit quality and optimum maturity lasting for shorter periods increased incidence and severity of frosts due to increased soil drying higher temperatures before harvest warmer periods around the time of fruit initiation less rain in the major catchment areas unseasonal rain in some growing areas.

Some of these factors are:

how much the climate varies the rate of climate change the extent of these changes how the world reacts and what governments do the degree of acceptance by the viticulture industry, and what the industry is prepared to do how producers accept the changes and the extent to which they are prepared to adapt, monitor, and modify existing practices.

How grape growers adapt will depend on:

the methods used to adapt the current variety mix water availability in their area how effectively the water is used their understanding of how much water their vines need their choice of rootstocks, including the more adaptive ones their current financial position and the economic profitability of their business.

What cultural practices will need to be looked at as adaptive measures?

use of new varieties with increased planting densities use of different methods and levels of pruning more prioritisation and rotation of patches use of drought-resistant varieties and of rootstocks that can reduce the vigour of the scion and thus reduce transpiration in hot, dry conditions

20

 increased use of soil moisture retention methods increased crop thinning or regulation use of cover crops or mid-row plants to reduce vineyard temperatures increased fertiliser application to increase vegetative growth on some varieties increased monitoring and water budgeting.

Optimise foliage density and nutrition. Check for and manage late disease problems. Optimise management of post-harvest growth.

In coping with, and surviving, change in viticulture, what things do you need to consider?
What lessons (e.g. in water reduction) have you learned from the past? What will you need to monitor (e.g. changes in flowering and harvest times)? What amount of water do you need? What future rootstock and varieties will be needed? What cultural practices will you use? If you change a practice, what will happen next? With earlier harvest what changes to your nutrition, disease and irrigation programs will there be? Do you need to grow a crop more adaptive to climate change? Be informed, communicate with others, and have a support network when making decisions! Try to take the emotions out of the decisionmaking process.

What are the increased types of monitoring required?

budburst dates flowering dates vineyard temperature readings soil moisture and salinity harvest dates and yields yield trends local weather trends and actuals.

What are the trends in Sunraysia, and what has happened in past seasons?
reduced yields (minus 20% to 50%) in grapes grapes reaching maturity earliest ever severe leaf and bunch stress red and whites maturing at the same time maturing of some varieties followed by breakdown in quality after rain reduction in irrigation allocations.

What needs to happen at the vineyard level?

Monitor, monitor and monitor! Use your eyes, your equipment, and computer services!! Optimise your row direction and use closer rows. Use cover-crops to reduce vineyard temperatures. Change the times when the wires used to hold the canopy structure and foliage are lifted, and change the number of lifts (e.g. the number of lifts may need to be reduced from two to one in a season to prevent overexposure of the fruit to sunlight). Change your nutrition program to increase foliage. Use early frost irrigation as a preventive measure.

21

Australian winegrape outlook 200711

STUART MCGRATH - KERR , EXECUTIVE OFFICER , NSW WINE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION

Introduction
This report paper was prepared by McGrath-Kerr Business Consultants Pty Ltd for Wine Grape Growers Australia (WGGA)* using funding from the Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation (GWRDC). The Report provides grapegrowers and others with an overview of the winegrape supply/demand position within the Australian wine industry and, in particular, the outlook for the industry over the next 5 years. Similar overviews have been produced each year since 1994 as part of the process of growers and winemakers meeting to discuss industry prospects, and more recently, as the Report of the Australian Winegrape Conference, which has been held in Mildura in November of 2003, 2004 and 2005.

Marketing Board (Riverina), the New South Wales Wine Industry Association, and the Phylloxera and Grape Industry Board of SA.

A note on the new methodology

This year information on grape supply was obtained from ABARE forecasts rather than from winemakers through the Australian Regional Wine Grape Crush Survey. Under the revised arrangements winemakers were asked to specify their Committed intake (fruit from their own vineyards and contract purchases), and their Required intake (demand). This has been compared with grape supply forecasts prepared independently by ABARE to determine grape supplydemand balances. For this first year using the new methodology, ABARE has only been able to provide supply forecasts to the zone level, meaning that some regional analyses done in the past are not possible for this year. The regions previously analysed (Riverina, Murray Valley and Riverland) are slightly expanded as a result of the use of zones. However, this is expected to be rectified in the coming year so that a more forensic analysis of the two sets of data can be undertaken. This paper is presented in three parts: Part 1 is a summary to date of the Australian wine market for both domestic and exports, future production and sales, and stocks. Part 2 is an analysis of the supply and demand position for the broad warm/cool groupings for 2007 to 2011. Warm regions are defined to encompass the zones of Big Rivers, Murray Darling Swan Hill and Lower Murray, and the cool regions are the rest. Part 3 is a Summary Statement of the winegrape outlook for cool and inland (warm climate) regions.

This year WGGA is not conducting a single Australian Winegrape Outlook Conference, opting instead to produce the Outlook Report and use this as the basis of a program of more targeted regional briefings. This overview has been produced based on the realisation of a significantly reduced crop in 2007 and a flow-on effect for 2008. For the purposes of this Report it is assumed that the industry returns to normal yields in vintage 2009 in line with the current Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics (ABARE) forecasts. However, depending on the timing of a return to more normal rainfall patterns in southern Australia and the availability of irrigation water from the MurrayDarling system prior to vintage 2008, there may be an enduring drought impact on the 2008 vintage and some carryover of these drought impacts on the 2009 vintage. The Report draws on statistics and market analysis provided by regional, State and National industry bodies, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation (AWBC), and the ABARE. Collection of the ABS and ABARE data was funded by the GWRDC. Regional winegrape utilisation surveys were funded by the Murray Valley Wine Grape Industry Development Committee, the Wine Grapes

A note on drought impacts

A combination of widespread frosts, drought-induced water restrictions, drought-affected bunch development and smaller berry size during the 200607 growing season has resulted in a marked reduction in grape supply in 2007, which is expected to carry through to the 2008 vintage. Projections used in this

*WGGA address: Suite 7,128 Fullarton Road, Norwood, SA 5067 Postal: PO Box 950 Kent Town, SA 5071 Telephone: (08) 8331 1422 Facsimilie: (08) 8331 1477 email: info@wgga.com.au 22

by 2009. These projections have been provided by ABARE, but may be optimistic if drought conditions and irrigation water restrictions persist. While the Reports general supplydemand settings for the industry over the next 5 years would remain valid, a deeper than forecast drought impact on 2008 and 2009 vintage yields would result in: a) wine stocks remaining well within industry comfort levels over the longer-term b) deepening of the forecast shortages of warm inland fruit c) extension of the period of substitution of warm inland grape requirements with cool zone fruit, the delaying of the reappearance of the structural oversupply of grapes in cool zones, and the delaying of consequent downward pressure on cool zone grape prices until the end of the forecast period.

Will exports of bulk wine fall back? Will exports cease to grow (or even fall) in the medium term? Will there be a return to wineries contracting growers to secure fruit supply? The reduced vintages in 2007 and 2008 should see all grapes taken up. The imbalance of grape production between the higher-cost (cool) regions and the lower-cost (warm inland) regions will be put on hold for 2 years while grape production recovers. Excess demand for grapes in 2008 should see grape prices increase for that year across most varieties. However, based on the most recent surveys of winemaker demand from the Australian Regional Winegrape Crush survey conducted in mid-2006, a return to normal yields by 2009 would see the imbalance between warm and cool grapes once more express itself. Winemakers are indicating a preference for warm-region fruit in the longer term, while cool region fruit will be oversupplied by around 25%. Depending upon how short Australian winegrape production is and how world markets respond to shortages in Australian wine over the next 2 years, this could result once more in a softening of grape prices in 2009. The supply/demand balances between warm and cool regions are discussed in detail in Part 2 of this paper. Winemaker demand will be re-surveyed during 2007 and the results will be once again compared with ABARE forecasts to review supply/demand balances. It is expected that this revised analysis will be published before the 2008 vintage. WGGA 2007

Overview
For the three vintages 200406 Australian wineries crushed in excess of 1.8 Mt of grapes for wine. The volume of wine produced relative to wine sales for those years saw stocks build to beyond industryaccepted comfort levels. In stark contrast, for at least the next 2 years the industry will be short of grapes relative to current sales levels. Australian wine sales are currently running at a shade under 1200 ML annually. Under normal winegrape juice extraction rates, a 1.3-Mt vintage will produce around 950 ML of wine, which would yield 250 ML less wine than was sold in the last calendar year. However, production reports from the 2007 vintage have indicated a significant reduction in extraction rates owing to reduced berry size. The effect of the much lower national crush and lower extraction rates will be an immediate reduction in stock levels compared with the same time last yearof at least 250 ML. If wine sales in 2007 remain at levels similar to 2006 (i.e. zero growth in domestic and export sales due to supply constraints), a 2008 vintage of 1.5 Mt would produce around 1100 ML of wine, which would see a further rundown in stocks in 2008. If reduced irrigation water supplies further constrain production in the 2008 vintage (below the 1.5-Mt ABARE projection), clearance of wine stocks will occur even more rapidly. This raises a number of questions as to how the industry and the market will respond to this prospect: Will there be an increase in the import of bulk wine for the cask market as in the past?

Abbreviations and terms used in this document: t = tonnes Mt = million tonnes MAT = moving annual total kt = thousand tonnes ML = million litres fob = free on board ha = hectares Reference to bottled wine is to wine sold in containers under 2 L. Data are sourced from ABS collections where possible. Some detail on exports has been obtained from the AWBC, and there may be differences between the two sources.

23

Part 1: The market for Australian wine

200506 in review
The year that passed gave little comfort to grapegrowers. Grape production once again exceeded 1.9 Mt, although not all production was taken up by wineries in 2006, with up to another 200 kt harvested to the ground or left on vines. There were further sharp falls in average grape returns across all regions in 2006, as Figure 1 shows. There is a significant differential between average grape prices from warm regions and cool regions. For a number of years average returns from warm regions have been around 42% of the average returns from cool regions. In 2006 this percentage fell to 37%. For cool regions average purchase values peaked in 2001 and remained relatively steady for the next 2 years. A poor production year in 2003 had the effect of maintaining some scarcity. For warm inland regions prices peaked in 2002, partly driven by shortages in the cool regions, but have declined steadily over the past 4 years. In 2006 average returns fell $100/t. Since the 2001 peak, average returns have fallen 30% in cool regions and 37% in the
Table 1. Wine sales summary (December 12 month MAT) 12 months to June 04 (ML) White < 2 litre White soft pack and other Total white table Red < 2 litre Red soft pack and other Total red table Total table wine Sparkling and carbonated Other Total Australian domestic (A) Imports Total domestic sales Exports white (ML) Exports red (ML) Exports other (ML) Exports total (ML) (B) Total Australian sales (A+B) Exports: total ($ billion) 206 365 13 584 1002 84 124 208 83 64 147 355 38 24 417 19 436

Figure 1. Average purchase values. Source: AWBC

warm regions. In 2006 average purchase values fell 21% in warm regions and 9% in cool regions. While exports continued to grow in 200506, most growth was in bulk wine at low unit prices. Overall volume growth was 8% in the last financial year (15% a year earlier; these are ABS figuresthere are differences between the rate of export growth as reported by approvals through the AWBC, which show growth at 12%), while domestic sales of Australian wine showed no volume growth. Fierce discounting and competition for market share have not added one dollar of value to the industry overall,

12 months to June 05 (ML) 89 120 209 91 64 155 365 43 23 431 22 453

Increase 6.2% 3.1% 0.7% 10.0% 0.2% 5.7% 2.8% 11.7% 3.5% 3.2% 18.2% 3.9%

12 months to June 06 (ML) 92 120 212 91 62 154 366 44 22 431 27 458

Increase 3.2% 0.2% 1.2% 0.0% 2.9% 1.2% 0.2% 3.4% 7.8% 0.1% 22.7% 1.2%

234 421 15 670 1101

13.3% 15.3% % 14.6% 9.9%

259 445 18 722 1153

10.6% 5.9% 16.1% 7.8% 4.8%

*Sparkling, fortified etc. Source: ABS no 8504.0 24

nor any growth in demand. Imports of wine increased 23% to 27 ML, with the growth being predominantly in consumption of New Zealand wine. Table 1 summarises the result for the last calendar year.

Domestic wine sales

Domestic wine sales of 458 ML (Australian-produced wine plus imports) were 5 ML (or 1%) higher than the year before (Figs. 2 and 3). A 3-ML increase in Australian bottled white table wine sales was largely offset by a 2-ML decrease in cask red wine sales. Fierce discounting of Australian wines has not resulted in any volume growth and has stripped millions of dollars from brand value. During this period there was a 23% growth in imports, mainly of New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc, which generally retails in the premium price bracket of $15$20 retail per bottle. In terms of composition, the volume of bottled table wine sold now slightly exceeds cask sales, which have remained relatively static in recent years. To a large extent, sales of cheap bottled wine have displaced some cask sales. Australian table wine accounts for 81% of domestic wine sales. In the last year the shares of bottle sales and cask sales have slightly subsided with the growth in the share of imports, and now each comprises 40% of total domestic wine sales. Imports are now 6% of the domestic market.

Figure 3. Domestic wine sales 200506

Bottled red wine sales were steady at 91 ML. This follows a strong 10% growth in bottled red sales. Red soft pack sales fell 3% and make up 40% of the sector.

Sparkling
While sales of Australian sparkling wine have shown strong growth over the past 3 years, that growth too has tapered and now stands at 44 ML, a 3% increase in the past year. This follows the 12% growth in the previous year.

Fortified
Sales of fortified wine in 200506 fell 7% in the last year and now stand at 18.5 ML.

Imports
Imports generally represent only a small proportion of domestic wine sales, historically around 5% (currently 6%). In two periodsin 1996 and again in 1998 following the relatively short vintages of 1995 and 1997the level of imports surged due to relatively large imports of bulk wine used mainly in the cask market. More recently there has been strong growth in imports driven by increase interest in wines from New Zealand. In 200506, 27 ML of wine was imported, of which New Zealand contributed just under half (49%). Three years earlier New Zealands share was 29%.

White wine
White wine sales in 2006 were 212 ML, equal to the peak level in 1986. However, there have been significant compositional changes, and while cask wine accounted for more than 80% of all sales in 1986 it now represents 56% in 2006. Bottled white wine was 92 ML in 200405, a 3% increase in the year.

Red wine
Domestic sales of Australian red wine decreased in the past 12 months, with cask sales bearing the loss.
Figure 2. Domestic sales of Australian table wine

Australian wine exports

Australian table wine exports have been the mainstay of industry growth over the past decade and a half and remain the industrys main hope for a soft landing over the next couple of years. The rapid expansion in grape supply (particularly of red grapes in the late 1990s) has placed enormous strain on the industrys capacity to maintain balanced growth. Figure 4 shows the patterns of domestic and export sales growth. Exports account for 63% of Australian wine sales, and are increasing as a proportion. Within exports, red table wine makes up 62% of all exports, with white table and other wine comprising the balance.

25

Table wine
For a period in the early years of this decade the Australian dollar weakened relative to the $US and Pound, delaying the market signals regarding potential supply imbalance. The strengthening of the Australian dollar in the last 2 years forced wineries to slash prices or move bulk wine off-shore in order to generate volume growth to dispose of the rapid production increases. Export sales over the past 3 years have been insufficient to prevent a rapid build-up of stocks, which were reported at record levels in 2006. The increase in stocks has led to declining grape prices and, in some instances, grapes not even being sold. Some industry sources estimate this figure to be as high as 200 kt in 2006. Major growth in export is in the sub-$5/L f.o.b. (free on board) category, the popular premium segment, as Figure 5 and Table 2 illustrate. Almost 80% of wine exports are sold for less than $5/L. This proportion has grown steadily since 2002 and should further increase if the current pattern of growth continues. In volume terms, wine exports increased 76 ML in the last year (AWBC figures). Of that, the sub-$5/L segment increased by 85 ML, while volumes in the higher segments fell by 12 ML, once again highlighting the difficulty high-cost grape producers have in competing in these markets. A development of concern to grapegrowers is the growth in the sub-$2.50/L sector, where the volume of exports grew 72 ML. This was very largely driven by bulk wine sales, which increased by 65 ML. Bulk wine now makes up 28% of all exports but yields on average $1.12/L. Table 2 shows the proportion of wine sold at various price points. For a number of years up to 2001 the

Figure 5. Exports by price points

share of premium wine exports (broadly speaking above $5/L) increased, before sharply declining with the appreciation of the exchange rate and the growth in the popular premium wine sector. Australias major volume markets are the UK, US, New Zealand and Canada. Table 3 shows the regional distribution of Australian wine exports by value over the past 4 years. The UK is still the largest market for Australian wine in terms of value. The US and UK combined make up 66% of export earnings. While the UK is again the largest market by volume (36% of total), strongest growth in recent years has been in the US. Exports to the US grew by 27 ML in the last financial year. Table 4 shows the composition of Australian wine exports by volume for the principal markets as well as unit values.
Table 2. Exports by price point (% share)
Y/e June < $2.50 $A2.50 to $A4.99 $A5.00 to $7.49 $A7.50 to $A9.99 >$A10.00 Total Sub-$5/L category 2000 16% 49% 25% 6% 4% 100% 65% 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 18% 19% 19% 21% 23% 30% 44% 42% 45% 53% 53% 49% 27% 28% 24% 17% 18% 15% 7% 5% 8% 6% 4% 3% 4% 5% 4% 3% 3% 3% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 62% 61% 65% 73% 75% 79%

Figure 4. Sales of Australian table wine

Source: AWBC 4

Table 3. Exports of Australian wine, by principal market, by value

200203 % $M share UK 860 36% US 828 35% New Zealand 99 4% Canada 174 7% Germany 58 2% Others 368 15% TOTAL 2,386 100% 200304 % $M share 200405 % $M share 200506 % $M share

860 34% 967 35% 960 34% 906 35% 897 33% 902 32% 98 4% 94 3% 92 3% 205 8% 247 9% 249 9% 77 3% 72 3% 76 3% 406 16% 472 17% 523 19% 2,552 100% 2,748 100% 2,801 100%

Source: AWBC 26

Table 4. Exports of Australian Wine, by principal market, by volume (these are ABS figuresthere are differences between the rate of export growth as reported by approvals through the AWBC, which show growth at 12%).
200203 M L $/L UK US New Zealand Canada Others TOTAL 209 142 33 25 100 508 $4.12 $5.83 $3.02 $7.09 $3.67 $4.70 200304 ML 225 172 27 33 124 581 $/L $3.82 $5.27 $3.63 $6.22 $3.28 $4.39 200405 M L $/L 263 187 25 44 143 661 $3.68 $4.81 $3.77 $5.61 $3.30 $4.16 200506 M L $/L 269 214 27 51 176 738 $3.57 $4.21 $3.36 $4.88 $2.97 $3.80

that there are still some further production increases in this variety. Sauvignon Blanc had 23% of its planted area non-bearing in 2005, while 7% of Shiraz plantings were non-bearing. Based on the ABS data it is expected there could be only minor increases in bearing area over the next 3 years, and depending on the rate of removals, overall bearing area could decrease. Based on normal conditions around 1.9 Mt of grapes would be available for wine production. However, unseasonal conditions leading into 2007 are now expected to limit the available crop and ABARE is projecting a grape availability of around 1.3 Mt and 1.5 Mt for 2008. Using the truncated production projections, red and white wine production has been calculated and applied to the stocks model. The outlook for the industry under certain sales assumptions can then be assessed.

Source: AWBC

Average returns are highest per litre in the North American markets (US and Canada), although that return has declined somewhat due to a strengthening Australian dollar and a greater proportion of popular premium wines. Table 5 shows the volume of exports by principal wine category. The impact of the growth in bulk/cask wine sales in 200506 can be clearly seen, with that proportion increasing to 28%.
Table 5. Exports of wine by container type (ML)
1999 2000 Bottled red 88 Bulk/soft pack red 13 101 TOTAL RED Bottled white 83 Bulk/soft pack white 23 TOTAL WHITE 106 TOTAL TABLE WINE 207 OTHER WINE 9 TOTAL WINE 216 Inc. % 12% Inc. ML 23 Bulk/cask etc. 18% 127 18 145 107 25 132 277 10 288 33% 71 16% 2001 2002 2003 157 23 180 120 30 150 330 9 339 18% 51 16% 198 36 234 138 36 174 408 10 417 23% 78 17% 250 57 307 151 40 191 498 10 508 22% 91 20% 2004 2005 2006 289 75 364 165 39 205 569 12 581 14% 73 20% 330 88 418 181 48 229 647 14 661 14% 80 21% 331 125 456 186 80 266 722 76 738 12% 77% 28%

Wine stocks
Winemakers seek to maintain levels of stock appropriate to the needs for future growth but at the same time reflecting the need to contain costs. The stock level also will reflect winery risk strategy: what would be the impact on my business of an X% reduction in available grapes in the following vintage? Historically wineries have aimed to hold around 1.51.7 years of white wine stock (relative to current sales), while for red wine the figure was been around 2.02.2 years. The historical comfort level for all wine stocks has been a 1.8-year stock to sales ratio. With the shift in the export mix towards a greater proportion of popular premium wines, it could be argued that the overall desired stockholding period will be at the bottom of the range. However, wineries that operate in the bulk trade (and this is increasing at present) may be encouraged to assume a higher stock position on the expectation that this stock can be sold cheaply and quickly. Low grape prices to a large degree offset holding costs. The desirable level of stocks could therefore fall within a rangea comfort zonebased on a number of factors, including expectation of future sales growth, and current and future grape availability and prices. For a number of years there have been industry concerns that the level of inventories as measured by the ABS may have been understated. In the past the ABS has only collected data from winemakers who crush more than 400 t annually and who have domestic sales in excess of 250 000 L. Inventories owned by winemakers with a lower crush or lower domestic sales and who predominantly have wine export sales or who mainly undertake contract crushing were not included. The ABS has addressed this issue in 2006 by surveying those wineries who crush more than 400 t of
27

Source: AWBC

Future production and sales prospects

Grape production
Rapid investment in grape plantings in the 1990s has seen the area of grapes (wine, table and drying) increase from 67 000 ha in 199394 to over 166 000 ha at harvest 2005. Official ABS figures show there were 68 632 ha of white grapes (for all uses) and 98 033 ha of red grapes planted as at harvest 2005. This is 1.5% up on the previous year. Intended plantings of red grapes were 878 ha after 2005, and of white grapes 1575 ha. Just 5% of all red grape plantings were non-bearing at harvest 2005, while for white grapes the figure is 12%. Of the white grapes, Chardonnay is the dominant variety, with 16% of plantings not yet bearing (last year the figure was 20%), indicating

grapes but who do not have domestic sales greater than 250 000 L. As a result of this an additional 148 ML of inventory was identified. The ABS believes that its figures are now close to the mark. By carrying through the pattern of adjustment for the previously unidentified stock, a clearer view of the stocks to sales ratio emerges. Table 6 shows the relationship between production, sales and stocks and the stocks-to-sales ratio. Adjustments made to ABS inventory figures for 2001 to 2004 are shown in brackets next to the stocks figures. In order to show just the impact of the reduced crop in 2007 and 2008, the analysis assumes zero sales growth in 200708 and 200809. The first point to note is that the aggregate level of stocks is well below the levels previously believed by industry to be the case. That AWBC has reduced its estimate of stocks exceeding the industry comfort level of 1.8 years from 900 ML to 460 ML between 2006 and 2007 is consistent with this. The table shows that for the past 11 years the stocks to sales ratio has been within the narrow band 1.7 2.0. At 1.7 wineries actively sought grapes, while at 2.0 grapes were in over-supply. In 2006 the ratio was 2.0 years, around 0.2 years (or 250 ML) higher than ideal levels. The impact of reduced 2007 and 2008 vintages can be clearly seen, with the ratio falling to 1.6. Even

assuming zero sales growth and a return to normal production by 2009 sees little change in the ratio. Clearly the implications of 2007 and 2008 will be felt for a number of years beyond that. (If sales fall then there will be an increase in the ratio for any given stock level.)

Cool/warm imbalance
Of great concern to growers are the low prices currently being paid for grapes from all zones. The longer-term outlook for depressed grape prices from cool/premium/ higher-cost grape regions is of particular concern to many growers. This is a result of a number of factors, including over-investment in some regions relative to the growth of the market segments able to absorb that production and give a return appropriate to the cost of growing. The effect of this imbalance, which has been felt across all sectors, has been diminished in 2007 because of the effects of drought, and the expectation of a reduced 2008 vintage is likely to keep demand firm for all fruit. However, a return to normal yields by 2009 will see the demand (preference) imbalance between warm and cool regions re-emerge. To the extent that winemakers will be prepared to offer prices that keep cool region producers viable will depend upon how much winemakers value that fruit for their product mix and the reaction of world markets to Australian wine shortages in the next 2 years.

Table 6. Production, sales and stocks reconciliation Sales Export

Domestic

Total Australian

Grapes crushed

Wine produced

Stocks

S/S Ratio*

Overall sales growth

Export sales growth

Year ending June 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

ML 309 334 339 348 369 384 386 402 417 430 431 437 440 443

ML 130 154 193 216 285 338 418 519 584 670 722 779 779 779

ML 439 488 532 564 654 722 805 921 1,002 1,100 1,153 1,216 1,219 1,222

kt 863 779 954 1,100 1,119 1,398 1,574 1,368 1,883 1,894 1,867 1,264 1,503 1,925

ML 606 567 680 793 806 1,037 1,174 1,014 1,401 1,421 1,377 931 1,108 1,420

ML 782 818 900 1,090 1,191 (40) 1,417 (55) 1,625 (70) 1,652 (85) 1,940 2,153 2,249 1,928 1,787 1,959 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.9 1.8 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.5 1.6 3% 11% 9% 6% 16% 10% 11% 14% 9% 10% 5% 5% 0% 0% 14% 19% 25% 12% 32% 19% 24% 24% 13% 15% 8% 8% 0% 0%

* Ratio of stocks to current sales. Source: ABARE, ABS and McGrath-Kerr Business Consultants. The figures bracketed beside the Stocks volume column represent the upward adjustment of historical stocks using the new ABS collection methodology. Figures assume a historical extraction rate of 730 L/t and a production loss rate of 3%. 28

CROP CARE

29

Part 2: Supply demand balances for major varieties Important information

The demand figures for 2007 to 2011 were compiled from winemaker surveys conducted in mid-2006. The Supply forecasts were compiled by ABARE during vintage 2007 and reflect, to the extent possible, the reduction in grape supply experienced in 2007 and expected for 2008. The forecasts assume a return to normal yields by vintage 2009. The reduced crop in 2007 may have an impact on future winemaker demand, which will be surveyed later this year and the results published before the 2008 vintage. Other information collected from wineries under the ARWCS includes how much of their expected intake is committed (i.e. sourced from their own vineyards or under contract). This information is shown in the attached tables. In some cases committed intake may exceed demand, suggesting a lack of preference for that variety. It should be observed that the winery estimates of own grown grapes and contract purchases will be overstated relative to supply in the short term owing to the unforeseen reduction in yields since the survey was completed.

Introduction
The following tables compare physical forecasts of grape supply sourced from an independent source (ABARE) with winemakers estimates of grape production from their own vineyards, their committed grape intake through contracts, and their overall grape requirements (demand) and preferences. The total inland grouping comprises the three zones of Big Rivers (New South Wales), Murray Valley (New South Wales and Victoria) and Lower Murray (South Australia). This grouping incorporates the regions Riverina, Murray Darling-Swan Hill and the Riverland. The ABARE supply forecasts are based on vineyard area and production data collected by the ABS from information provided by grapegrowers. Demand for grapes continues to be collected through the survey of wineries conducted under the Australian Regional Winegrape Crush Survey (ARWCS). Differences between supply and demand are discussed in the next section.

Key points
Three things stand out in the following analysis of supply/demand balances: 1. The reduction in crop for 2007 and 2008 suggests that there are no immediate surpluses of fruit in the short-term in either the cool or warm inland regions for either red or white grapes. 2. In the medium to longer term (2009 and beyond) overall supply and demand for both red and white grapes is in broad balance. 3. With a return to normal yields by 2009, the structural imbalance between a shortage of (preference for) inland fruit and surpluses of cool region fruit continues. To the extent that demand is satisfied by cool region fruit, this suggests that cool region prices will continue to be depressed in the longer term.

Summary of national position: red grapes

Winery grapes (KT) Contract purchases (KT) Total committed intake (KT) Total required intake (demand) (KT) Supply/demand Supply/demand balance balance Supply surplus(+) or as a % (KT) shortfall () of demand

Comment

(A)

(B)

(C)=(A)+(B)

(D)

(S)

(S) (D)

(S)><(D)%

Inland

Cool

Total

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

78 81 84 84 86 173 175 178 181 183 251 256 262 265 269

431 406 368 323 305 250 210 176 167 147 681 616 544 490 452

509 487 452 407 391 423 385 354 348 330 931 872 806 755 722

523 583 618 606 612 331 345 349 363 361 854 928 967 969 973

388 448 559 562 565 235 332 454 457 458 623 780 1,013 1,019 1,024

135 135 59 44 47 96 13 105 94 97 230 148 46 50 50

26% 23% 10% 7% 8% 29% 4% 30% 26% 27% 27% 16% 5% 5% 5%

Shortages early revert to broad balance in the medium term. Shortages early revert to surplus in the medium term. In aggregate shortages early revert to surplus in the medium term.

The shortages arising in the short term because of drought impacts disappear with a return to normal yields by 2009. Winemakers are indicating a preference for inland red grapes, but the aggregate position is one of broad balance in the longer term. Medium-term supply of cool region red grapes exceeds demand by around 25%.
30

It is important to note that the Total required intake (demand) figure in the tables is an indication of preference, and any shortages of supply may well be met from other regions.

Summary of national position: white grapes

Winery grapes (KT) Contract purchases (KT) Total committed intake (KT) Total required intake (demand) (KT) Supply/demand Supply/demand balance balance Supply surplus(+) or as a % (KT) shortfall () of demand

Comment

(A)

(B)

(C)=(A)+(B)

(D)

(S)

(S) (D)

(S)><(D)%

Inland

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

84 92 98 99 98 93 97 99 101 102 177 189 197 199 200

486 485 436 391 367 118 105 94 89 82 604 590 530 480 448

569 577 534 489 464 211 202 193 190 184 781 778 727 679 648

586 641 664 685 680 193 200 202 206 202 779 841 866 891 882

499 529 663 674 677 143 194 249 256 260 641 723 912 930 937

88 112 1 11 2 50 6 47 50 58 138 118 46 39 55

15% 17% 0% 2% 0% 26% 3% 23% 24% 28% 18% 14% 5% 4% 6%

Shortages early revert to broad balance in the medium term. Shortages early revert to surplus in the medium term. In aggregate shortages early revert to surplus in the medium term.

Cool

Total

As with red grapes, shortages arising in the short term because of drought impacts disappear with a return to normal yields by 2009. Winemakers are indicating a preference for inland white grapes, but the aggregate position is one of broad balance in the longer term. Again, it is important to note that the Total required intake (demand) figure is an indication of preference and any shortages of supply may well be met from other regions, depending upon the relative availability. Similarly to red grapes, cool region white grapes are oversupplied by around 25%. The situation with major varieties is discussed below.

Cabernet Sauvignon
Winery grapes (KT) Contract purchases (KT) Total committed intake (KT) Total required intake (demand) (KT) Supply/demand Supply/demand balance balance Supply surplus(+) or as a % (KT) shortfall () of demand

Comment

(A)

(B)

(C)=(A)+(B)

(D)

(S)

(S) (D)

(S)><(D)%

Inland

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

23 23 24 24 26 58 59 59 59 60 81 82 83 83 86

118 107 91 74 68 74 62 51 47 39 193 168 142 121 107

141 129 115 98 94 132 121 110 106 99 273 250 224 204 193

154 159 163 157 158 99 105 106 110 109 253 264 268 267 267

110 122 147 147 147 68 98 142 142 142 179 220 288 289 289

44 37 16 10 11 30 7 36 32 33 74 44 20 22 23

28% 23% 10% 6% 7%

Significant short-term shortage of inland fruit reverts to balance in medium term.

Cool

31% Shortage only in 2007, 7% quickly moving back 34% into significant surplus 29% in the medium term. 31% 29% 17% 8% 8% 9% Overall shortage of Cabernet for next 2 years then back to slight surplus.

Total

The short vintage sees excess demand for Cabernet in both cool and inland regions that is quickly offset by the return to normal yields by 2009. Longer-term shortages of inland region fruit are more than offset by surpluses in cool regions. Winemakers are indicating a preference for warm region Cabernet Sauvignon.
31

Chardonnay
Winery grapes (KT) Contract purchases (KT) Total committed intake (KT) Total required intake (demand) (KT) Supply/demand Supply/demand balance balance Supply surplus(+) or as a % (KT) shortfall () of demand

Comment

(A)

(B)

(C)=(A)+(B)

(D)

(S)

(S) (D)

(S)><(D)%

Inland

Cool

Total

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

42 47 49 49 49 44 45 46 46 48 85 92 95 96 96

251 252 223 193 180 59 50 42 39 35 310 302 265 232 215

293 299 272 243 228 103 95 88 85 83 395 394 360 328 311

268 304 312 322 319 88 89 88 90 91 356 393 400 412 410

245 274 350 351 352 68 95 124 126 127 313 369 474 477 479

23 30 38 29 33 19 6 36 36 36 42 24 74 65 69

9% Slight inland shortages 10% return to surplus with 12% normal yields. 9% 10% 22% Cool region shortages 6% return to significant 41% surplus in the 40% medium-term with 40% normal yields. 12% Overall shortage of 6% Chardonnay for next 19% 2 years then back to 16% significant surplus in 17% medium term.

Chardonnay is Australias most widely planted white grape, comprising over 50% of all production. Shortages in the short term revert to surpluses (particularly in the cool regions) in the longer term.

Colombard
Winery grapes (KT) Contract purchases (KT) Total committed intake (KT) Total required intake (demand) (KT) Supply/demand Supply/demand balance balance Supply surplus(+) or as a % (KT) shortfall () of demand

Comment

(A)

(B)

(C)=(A)+(B)

(D)

(S)

(S) (D)

(S)><(D)%

Inland

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

5 5 5 5 5

66 63 53 47 43

70 68 59 52 48

80 86 94 97 96

56 58 76 76 76

24 28 18 21 20

30% 33% 19% 22% 21%

The significant shortage in 200708 continues into the medium term.

Colombard is almost exclusively grown in the inland regions, it is indicated to remain in shortage in the medium-term.

Merlot
Winery grapes (KT) Contract purchases (KT) Total committed intake (KT) Total required intake (demand) (KT) Supply/demand Supply/demand balance balance Supply surplus(+) or as a % (KT) shortfall () of demand

Comment

(A)

(B)

(C)=(A)+(B)

(D)

(S)

(S) (D)

(S)><(D)%

Inland

Cool

Total

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

11 12 12 12 12 21 21 21 21 22 31 32 33 34 34

57 57 53 45 43 27 24 20 19 16 84 81 73 65 59

68 69 65 58 55 47 45 41 41 38 115 114 106 98 93

74 81 85 82 82 35 36 35 36 35 108 117 120 118 117

54 61 78 79 79 29 41 55 56 56 83 101 133 134 135

20 20 6 3 3 6 5 20 19 21 25 16 14 16 17

27% 25% 8% 4% 4% 17% 13% 58% 53% 60% 23% 13% 12% 14% 15%

Shortage early reverts to balance in the medium term.

Shortage in 2007 reverts to surplus by 2008.

In aggregate early shortage reverts to surplus in the medium term.

Merlot in aggregate remains in oversupply in the medium term. The inland position is one of medium-term balance, while there are significant surpluses in the cool regions.
32

Petit Verdot
Winery grapes (KT) Contract purchases (KT) Total committed intake (KT) Total required intake (demand) (KT) Supply/demand Supply/demand balance balance Supply surplus(+) or as a % (KT) shortfall () of demand

Comment

(A)

(B)

(C)=(A)+(B)

(D)

(S)

(S) (D)

(S)><(D)%

Inland

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

3 3 3 3 3

16 14 14 13 13

19 17 17 16 16

14 14 14 14 14

17 17 22 22 22

2 3 8 9 9

17% 18% 59% 62% 63%

Despite the 2007 shortage remains in surplus. Significant surpluses in medium term.

Again a variety predominantly sourced from the warm inland areas, Petit Verdot remains a non-preferred variety in both the short and medium terms.

Pinot Noir
Winery grapes (KT) Contract purchases (KT) Total committed intake (KT) Total required intake (demand) (KT) Supply/demand Supply/demand balance balance Supply surplus(+) or as a % (KT) shortfall () of demand

Comment

(A)

(B)

(C)=(A)+(B)

(D)

(S)

(S) (D)

(S)><(D)%

Inland

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

1 1 1 1 1 12 13 13 13 12 13 14 14 14 14

11 11 10 10 9 11 8 7 7 7 21 19 18 17 16

12 12 11 11 11 23 21 20 20 19 35 33 32 31 30

20 21 21 21 21 21 19 19 20 18 41 40 40 41 39

8 8 11 11 11 12 19 24 24 25 20 27 35 35 35

12 13 10 11 11 9 1 5 5 7 21 13 5 6 4

62% 64% 48% 50% 50% 42% 3% 25% 25% 37% 52% 32% 13% 14% 10%

Inland Pinot remains in significant shortage throughout the period. Excess demand for cool region Pinot tends to surplus in the medium term. Overall demand for Pinot exceeds available supply.

Cool

Total

The survey is indicating a strong preference for warm region Pinot in the longer term, which may be satisfied in part by cool-region fruit.

Riesling
Winery grapes (KT) Contract purchases (KT) Total committed intake (KT) Total required intake (demand) (KT) Supply/demand Supply/demand balance balance Supply surplus(+) or as a % (KT) shortfall () of demand

Comment

(A)

(B)

(C)=(A)+(B)

(D)

(S)

(S) (D)

(S)><(D)%

Inland

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

2 2 3 3 3 15 16 16 16 16 18 18 19 19 19

9 8 8 8 8 16 16 15 15 13 25 24 23 23 21

11 10 11 11 11 32 32 31 31 29 43 42 42 42 40

12 13 13 13 13 24 26 27 28 27 37 39 40 41 40

8 8 11 11 11 15 23 30 31 31 23 31 41 42 43

4 5 2 2 2 10 3 3 3 5 14 8 1 1 3

34% Inland Riesling remains 37% in shortage in the 13% medium term. 14% 14% 40% 13% 11% 12% 17% 38% 21% 4% 4% 7% Early shortages revert to surpluses in the medium term.

Cool

Total

Very short early, overall supply demand is in balance in the medium term.

33

Riesling is a minor variety comprising just 2% of inland white grape production. Indications are that cool regions are in surplus overall once the effect of the drought is taken into account. Shortages of inland Riesling can be topped up from the cool regions.

Ruby Cabernet
Winery grapes (KT) Contract purchases (KT) Total committed intake (KT) Total required intake (demand) (KT) Supply/demand balance Supply surplus(+) or (KT) shortfall () Supply/demand balance as a % of demand

Comment

(A) Inland 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 5 5 5 5 5

(B) (C)=(A)+(B) 15 13 11 11 11 20 18 16 16 15

(D) 13 13 13 12 12

(S) 19 20 25 25 25

(S) (D) 6 7 13 13 13

(S)><(D)% 50% 52% 100% 103% 104% Significant surplus despite the effects of the 2007 vintage.

Significant surpluses of Ruby Cabernet are indicated over the forecast period. It is noteworthy that committed intake exceeds demand by a significant amount, suggesting that the only factor keeping this variety in the ground is the existence of contracts.

Sauvignon Blanc
Winery grapes (KT) Contract purchases (KT) Total committed intake (KT) Total required intake (demand) (KT) Supply/demand balance Supply surplus(+) or (KT) shortfall () Supply/demand balance as a % of demand

Comment

(A) Inland 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 6 8 9 9 9 11 11 12 12 12 17 19 21 21 21

(B) (C)=(A)+(B) 11 12 11 10 10 14 13 12 12 11 25 25 23 22 21 17 20 20 19 18 25 24 24 24 23 42 44 44 43 42

(D) 26 28 29 29 29 29 30 31 31 30 56 58 60 60 59

(S) 12 12 20 20 21 16 24 31 33 35 29 36 51 54 56

(S) (D) 14 16 9 9 8 13 6 0 2 5 27 22 10 7 3

(S)><(D)% 54% 58% 32% 30% 28% 44% 21% 0% 7% 18% 49% 39% 16% 11% 5% Inland Sauvignon Blanc remains in significant shortage throughout the period. Excess demand for cool region Sauvignon Blanc tends to surplus in the longer term. Overall demand for Sauvignon Blanc exceeds available supply in the medium term.

Cool

Total

Sauvignon Blanc is indicated to be in acute shortage in the short term for both warm and cool regions, but in aggregate is moving towards a balance in the medium term with a return to normal yields. It is worth noting that while demand is relatively static, supply is forecast to increase through the medium to longer term for cool regions, pointing to a possible surplus of cool region fruit in the longer term.

34

Semillon
Winery grapes (KT) Contract purchases (KT) Total committed intake (KT) Total required intake (demand) (KT) Supply/demand balance Supply surplus(+) or (KT) shortfall () Supply/demand balance as a % of demand

Comment

(A) Inland 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 15 16 16 16 15 10 10 10 10 10 25 25 25 26 25

(B) (C)=(A)+(B) 44 44 42 41 40 16 14 13 13 13 60 57 55 53 53 59 59 58 56 55 26 23 22 23 22 85 83 80 79 78

(D) 64 65 66 65 65 25 26 26 27 26 89 91 93 92 91

(S) 55 54 67 67 68 22 28 34 35 35 77 81 100 102 103

(S) (D) 9 12 0 3 4 3 2 7 8 9 12 10 8 10 13

(S)><(D)% 14% 18% 0% 4% 6% 11% 7% 28% 28% 35% 13% 11% 8% 11% 14% Shortage early reverts to balance in the medium term. Early shortages revert to surpluses in the medium term. In aggregate, early shortages revert to surpluses in the medium to longer term

Cool

Total

Again, the pattern for Semillon in aggregate follows that of other white varieties, with shortages (drought related) in the short term but a longer-term surplus indicated. Most of the surplus is accounted for from the cool regions.

Shiraz
Winery grapes (KT) Contract purchases (KT) Total committed intake (KT) Total required intake (demand) (KT) Supply/demand balance Supply surplus(+) or (KT) shortfall () Supply/demand balance as a % of demand

Comment

(A) Inland 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 29 30 31 31 31 67 68 71 73 75 96 99 102 104 105

(B) (C)=(A)+(B) 193 184 170 153 146 123 104 87 82 75 316 287 257 235 220 222 214 201 184 177 190 172 157 155 149 412 386 359 339 326

(D) 224 263 291 286 291 154 161 165 173 176 378 424 456 459 467

(S) 153 189 241 243 245 105 149 201 202 203 259 338 441 445 448

(S) (D) 70 74 50 43 46 48 13 35 29 28 119 86 15 14 19

(S)><(D)% 31% Inland Shiraz indicated 28% to remain in shortage 17% throughout the period. 15% 16% 31% 8% 21% 17% 16% 31% 20% 3% 3% 4% Early shortages revert to surpluses in the medium term.

Cool

Total

Very short early, overall supply demand is in balance in the medium term.

The most significant Australian red grape variety, contributing 43% of red grape production nationally. The supply forecasts for the inland regions suggest little increase in available supply beyond that affected by the drought, while there is a steady increase in forecast demand. For cool region Shiraz the shortages in the medium term revert to surpluses, suggesting a preference for more warm-region Shiraz in the overall mix. In aggregate in the medium to longer term demand and supply are in balance.

35

Part 3: Balance of supply and demand Inland regions

Vintage 2007 and longer-term position
Variety WHITE GRAPES Chardonnay Colombard Muscat Gordo Riesling Sauvignon Blanc Semillon RED GRAPES Cabernet Sauvignon % of category in 2006 50% 13% 10% 2% 3% 11% Supply position for vintage 2007 % 9% under 30% under Assumed balance 34% under 54% under 14% under Expected supply position for vintage 2009 12% over 19% under Assumed balance 13% under 32% under balanced Expected supply position for vintage 2011 % 10% over 21% Assumed balance 14% under 28% under 6% over Comment Slight early shortages revert to surplus in the medium-term. A significant shortage in the shortterm continues in the longer terrm. Wineries generally able to balance demand with available supply. Inland Riesling continues to be in shortage into the medium term Inland Sauvignon Blanc remains in significant shortage throughout the period. Shortage early reverts to balance in the medium term.

Significant short-term shortage of inland fruit reverts to balance in medium term. Merlot 14% 27% under 8% under 4% under Shortage early reverts to balance in the medium term. Petit Verdot 4% 17% over 59% over 63% over Remains in surplus throughout the period. Non-preferred variety. Pinot Noir 2% 62% under 48% under 50% under Inland Pinot remains in significant shortage throughout the period. Ruby Cabernet 5% 50% over 100% over 104% over Significant surplus despite the effects of the 2007 vintage. Shiraz 41% 31% under 17% under 15% under Inland Shiraz indicated to remain in shortage throughout the period. Source: Data compiled from the results of the Australian Regional Winegrape Crush Survey 2006 and ABARE supply forecasts. Preference signals for warm regions need to be considered in light of availability of fruit from all regions. Before grubbing, planting or altering varieties contact your winemaker.

28%

28% under

10% under

7% under

Cool regions
Vintage 2007 and longer-term position
Variety WHITE GRAPES Chardonnay Riesling Sauvignon Blanc Semillon RED GRAPES Cabernet Sauvignon % of category in 2006 50% 2% 3% 11% Supply position for vintage 2007 % 22% under 40% under 44% under 11% under Expected supply position for vintage 2009 41% over 11% under balanced 28% over Expected supply position for vintage 2011 % 40% over 17% over 18% over 35% over Comment Cool region shortages return to significant surplus in the medium term with normal yields. Early shortages revert to surpluses in the medium term. Excess demand for cool region Sauvignon Blanc tends to surplus in the longer term. Early shortages revert to surpluses in the medium term.

Shortage only in 2007, quickly moving back into significant surplus in the medium term. Merlot 14% 17% under 58% over 60% over Shortage in 2007 reverts to surplus by 2008. Pinot Noir 2% 42% under 25% over 37% over Excess demand for cool region Pinot tends to surplus in the medium term. Shiraz 41% 31% under 21% over 16% over Early shortages revert to surpluses in the medium term. Source: Data compiled from the results of the Australian Regional Winegrape Crush Survey 2006 and ABARE supply forecasts. Preference signals for cool regions need to be considered in light of availability of fruit from all regions. Before grubbing, planting or altering varieties contact your winemaker.

28%

31% under

34% over

31% over

Attachment: 2006 vintage intake and prices, inland areas

VARIETY RIVERLAND Calculated Total crush (t) average purchase value ($/t) 66,951 9,120 6,504 29,770 3,302 14,726 5,736 9,742 829 104,735 251,415 111,377 4,585 34,565 24,961 5,603 11 4,001 5,828 11,672 3,029 2,889 3,037 1,395 212,953 464,368 324 283 297 377 280 315 495 264 269 425 370 421 290 279 362 324 498 380 553 361 230 531 375 703 385 377 RIVERINA Total crush Calculated (t) average purchase value ($/t) 23,626 5,262 1,117 1,506 15,650 5,131 3,568 2,747 12,431 306 63,553 133,780 59,898 1,200 17,170 5,057 2,892 3,227 5,143 3,945 45,935 5,219 3,874 6,309 1,320 161,189 294,969 384 388 356 306 372 326 338 459 326 594 386 376 425 313 288 337 399 671 331 470 351 349 276 314 438 378 377 MURRAY DARLING SWAN MURRAY DARLING & SWAN HILL Total crush Calculated (t) average TOTAL purchase Total crush value ($/t) (t) 66,634 137 10,237 380 31,428 2,866 3,469 2,550 4,272 1,721 65,515 180,089 136,030 1,042 26,764 30,439 2,889 2,023 2,382 5,789 12,308 13,216 8,108 1,308 1,658 235,848 415,937 362 316 261 385 521 321 448 270 269 399 379 382 337 301 350 481 667 395 502 378 263 157,211 5,399 8,390 76,848 11,299 21,763 11,033 26,445 2,856 233,803 565,284 307,305 6,827 78,499 60,457 11,384 5,261 11,526 15,562 69,915 16,245 3,874 10,654 4,373 609,990 1,175,274

RED Cabernet Sauvignon Durif Grenache Mataro Merlot Other red Petit Verdot Pinot Noir Ruby Cabernet Sangiovese Shiraz Total red WHITE Chardonnay Chenin Blanc Colombard Muscat Gordo Blanco Other white Pinot Gris Riesling Sauvignon Blanc Semillon Sultana Traminer Trebbiano Verdelho Viognier Total white TOTAL

328 542 369 373

Source: Riverland figures provided by the Phylloxera and Grape Industry Board of SA. Riverina figures from the Wine Grapes Marketing Board. Murray Valley figures provided by the Murray Valley Winegrape Industry Development Committee.

Downy mildew management

SHAYNE HACKETT , DISTRICT HORTICULTURIST , NSW DPI , WAGGA WAGGA

Introduction
Downy mildew of grapevines, caused by the fungus Plasmopara viticola, requires specific weather conditions to establish and infect. It can attack all green tissues with functioning stomata, including the undersides of leaves, or shoots and flowers. Downy mildew can be extremely devastating if infections are permitted to become established early, especially before flowering.

Symptoms
Leaves
Symptoms on the leaves first appear as slight, yellow oilspots. They are often surrounded by a slightly darker ring at the edge that gives them their oily appearance. On red varieties the spots may be reddish. On older leaves the oilspots can become restricted by the veinlets and spots and thus become more irregular in shape. With severe infections on older leaves the infected leaf tissue can have a tapestry appearance.
Downy mildew primary infection on Durif. Photo: S Hackett

Fruit
Young flowers and berries are particularly susceptible and can turn an oily brown upon infection. Under ideal conditions they may appear covered with white downy growth, but they will eventually brown and wither. Berries remain susceptible to infection up to about pea size, after which they are generally considered resistant. Berries that have been previously infected may stop growing, harden and turn purple. Occasionally they can be covered in white downy growth. Mature berries are considered resistant but may be lost if infection occurs on the susceptible bunch stems.

Life cycle
Overwintering
Downy mildew overwinters as small survival structures called oospores. These spores are formed at previous infection sites and can become trapped in the bark of crowns and cordons or in the soil as the leaf tissue breaks down. The spores are very resilient and are believed to survive for more than 5 years. Considerable wetting of these spores is required for them to germinate, but only those in a mature state will germinate upon wetting.

Downy mildew primary infection on Viognier. Photo: S. Hackett

If conditions favourable for the establishment of secondary infection have occurred, a distinctive white down will be visible on the undersides of the oilspots.

Primary infection
The general rule of thumb for a primary infection is 10:10:24: 10 mm rainfall 10 C minimum temperature over a 24-hour period.

Shoots
Oily brown areas may develop on young shoots and tendrils. These infections can lead to death of the shoot tip beyond the infection site.
38

The primary infection cycle is more accurately described in three phases: 1. Initial wetting and germination of the oospore to form a sporangium. The sporangium then releases motile spores called zoospores. This phase is temperature dependent and can take more than 16 hours, depending on the minimum temperature. Following release of the zoospores, a rainsplash event is required to carry the zoospores to the underside of the leaf or other susceptible green tissue. Infection by the zoospore at the stomata occurs only if the leaves remain wet for a further 2 or 3 hours.

4 hours of darkness leaves wet for 2 to 3 hours pre-dawn. Sporangia are produced through the stomata of infected tissue and are then wind-dispersed to other tissues, where they germinate in free water to release zoospores. Under optimum conditions the time from germination to infection can be less than 90 minutes.

2.

Bag test
Often spots are seen on leaves in the vineyard during spring. Confusion often arises as to whether these spots are downy mildew or have some other cause. To determine whether downy mildew is the cause, you can perform a simple bag test on the suspect tissue. The bag test creates conditions that resemble secondary infection conditions and enables the mildew to sporulate. To verify the existence of downy mildew, place the tissue in a plastic bag with a few drops of water. Seal and place in a dark, warm position (18 C min) overnight and then examine for white down on the underside of the tissue.

3.

Under Australian conditions, primary infections typically result in one to three oilspots per 50 m of vine row. As such, primary infections, on their own, pose little threat to the crop. However, where primary infections have previously become established, secondary infections can lead to significant loss of both crop and leaf area. This can be particularly severe when infections are allowed to build up before flowering.

Secondary infection
Secondary infection conditions are quite different from primary infections and can occur outside the 10:10:24 criteria.

Treatments
Cultural
Cultural controls methods that will reduce the incidence of downy mildew are those that will permit rapid drying of the canopy to reduce the likelihood of infection conditions occurring. Canopy management systems that permit good aeration will also allow good spray penetration and coverage.

Biological
There are no biological treatments registered for use on downy mildew in Australia.

Chemical
Traditionally, downy mildew has been controlled by using a combination of protectant fungicides and eradicant fungicides, which are applied after potential infection conditions occur. Protectant fungicides include: For a secondary infection to occur there must be existing oilspots in the vineyard or nearby. Secondary infections occur when existing oilspots sporulate to release new spores into the vineyard. Spores develop from existing oilspots after: 98% humidity temperature of more than 13 C copper formulations dithiocarbamate (thiram, ziram, mancozeb) quinone (Delan) chlorophenyl (Bravo) strobilurins (Amistar, Flint).

Spores appearing after secondary infection conditions have occurred Photo: S Hackett

39

It is important that protectant fungicides are applied before infection conditions occur, as the fungicides need to be on the tissue before the spores land. Ideally, protectant fungicides should be applied as close to a predicted infection event as possible. These chemicals are not systemic, and the amounts of residue can be reduced by rainfall. They will not protect new growth after application. The strobilurins are partly systemic and are not subject to loss from rainfall. Eradicant fungicides include: phosphonate (Agri-Fos, Fungi-Fos, etc.) phenylamide (Ridomil Gold Plus, Galben M). These fungicides work best when applied immediately after an infection event and before the appearance of oilspots. There have been reports of resistance to phenylamide overseas; more recently, several vineyards in the Hunter Valley were shown to have lower sensitivity to this fungicide group. The use of these fungicides should therefore be restricted to no more than one application in any one season.

Care should also be used when applying phosphonate fungicides as there are no MRLS for fungicide overseas. This product should be used only after consultation with your winery or where wines are not destined for export markets.

Further reading
Magarey, R. Magarey, P. Clancy T. (2000) Information which will assist with downy mildew decision making. Australian Viticulture 4(5):37, Sept/Oct. Magarey, R. Magarey, P. Clancy T. (2000) The downy mildew challenge. Australian Viticulture 4(5):3846, Sept/Oct. Nicholas, P. Magarey, P. and Wachtel, M. (1994) Diseases and Pests. Winetitles. Adelaide. Pearson, R.C. and Goheen, A.C. (1988) Compendium of Grape Diseases. American Phytopathological Society Press, St Paul Minnesota. 93 pp.

Elders half page advert

40

Grapevine nutrition
SUZY ROGIERS , RESEARCH SCIENTIST , NSW DPI , WAGGA WAGGA HARRY CREECY , DISTRICT HORTICULTURIST , NSW DPI , GRIFFITH

Introduction
The mineral nutrition of grapevines plays an important part in grapevine growth, berry production and metabolism. There are 13 elements considered essential for vines. These elements or nutrients can be divided into two broad groups: macronutrients, required in large amounts, and micronutrients, required in very small (trace) amounts. The macronutrients, needed in concentrations of at least 1000 ppm of dry matter, are potassium, calcium, magnesium, nitrogen, phosphorus and sulfur. Potassium is the inorganic element that is present in the highest concentration in plants. The micronutrients, needed in concentrations of 100 ppm or less of dry matter, are iron, manganese, zinc, copper, chlorine, boron and molybdenum. Carbon, oxygen and hydrogen are components of organic compounds and are not considered mineral nutrients. Inorganic nutrients are components of enzyme systems that facilitate biological reactions in plant cells. Some mineral elements act as structural components of the cell; for example, calcium forms part of the cell wall. Inorganic ions also affect water movement into and out of plant cells through a process known as osmosis.

Absorption of ions
Mineral nutrients are absorbed as ions from the soil by a process called solution mining. Plants can explore large volumes of soil because of the filamentous form of their roots. Root hairs also contribute to the absorption of ions. Young roots absorb nutrients more rapidly than old roots. Elements reach roots in three ways: by diffusing through the soil solution, by being passively carried along as water moves by bulk flow into the roots (driven by transpiration), and by roots growing towards them. Cultural practices and soil types have a large influence on root development. Grapevines can develop dense root systems within the top 30 cm of soil for own-rooted vines and at depths of 1560 cm for rootstocks. There can be 250 km of roots per cubic metre of soil. In high-density plantings the depth of root penetration is enhanced.

Deficiency and toxicity

Growth of a plant is dependent on the concentration of any particular nutrient in the plant tissue. When the nutrient is in low concentrations, any added amounts will result in increases in growth. Above a critical concentration, however, increased fertiliser application does not appreciably affect growth. Continued increases in the concentration of the element will lead to toxicity and reduced growth (Figure 6). Plants respond to an inadequate amount of an essential nutrient by forming characteristic deficiency symptoms (see Table 7). Symptoms may include stunted growth, chlorosis and necrosis of leaves. The deficiency symptom will depend on the function of that element and whether or not the element is readily translocated from old leaves to younger leaves. Young parts (e.g. shoot tips) of a plant are good at withdrawing some mobile nutrients from older parts. Reproductive organs (flowers and seeds) are especially good at withdrawing nutrients. Whether the withdrawal of an element is successful or not depends on the mobility of that element. If the element is easily translocated, the deficiency symptoms

Figure 6. Relationship between nutrient content and growth or yield. Adapted from Marschner H (1995). Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants. 2nd ed. Academic Press, London

41

Table 7. Deficiency symptoms in grapevines

Nutrient Nitrogen (N) (page 85)

Phloem mobility High

Deficiency symptoms Whole vine Reduced vigour Leaves Smaller leaves of red varieties Yellowing of leaves Reddening of petioles and laminas of red varieties Shoots Smaller shoots Fruit

Phosphorus (P)

High

Basal leaves turn yellow

Red dots may appear near the edges Red dots may coalesce later into red bars at right angles to the veins Older leaves become yellow near the margin, extending towards the centre of the leaf. Severe deficiency shows up as marginal burning. In red varieties, leaves show red colouring prior to marginal burn. Sometimes leaves turn black. Older leaves turn yellow in white varieties Older leaves turn red in red varieties Can be confused with leafroll virus

Reduced fruit set Small, tight bunches Unevenly ripened berries

Potassium (K)

High

Magnesium (Mg) High

Calcium (Ca) Sulfur (S) Zinc (Zn)

Low High Intermediate

No data for field vines, but in hydroponic vines the apex of the growing shoot dies back, and there is a pale interveinal area on recently matured leaves Older leaves turn yellow Young leaves become mottled Shoots stunted Poor fruit set and may have zigzag pattern Short canes with shortened internodes

The petiole sinus opens wide so leaves do not have typical shape Copper (Cu) Iron (Fe) Intermediate Intermediate Pale and small and with slight indentations Diffuse yellowing of young leaves of young parts of shoot Vine growth is Brightening between veins, strongly inhibited but edge around veins remains green Yellowing between veins of recently matured leaves

Diffuse yellowing Laterals stay green Shoots may zigzag Death of shoot tip Berry ripening is strongly inhibited Berries may be seedless and flattened Poor fruit set Poor fruit set

Manganese (Mn) Low

Boron (B)

Intermediate

Molybdenum (Mo) Intermediate

Small leaves with burned margins Papery feel to leaves

Rubbery feel to shoots Wood fails to mature

42

appear earliest and most pronounced in the older leaves. Nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, magnesium and chlorine move easily, whereas boron, iron, and calcium are much less mobile. Nitrogen deficiency symptoms include general chlorosis (pale yellowing), especially in the older leaves. Plants deficient in phosphorus often develop red and purple colours, and potassium-deficient plants have small spots of dead tissue, usually at the leaf tips and between the veins. Sulfur-deficient vines show early yellowing of mature leaves. Australian soils are commonly deficient in sulfur and magnesium and the trace elements molybdenum, boron, iron (especially in grey soils), copper, zinc and manganese. Australian subsoils are also often sodic (exchangeable sodium level more than 6%), and these soils can be deficient in some nutrients (e.g. zinc) or toxic in others (e.g. boron). Magnesium deficiency, along with low calcium and/or high potassium levels, may contribute to bunch stem necrosis. Petiole tests of vines with Merlot disorder (a proliferation of shoots and weak growth) show deficiency in molybdenum along with very high levels of nitrate nitrogen. Zinc, boron and molybdenum deficiencies may lead to poor fruit set. Boron deficiency may also lead to the condition known as hen and chickens in bunches.

such as iron, manganese and copper precipitate out and become unavailable to the plant, because roots are only able to take up nutrients that are in solution as ions. Most agricultural soils will be slightly acidic (pH 5.5 to 6.5), and essential nutrients are all readily available within that range. In highly acidic soils aluminium and/or manganese toxicity can occur. Aluminium toxicity occurs at pH less than 4.5, and manganese toxicity occurs at pH less than 5.5, depending on other environmental factors. In New South Wales, the south-western slopes contain many acidic soils, as do the tablelands.

Salinity
Salts dissolved in soil water can inhibit growth because they reduce water uptake, and in excessive amounts they are toxic. Vineyards in Australia are subjected to salt stress from brackish irrigation water and sodic soils (lower Murray-Darling Basin), or from on-shore winds (Margaret River, WA). Grapes are moderately sensitive to salinity (over 1.5 dS/m), more so than cotton but less than lettuce. Salt stress shows as leaf burn, reduced vine vigour and reduced yield. Fortunately, some rootstocks (e.g. Ramsey, 1103 Paulsen, 140 Ruggeri and 10114 Mgt) are salt- tolerant and can alleviate the problem. These rootstocks lower the chloride ion content of the petioles, leaves and berries and provide some exclusion of sodium.

Soil pH
The availability of inorganic nutrients for plant growth is related to the acidity or alkalinity of the soil. A soil is acidic if the pH of its aqueous solution is less than 7 and alkaline if the pH is greater than 7. Since pH is measured on a logarithmic scale, a soil with pH 4 is ten times more acidic than a soil with pH 5. Soil pH varies over seasons, and over space as well. Soil pH influences the solubility and therefore the availability of nutrients (Figure 7). In alkaline soils, some cations
Figure 7. Nutrient availability at different pH ranges. Adapted from Janick et al. (1981). Plant Science. An Introduction to World Crops. 3rd ed. W.H. Freeman and Company, USA.

Soil testing
Soil tests are particularly useful before planting, as they provide information on pH and soil stability to help determine whether gypsum (CaSO4) or lime (CaCO3) is required to correct the soil. The tests will also provide information on organic matter content and the need for a boost by using animal manure, plant waste or cover crops. After vine planting, plant tissue analysis of vine leaves provides the best general information on vine nutrition requirements.

Plant tissue analysis

Chemical analyses of vine leaf tissue for content of essential inorganic nutrients can be compared to vine standards as a guide for growers in their fertiliser management. Soil analysis is not as reliable as plant tissue analysis for determining the nutritional requirements of the vineyard. Leaf petioles or leaf blades are used for tissue analysis because they are sensitive indicators of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) status. Leaf petioles are harvested randomly from the nodes opposite the basal bunch at

43

bloom. Approximately 200 petioles are required for a sample (Table 8). The petioles are washed, surfacedried, and then analysed by a commercial laboratory. Benefit may be obtained by sampling for mobile nutrients in older leaves and for immobile nutrients near the growing tips of shoots.

Fertilisers
Always check the manufacturers recommendations for application rates and form of application. The amount and form of fertiliser applied to the vineyard

is dependent on the soil texture, pH and efficiency of application. Sandy soils are more prone to leaching and will need fertilizing more often than loam or clay soils. On light soils, frequent applications of small amounts of soluble nutrients, such as nitrogen, suit grapevines. The type of irrigation system in the vineyard will also affect the efficiency of fertiliser distribution and uptake. With drip irrigation, vine roots are concentrated under the supply line, making it convenient and efficient to apply fertiliser with the water (by fertigation).

Table 8. Grape vine leaf analysis standards. At flowering, take petioles from opposite a bunch. At veraison, take leaf blades from opposite a bunch. Take one petiole or blade from 100 to 200 vines, according to analysis requirements. Except where indicated, all samples have been taken from the petiole. Sampling stage: Flowering (F) Veraison (V) F (petiole) V (lamina) Nitrate nitrogen (ppm) F V Phosphorus (%) F V Potassium (%) F V Calcium (%) F V Magnesium (%) F V Sodium (%) F V Chloride (%) F V Copper (ppm) F V Zinc (ppm) F V Manganese (ppm) F V Boron (ppm) F V Molybdenum (ppm) F V 1.62.1 340499 0.200.24 0.120.14 1.01.7 0.50.7 0.300.39 35 510 1625 2029 2029 2025 2634 2529

Nutrient Nitrogen (%)

Low

Adequate 0.81.1 2.24.0 5001200 0.250.50 0.150.30 1.83.0 0.81.6 1.22.5 1.83.2 > 0.4 < 0.20 < 1.3 611 11300 > 26 3060 3060 26200 3570 30100 Estimate 13 Estimate 13

High

>4.0 >1200 >0.50 >0.30 >1.6 >0.5 toxic (1) 0.210.50 >1.01.5 toxic(1) 1.311.80

>500 toxic 71100 101250

Acknowledgment: The information used for these nutrient standards is based on that quoted in the Cooperative Research Centres 2001 Grapevine Nutrition Research to Practice publication. 1. The petiole is a more sensitive and reliable indicator of potassium deficiency and of toxicites of chloride and sodium than the lamina (leaf blade) (Weir & Cresswell 1993) 44

Tissue analysis is a useful management tool for determining the success of a fertiliser program. The analysis can be compared to vine standards to facilitate correction of deficiencies or toxicities that might affect vine vigour, yield and fruit quality. The greatest demand for mineral nutrients is at the time of maximum shoot growth in spring, followed by the period of berry cell division in the 3 or 4 weeks after fruit set. The next period of significant uptake is the post-harvest to leaf fall period. This uptake helps the root flush and accumulation of carbohydrate reserves in the roots and trunk of the vine. The vine takes up N from the period of rapid shoot growth in spring through to veraison (when sugars begin to dominate acids in the grapes), and from harvest to leaf fall. P is taken up from budburst to veraison and then again between harvest and leaf fall. K is acquired by the vine from the period of rapid shoot growth to leaf fall. Ca and Mg are taken up from this time to veraison. (See Figure 8.) Application of 40 kg N/ha/year is believed to be adequate for moderately yielding vineyards (surveys show 0 to 200 kg/ha is used by growers). Excessive application of N in vineyards causes excess vegetative
Figure 8. Nutrient uptake by season. Adapted from Grapevine Nutrition: Research to PracticeTM Draft Training Workshop Manual (1999).

growth and results in poor quality winegrapes. There is also a negative impact on the environment through nitrate leaching. The right choice of a nitrogen fertiliser is particularly important for drip-irrigated vineyards to avoid acidification (reduction of soil pH) of soil in the wetted zone, as it is very difficult to correct. Sulfate of ammonia is the most acidifying nitrogen fertiliser, followed by (in descending order) urea, ammonium nitrate, di-ammonium phosphate (DAP) and mono-ammonium phosphate (MAP). Calcium nitrate and potassium nitrate have no acidifying effect. Superphosphate products can be applied by subsurface banding. Autumn application allows some phosphorus to be available by springtime in the following season. Liquid and solid soluble forms of phosphorus, such as MAP or phosphoric acid, are applied through drip irrigation and allow P to be readily available for vines. Mg fertilisers include Epsom salts (magnesium sulfate) and potassium magnesium sulfate. These can be surface-spread or applied through drip irrigation. Dolomitic lime (calcium magnesium carbonate) used for raising soil pH in the inter-row area will also contribute magnesium to the soil. Lime products are best applied before planting in the whole vineyard area. Ca and S are not usually applied specifically as nutrients. Ca is released from gypsum, lime and superphosphate, whereas S is applied to foliage as colloidal sulfur for prevention of powdery mildew and for mite control. Sulfur is also received in the form of sulfate of potash, which is used to improve soil potassium levels in some districts. Vineyards planted in sandy soils may be deficient in K. K can be applied by broadcasting or banding to the soil surface, in a furrow, or by fertigation with drip irrigation. If required, in flood- or furrowirrigated vineyards potassium should be applied in autumn by broadcasting. In drip-irrigated vineyards it should be applied at around veraison by fertigation. K products commonly used are potassium nitrate, muriate of potash (potassium chloride) and sulfate of potash (KSO4). Take care to avoid excessive application rates, as high levels of K uptake can result in high-pH wine that will cause a decline in red wine colour and adversely affect wine flavour and microbiological stability in all wines. In areas deficient in potassium, Schwarzman can be used as a rootstock because of its superior uptake ability.

Phosphorus

Budburst

Grand period of growth Flowering

Fruit-set

Veraison

Harvest

Magnesium

Potassium

Nitrogen

Calcium

Foliar nutrients
Leaf fall
Nutrients required can also be applied via foliar sprays. The nutrients enter the leaf by diffusion. Use of wetting agents in the spray allows the nutrient solution to enter through the leaf stomata and pores.
45

Micronutrients are commonly applied via foliar sprays. B can be applied in sprays of borax, Solubar or Bortrac before flowering. Zn foliar sprays should be applied about 10 days before flowering as zinc sulfate or zinc oxide. Mn can be applied as manganese sulfate with zinc sprays. Mancozeb fungicide will supply Mn as it breaks down, and this can be absorbed by the vine. Copper-based fungicide sprays will also break down to forms that the vine can use (some Australian soils are deficient in copper for plant use). Magnesium sulfate (Epsom salts) sprays are used to combat magnesium deficiency. Because some of the micronutrient chemicals are compatible with each other in solution they can be applied together.

that is readily available to vines in the first year of application. The compost should have a carbon to nitrogen ratio of below 20:1 to reduce the risk of N draw-down.

Cover crops
When organic matter is low, the clay content is high, or soil has been compacted, the use of cover crops such as oats or cereal rye in the inter-row area will raise organic matter levels and improve soil structure. Slashing of the oats or cereal cover crop before budburst will lessen the risk of frost damage to the emerging vine growth. The slashed cover crop contributes to weed control and moisture conservation. If cereal crops with large amounts of vegetative matter are worked into the inter-row area of flood- or furrow-irrigated vineyards the vines will have to compete for available N with the decomposing cover crop. Using a leguminous cover crop can contribute nitrogen to the soil in the inter-row area. Legume plants form an association with rhizobial bacteria, as shown by the pink nodules on their roots. The bacteria provide fixed nitrogen to the legume, which, in turn, releases nitrogen to the soil. In drip-irrigated vineyards this helps to maintain soil health in the inter-row area.

Post-harvest period
The long post-harvest period in most Australian wine regions gives potential for significant nutrient uptake and accumulation before dormancy. The nutrients are then stored in the vines trunk, canes and roots until the next season, when they are used to support the first growth of spring. Nutrient application post-harvest can stimulate root growth and give vines better access to nutrients and water in the following season. Post-harvest application of nutrients (especially nitrogen) is best left to mid-autumn (cool) in most districts to avoid excessive shoot growth, which will deplete the vines carbohydrate and nutrient reserves. Ideally, shoot growth should be limited in autumn, but enough healthy leaves should remain on the vine to allow photosynthesis to continue. The removal of all the leaves after harvest has been found detrimental to vines because photosynthesis is stopped, root growth is not supported, and no further carbohydrates are accumulated for use in the next season. A research project at the NWGIC has been set up to investigate the importance of the post-harvest period for growth and yield in the following season.

Organic matter
Compost is a rich source of organic matter and nutrients. The compost used in Australian viticulture is often derived from decomposed animal manure (e.g. cattle manure from feedlots). Only composts of low nutrient value are recommended for new vineyards. Compost can be applied in the rip-line when establishing vines. In mature vineyards it can be applied 5 to 10 cm deep in the vineyard inter-row area and cultivated into the soil. Compost needs to be matured properly to avoid a deficiency in available N. Unlike inorganic nitrogen fertilisers, N in compost is available slowly over time. Although a properly prepared organic mulch is low in N, it contains an appreciable amount of Ca and K
46

Integrated weed management and desuckering

CLARRIE BECKINGHAM , DISTRICT HORTICULTURIST , NSW DPI , MUDGEE GREG MOULDS , DISTRICT HORTICULTURIST , NSW DPE , DATETON

Weeds can have a serious negative impact on grape production if they are not carefully managed. Weed resistance to herbicides, for example, is a developing issue for grapegrowers, and Integrated Weed Management (IWM) will underpin future planning to manage weeds in vineyards, adjoining lands and even regions. The main aim of IWM is to stop weeds reproducing and spreading. IWM is a flexible system that incorporates multiple weed management tactics and control measures measures, aiming to reduce weed numbers in an economic and sustainable fashion (Bowcher and Holding 2005). The weed control tactics are likely to be long term (5 to 10 years) and cost effective. They will be based on having a good knowledge of the target weeds identity, characteristics and life cycle and the vineyard environment the weeds are growing in. Weed management will be dependent on: age of vines and vineyard development stage organic or non-organic production weed types present critical periods for weed control (e.g. autumn, late winter, spring) middle/strip management preferences equipment and herbicides used alternatives to herbicides (e.g. mowing, cultivation, mulches) use of herbicide-resistant strategies registered herbicides available.

Remember: Read the product label before using a herbicide

the course of the season. They can occur in large numbers and are often annual species that can spread rapidly, especially when resistant to herbicides.

Weed treatment
Management of weed and cover crop species can be achieved by: mulching mowing cultivation herbicide application grazing monitoring.

Herbicide application for control of weeds and grapevine suckers

The benefits of using herbicides in vineyards include: no mechanical damage to vines by cultivation machinery

A covered spinning disc for herbicides produces little spray drift. The model shown is for use in under-vine spraying. Photo: Clarrie Beckingham

Identify the target

Before attempting to control any weed, identify it properly. This is one of the most important steps in weed control, as a good understanding of the type of weed species determines weed management.

Characteristics of weeds
Problem vineyard weeds are often vigorous growers that take advantage of short-term conditions, and a succession of different weed species can occur over
47

 easier and more effective weed control in newlyplanted vineyards reduced cultivation, offering improved soil structure increased soil organic matter levels improved water infiltration from rainfall and irrigation cost savings control of unwanted sucker (watershoot) growth on trunks.

Continuous agitation is necessary when using all formulations of herbicides. Dont spray in windy weather (e.g. wind speed greater than 10 kph). Dont spray weeds that are stressed by drought, frost, and cultivation or waterlogging. Be aware of localised wind currents within the vineyard caused by heated soil; these currents can carry fine droplets upwards into the canopy. Avoid spraying in situations conducive to temperature inversions. Be aware that temperature inversions are more likely to occur at night. Addition of spraying oil or LI700 to the spray mix can markedly reduce the number of driftable droplets, whereas the addition of non-ionic surfactants can markedly increase the number of driftable fines. Use the correct pressure: conventional nozzles 1.5 to 3 bar (150 to 300 kPa); pre-orifice nozzles 2 to 4 bar (200 to 400k Pa); low-pressure air-induction nozzles 3 to 5 bar (300 to 500 kPa); high-pressure air-induction nozzles 4 to 8 bar (400 to 800 kPa). Consider fitting air induction nozzles such as an AirMix, or similar, that produce a coarse spray even at pressures as high as 400 kPa. this spray quality is very suitable for systemic herbicides such as glyphosate, and when used with high water volumes it is good for contact herbicides as well. These nozzles dramatically reduce the proportion of fine, driftable droplets. However, one company prefers to recommend normal flat fan nozzles for applying its post-emergent grass herbicides. There have been problems getting consistent results with air induction nozzles for small grass weed control in broadacre crops at water rates of 50 to 80 L/ha. The larger droplets

Guidelines for applying herbicides in the vineyard

Avoid application of pre-emergent herbicides to very dry soils (i.e. dry below 15 cm, which is the critical zone where rain or irrigation is needed for herbicide incorporation) and use lower application rates per hectare on very sandy soils, if stated on the label. Use directed sprays or shrouded sprayers to minimise spray drift. Avoid spraying foliage or sucker growth. Remove sucker growth 1 week before using knockdown herbicides. Travel at a constant speed and shut off the boom when stopping or turning. A variation of 2 km/h in speed can cause a 30% difference in chemical application rates. Do not make operational adjustments in the vineyard that could result in any unnecessary herbicide being released. Do not carry out repairs to herbicide equipment in the vineyard, because herbicide may contaminate the crop.

Boom spray attached to the back of a spray rig modified to apply herbicide under vines two rows at a time. Photo: Clarrie Beckingham

Simple ground boom attached to front of tractor used to apply herbicide under vines. Photo: Clarrie Beckingham

48

produced by the air induction nozzles are not thought to be ideal for good coverage of small grass weeds; this may not be an issue provided that water rates ar over 200 L/Ha. When a previous seasons application has had a carry-over effect on the weed problem, carefully assess the present and anticipated weed growth before applying herbicide on the weed population. Under-vine ploughing away of soil exposes roots, and any herbicide applications should be made with the soil level or hilled under the vine row and not taken away. Do not apply herbicides to vines that are under stress (e.g. affected by disease, waterlogging, drought). Be careful not to spray the same row twice, and dont add extra chemicals into the spray cart for good measure. Cross-check with the manufacturer of the equipment you are using for the recommended nozzle, pressure and tractor speed combinations. (1 micron is 1 thousandth of a millimetre, or 1000 micron = 1 mm.)

kills susceptible individuals and, over time, allows the offspring of resistant individuals to dominate. The population in then considered to be resistant. The more selective herbicides are, the greater the risk of resistance, but if resistance management strategies are not practised it is probable that weeds will develop resistance to all herbicides.

To prevent herbicide resistance:

Take an integrated approach to weed management It is important to have a long-term Integrated Weed Management Plan, rather than being reactive. A plan will provide a focus on the key issues involved, be it problem weeds, resistance prevention, the cost of weed management, or water and nutrient management. Utilise non-chemical weed-control options where possible. Whilst herbicides will be the most cost effective weed control option, alternative Integrated Weed Management control options should also be adopted into a weed management program. Over-reliance on any one weed-control texhnique could cause problems. For example, cultivation may bring more weed seeds into the germination zone; mowing at the wrong time can spread seeds; and the use of uncomposted organic mulches and grazing could introduce unwanted weed species. Do not allow weeds to seed. Give special attention to resistant weeds before they set seed. Hand rogue if necessary. Use a combination of herbicides to reduce the risk of herbicide resistance to one mode of action (MOA) developing, especially in the higher-risk weed growth periods, such as winter for annual rye grass. Rotate herbicides from different groups. (Know the herbicide groups.) Herbicide groups (see product summary following) High Risk: Groups A, B Moderate Risk: Groups C, D, F, G, H Low risk groups I, J, K, L, M, N Remember: Read and follow the label directions of registered herbicide products before using. Calibrate spraying equipment and provide sufficient agitation of herbicide in tank, especially when using WP wettable powder WG wettable granule DF dry flowable SC suspension concentrate
49

Herbicide resistance
What is herbicide resistance?
Herbicide resistance is the inherent ability of a weed to survive a herbicide rate that would normally control it; it is not the increase in numbers of some weeds that are naturally resistant to a herbicide (e.g. marshmallow or hair willow herb) that occurs when susceptible weed species are controlled by herbicides, thus reducing competition.

Resistant weeds
Resistant weeds have developed in many plant populations where resistance strategies have not been used. Weeds in which resistance has developed include annual ryegrass, Indian hedge mustard, wild turnip, wild oats, bindweed, capeweed, barley grass, dirty Dora, and arrowhead in some regions. Without appropriate resistance management strategies the number of resistant populations will increase dramatically. Annual ryegrass resistant to glyphosate is on the increase across Australia, and most cases reported in 2005 were found in vineyards.

How do weeds become resistant?

Weed populations contain individual plants able to withstand particular herbicides. Repeated use of these herbicides and others with the same mode of action

 Consult the label for recommendations for use of wetting agents. Practice herbicide-resistance strategies. Check withholding periods of herbicides before use, as well as rainfast times.

Spray Sense leaflets available at www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/reader/spray-sense. How to calibrate hand operated sprayers Testing for chemical residues How to calibrate airblast sprayers

Herbicide tables
Table 9 lists non-selective post-emergent knockdown herbicides registered in NSW for use in vineyards. Table 10 lists the residual herbicides registered for use in vineyards, and Table 11 shows non-selective postemergent herbicides registered for grapevine sucker control in vineyards.

How to prevent and treat pesticide poisoning Storing pesticides safely on the farm Using fungicides correctly Safe disposal of empty pesticide containers The role of EPA pesticide inspectors How to read and understand Pesticide labels Transporting farm chemicals Spray water quality How to calibrate boom sprayers Managing chemical spills How to choose the right pressure gauge What pesticides can I use? Keeping pesticide records Assessing spray coverage with water sensitive spray cards

Spray Sense: information for users of agricultural chemicals

Spray Sense is a series of leaflets that focus on providing up-to-date information on a range of pesticide issues. Everyone who is involved in pesticide manufacture, sale, distribution, use and provision of advice is encouraged to use this information to apply pesticides more effectively. The Spray Sense series was first developed as an initiative of the Pesticide Project Team, comprising NSW DPI Horticultural extension officers and industry representatives located in the Greater Sydney Basin. The series has been expanded over the years to take into account new issues and now has a State-wide focus. The Spray Sense series is available on our website at www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/reader/spray-sense.

Acknowledgment
We very gratefully acknowledge the reviews and comments provided by representatives of companies associated with products used by the grape industries.

References
Bowcher A., Holding D. (2005) Integrated Weed Management. Weeds CRC, NSW DPI, Wagga Wagga, NSW. Beckingham C.R. (NSW Agriculture) (1987). Vineyard Soil Management Herbicides and their use Agfact H7.3.8, first edition. NSW Agriculture. Glenn D. and Aitken D. (eds) (1977). IPM Viticulture Research to Practice Training Manual. Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Victoria. Infopest CD (2004). Produced by Queensland Department of Primary Industries.

50

DOW AGRO

51

Insert 4 full pages word table

Insert 4 full pages word table

Insert 4 full pages word table

Insert 4 full pages word table

Spray application in vineyards

JOHN LOPRESTI, COOPERATIVE RESEARCH CENTRE FOR VITICULTURE/PRIMARY INDUSTRIES RESEARCH, VICTORIA DAVID BRAYBROOK , VITISOLUTIONS, SWINBURNE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, VICTORIA

Introduction
Effective spray application relies on delivering the appropriate chemical at the right dose to the part of the vine where it will control the target pest. This can be achieved by: timing the spray application to coincide with the most vulnerable (or most destructive) life cycle stages of the target pest selecting the right chemical type, considering mode of action, formulation, persistence and toxicity getting the chemical dose right to efficiently and cost-effectively control the target pest (More is not necessarily better!) ensuring adequate coverage to give the chemical the best possible chance of working effectively monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of control measures. Timing of applications is critical and involves identifying the disease status, the life cycle stage of the pest and the vine growth stage and then choosing between pre- and post-infection chemical strategies, where appropriate. Some terms commonly used in spraying are listed in Table 12.

Table 12. Terminology used in spray application. Dilute spraying Canopy is sprayed to the point of runoff using a spray mixture prepared using the label rate of product per 100 litres of water. A lethal dose is applied if the dilute label rate is used in a volume that thoroughly wets the vine canopy. Concentrate spraying Canopy is sprayed with a water volume that is less than that required for dilute spraying to the point of run-off, while applying the same amount of chemical that would have been applied when dilute spraying. Volume of water required to thoroughly wet a particular canopy.

Dilute water volume

Application rate Amount of chemical product applied to an area (i.e. per hectare), or to a length of vine row (i.e. per 100 metres). Dilute label rate The product concentration given on the label for dilute spraying, expressed as grams or millilitres per 100 litres of spray mixture. Coverage Dose Percentage of target surface covered by droplets (%) or number of droplets per cm2. The amount of chemical deposited on a target surface such as a leaf or berry. The lethal dose is the amount of chemical that needs to be deposited to control a pest or disease.

Spray targets
A spray target is the best time and place to deposit the most appropriate chemical to achieve control of a pest or disease. It is made up of both a biological and application target, and these will determine the timing of sprays, the selection of chemical and the , sprayer adjustments required to achieve the necessary coverage and dose.

Point of run-off Refers to coverage achieved where the majority of the canopy is covered in droplets so that some join together and run off foliage or bunches. Also known as thoroughly wet.

Improving access to the application target

The application target in grapevines changes rapidly through the growing season and is influenced by factors such as variety and the canopy management system. Even when spray equipment is set up and operated to maximise its performance, the effectiveness of the spraying process will be limited by the characteristics of the grapevine. A number of canopy management techniques are available to improve the exposure of the application target to the sprays being applied. These include converting trellis systems and/or using pruning methods, nutrition, and soil and irrigation management to achieve the desired level of vegetative growth.

What is the target?

The biological target refers to the pest that is to be controlled: for example, botrytis, lightbrown apple moth or weeds. The application target is the place where the pesticide spray must be deposited in order for it to work on the biological target (Table 13): for example, the flowers or bunches (for botrytis control) or the soil (for pre-emergent herbicides).

56

Table 13. Changes in the application target over the season for major pests and disease of grapevines. Application target Biological target Early season Flowering Flowers/ foliage Foliage Post flowering Bunches/stalks/foliage Foliage

Lightbrown apple moth Shoot tips/foliage Rust mite Bud mite Powdery mildew Downy mildew Phomopsis Botrytis Cordons, canes, spurs, buds Young shoot Whole shoot Foliage/undersides of leaves Whole shoot Whole shoot

Foliage/flowers All green tissue Foliage/flowers Whole shoot Flowers

Foliage/berries/ bunch stems All green tissue Foliage/berries/ bunch stems

Bunches

Selecting a sprayer
Effective pest and disease control can be achieved with most types of spray equipment currently available for use in viticulture. But no sprayer will be perfectly suited to every vine growth stage or target during the season, and each sprayer will have its strengths and weaknesses. With a clear understanding of how to best target sprays the majority of sprayers can be set up correctly for the canopy being sprayed. There can be significant differences between sprayers in the way they operate, in their versatility and reliability, and in their effectiveness in different canopies, or under a variety of weather conditions. As changes in the vine canopy control the spray application process, any sprayer used must be adaptable to your trellising systems, canopy size and density, and different growth stages during the season.

versatility: ideally the sprayer should be able to produce a wide range of droplet sizes, air volumes and speeds, and water volumes ability to target sprays accurately: this is important for cordon or bunch spraying and to minimise off-target impacts suitability for the vineyard terrain and climate: for example, a sprayer with a small fan producing fine droplets may not be suitable for a vineyard in a windy and hot climate where humidity is generally low equipment features such as a high-quality pressure gauge, filters before and after the pump, a spray monitor, an effective agitation system, an accurate tank volume indicator, high quality nozzles, a clean water tank and quality fittings.

Air-assisted sprayers Points to look for

Important considerations when purchasing a sprayer include: availability of spare parts, after-sales service and technical support: this is critical during the spraying season, when any delays in the event of a breakdown may result in pest or disease outbreaks reliability and durability of equipment: purchase the best sprayer possible tank and fan size: a sprayer with a 2000-litre tank and a large fan will require less refilling, may be able to travel faster because of the greater air output, and will have higher work rates than a sprayer with a 1000-litre tank and a small fan Air assisted sprayers are designed to transport small droplets to a target in an air stream produced by a fan. The use of air improves canopy penetration and coverage compared with boom sprayers. There are also opportunities to reduce spray volumes when using small droplets in an air stream, while at the same time maintaining or even improving target coverage. Conventional orchard or airblast sprayers form droplets using a hydraulic pressure nozzle and then use the air from the fan to carry the droplets into the canopy. Airshear sprayers form the spray by using a rapidly moving air stream to shatter low-pressure liquid into droplets that are then carried into the canopy. Multi-head sprayers use rotary atomisers or hydraulic nozzles and then incorporate fans to generate the air to transport the spray into the

57

canopy. The benefits of air-assisted application can be maximised by setting up (adjusting) the sprayer to deliver the right air quality (volume, speed and direction) to the vine canopy being sprayed.

Table 14. Possible adjustments when setting up a vine sprayer. Component Adjustment

Hydraulic boom sprayers

Simple boom sprayers consist of a tank, a pump, and a spray line with nozzles attached to a boom. They give poor spray coverage on the foliage and inner part of the canopy compared with air-assisted equipment but can be useful for early season applications where very thorough wetting of the wood or foliage is desirable.

Air direction Adjust air deflectors or ducts so that air is directed at target. Air plumes from multiple ducts or heads should overlap to avoid striping. Angle air outlets or heads backwards or forwards to lengthen travel path of air and reduce chances of shingling. For multi-head and ducted machines, converging air may improve coverage. Air volume Adjust fan speed through the sprayer gearbox or tractor PTO. Alter blade pitch (axial fan) (e.g., reduced blade pitch will decrease air volume) Adjust tractor speed (e.g. faster travel speeds produce more airflow per metre of row) Air speed Adjust fan speed through the sprayer gearbox or tractor PTO. Consider size of air outlet (where adjustable use the largest opening possible to produce low velocity, high volume air). Adjust tractor speed. Consider angle of nozzles (for ducted and airshear equipment). Low-speed and high-volume air delivery result in the best canopy penetration (for axial fan sprayers only; airshear equipment works in the opposite manner).

Recirculating sprayers are designed with a spraycatching surface to collect any spray not deposited on the vine. Either a boom or air-assisted sprayer can be modified into a recirculating sprayer, although air assistance will improve coverage later in the season. As there is little foliage on the vine to capture spray early in the season, much of the chemical applied is wasted. Considerable savings can be achieved and off-target impacts minimised by using recirculating spray equipment.

Sprayer set-up and calibration

Often there is too much focus on the type or brand of sprayer being used, rather than on what potential adjustments to set up and what operations can be used to improve its performance. The most important adjustment is matching the air output to the vine canopy. Air largely controls spray penetration into a canopy and evenness of chemical distribution across target surfaces. One of the most common problems encountered during spraying is poor set-up, resulting in very low deposits on whole sections of a target canopy. This issue can be readily addressed during sprayer set-up by adjusting air quality (i.e. volume, speed and direction) to suit the requirements of the target (Table 14). Sprayer set-up involves maximising spray coverage and minimising chemical wastage by adjusting: sprayer tractor speed air volume, velocity and direction nozzle size, number and direction to match the canopy, weather and target. Calibration is simply a technical procedure for measuring travel speed and volume output per minute from the sprayer, from which is calculated the volume leaving the sprayer per 100 metres of vine row or per hectare. Although calibration is important, it tells you nothing about what is required for: a particular canopy a specific pest or disease
58

the weather conditions on the day the application target (i.e. where on the vine the spray needs to reach).

Sprayer adjustment (set-up)

Sprayer set-up and evaluation should be carried out at least four times during the season for each trellising system. Sprayer adjustment will be necessary each time the vine canopy or target changes significantly, for example, at budburst, 20-cm shoots, flowering, pre-bunch closure and veraison. Correctly targeting sprays is particularly important for late-season grape bunch applications. The architecture, growth stage, leaf density and size of the vine determine the amount of air needed to carry the droplets to the application target. Air volumes generally need to increase as the canopy develops through the season. Depending on the equipment and set-up, it is possible to deliver both too much, or too little air, or the incorrect speed of air to different canopies or growth stages. There are large differences in the form and

power of air output from different air-assisted sprayers. For example, axial fan sprayers produce high- volume, low-speed air compared with airshear equipment, which produces low-volume and highspeed air. If the combination of air speed and volume is too high, it can push the spray cloud through the canopy, missing the target, or cause shingling, which reduces penetration into the canopy. Inappropriate air is a very common cause of poor spray application in vines. The greatest limitations of different sprayers, or particular sprayer adjustments, are usually seen on fully developed canopies as a failure to penetrate or adequately cover inner bunches and foliage. Air volume, air speed, air convergence/ mixing, and air direction may be adjustable, depending on the sprayer being used. Fan rotation speed, blade pitch, fan cowling designs and gearbox settings all influence the air quality produced (see Table 14). The most important part of set-up is matching the air to the canopy: Air should be used to move droplets to the target, not through to the next row. The spray plume should penetrate and settle out within a canopy so that an occasional puffing of droplet-laden air can be seen emerging from the other side of the vine, even in the densest parts of the canopy. If it is windy, the spray cloud should emerge from the upwind canopy, which may mean considerable movement beyond the downwind canopy. Wind gusts should also be taken into consideration.

trellising system will usually dictate the lowest volume used at the start of the season, whereas the full canopy volume will be largely determined by foliage density and spread. Spray volumes usually range between 400 L/ha and 1400 L/ha for dilute spraying. If concentrate spraying is used, then spray volumes usually range between 250 L/ha and 600 L/ha during the season. Water volumes are usually increased in three or four steps as the canopy increases in size, whether dilute or concentrate spraying. Selecting water volumes for spraying should not be confused with the process of determining the dilute volume (point of run-off) for a canopy that enables the chemical application rate to be calculated. The dilute water volume should be determined after the sprayer set-up has been completed and a water volume found that gives effective coverage. If the water volume used thoroughly wets the canopy, then this is the dilute volume. If this is not the case, then concentrate spraying is being performed and a dilute volume will have to be determined for this canopy.

Calibration
Accurate calibration improves spraying efficiency by ensuring that the sprayer produces an appropriate spray quality (droplet size) and the correct spray output for the application. Calibration also involves checking the performance and condition of all sprayer components. Regular calibration and good record-keeping practices also provide evidence in the event of a spray drift or chemical residue problems. Calibration is essentially the same whether the equipment is a knapsack sprayer or an air-assisted sprayer, and manufacturers usually provide directions on calibrating their spray equipment. Spray equipment used in viticulture should be calibrated: when purchased at the start of every season at each critical spray whenever the application volume is changed whenever nozzles are changed. Calibration involves the following steps: nozzle (spray quality) selection measuring sprayer travel speed determining sprayer water output from nozzles calculating how much spray volume is being applied calculating how much chemical to put in the tank determining how many tank fills are required.

Spray water volumes

The right combination of air output and water volume is required during spraying to achieve adequate coverage and dose. The water volume required for a particular canopy can only be accurately determined after the air output and direction have been optimised. In spray application water is simply a carrier and ensures that the chemical is spread across the target surface, but it is air quality that determines whether the spray actually reaches the target in the first place. In many cases there can be too great a focus on spray volumes at the expense of air set-up, with the latter of greater importance in hitting the target. As the vine grows, more chemical and water are needed to cover the increasing size of the application target to maintain a constant dose of chemical and uniform coverage of the target area. This is true for all types of equipment and for both dilute and concentrate application. Early-season application volumes are usually 25% to 50% of the full canopy volume. The

59

Calibration is the measuring of travel speed and flow rate of liquid from the sprayer to establish the volume of liquid delivered to the vine canopy at the best setup for that canopy. The travel speed should allow good air penetration of the canopy and is set during sprayer set-up. The actual tractor speed should be determined by measuring out 100 metres and timing how long it takes the tractor to travel this distance. Two common methods used to determine water flow rate from a sprayer are by collecting nozzle output or by using the tank refill method. Any nozzle output that differs from the manufacturers specification by more than 10% indicates that the nozzle should be checked and cleaned, or replaced if necessary. For some types of sprayers, such as those with airshear or rotary nozzles, it is difficult to collect the output from each nozzle. In this case the flow rate can be determined by filling the spray tank to the top and operating the pump at the normal rpm and spraying pressure for a set period of time (e.g. 10 minutes). The amount of water needed to refill the tank to the top can then be measured and the water flow rate in litres per minute calculated. Although area-based calibration (per hectare) has traditionally been used in viticulture, distance calibration per 100 metres of row is simpler and more appropriate for vine spraying. New chemical labels are based on the dilute rate per 100 litres and a maximum concentration for concentrate spraying. Distance calibration is better suited to the new label format. For further information see Distance Calibration by Geoff Furness (SARDI/PIRSA, 2002).

been optimised, a decision is made as to whether the water volume used thoroughly wets the canopy (i.e. whether the point of run-off has been reached). If this is the case, then this spray volume is the dilute water volume for the application, and spraying can start by using the chemical label rate and ensuring that vines are sprayed to run-off (i.e. dilute spraying). If the vine canopy has not been sprayed to run-off during the sprayer set-up process, then the dilute water volume must be determined so that the concentrate chemical rate to be added to the spray tank can be calculated for concentrate spraying. Although it is important to apply the right water volumes and chemical rates to a canopy, remember that this will not control a disease unless good coverage has also been achieved.

Dilute spraying
When dilute spraying, the millilitres or grams per 100 litre chemical rate from the label is mixed in the spray tank and the vine is sprayed to the point of run-off. Application should be to a level of coverage just before the point at which the spray starts to run off the plant surface Spraying to this point will maximise the amount of product applied, avoid wastage, and reduce possible unwanted contamination to the environment When dilute spraying, higher water volumes are used during the season in comparison to concentrate spraying and a wider range of droplet sizes is produced by spray equipment Spray volumes are also increased through the season to closely match vine canopy growth.

Determining pesticide rates

Water volume and application rate recommendations have progressively been removed from chemical labels, as it is impossible to specify single rates when many variations in canopy size, density, volume and trellising configuration exist between and within vineyards. Under new label directions, the volume of water required to spray a vine to run-off (i.e. the dilute volume) must be determined. With the move towards concentrate (low-volume) spraying it has become clear that there can be some difficulty in determining chemical rates and water volumes required for spraying vines. A simple procedure for determining water and chemical rates after sprayer set-up is described in Figure 9. Sprayer adjustment and evaluation are carried out to maximise coverage throughout the vine canopy being sprayed. This involves determining the best spray quality (droplet size) and air quality (air volume, speed and direction) for that particular spray target. At the same time, spray water volumes are adjusted to ensure good coverage. Once spray coverage has
60

What is the point of run-off?

The term to the point of run-off or thoroughly wet is actually quite difficult to describe. It is usually defined as the point at which spray starts to run off the surface of a leaf or bunch, but this point can be difficult to identify. Further complications arise because not all parts of the canopy being sprayed will have the same coverage at any one time. In most cases, the outer leaves closest to the sprayer nozzles will capture more droplets than leaves in the centre of the vine, and the aim of setting up the sprayer is to even out the coverage throughout the canopy. It is clear that we are not talking about a specific point but rather an overall level of wetness throughout a particular canopy, and some estimation will be

required. The point of run-off can most simply be defined as the point where most droplets on the outer foliage of a vine canopy begin to join together with some pooling at the edges of leaves or at the bases of berries in bunches. But this point will have been reached only once the sprayer has been set up to ensure even coverage of inner foliage and bunches (i.e. an even coverage of droplets should be visible inside the canopy).

Sprayers used for concentrate spraying generate spray clouds of fine droplets with a relatively narrow size spectrum. With a more effective conversion of spray mixture to useful droplets (by reducing the proportions of large and very fine droplets) the volume of spray mixture needed to achieve coverage of plant surfaces is reduced. Spray volumes used for concentrate spraying are selected to ensure good coverage and a reasonable work rate. Water volumes are increased through the season as the canopy grows, to ensure that coverage is maintained as foliage area increases. During concentrate spraying, the spray deposit landed (not the water volume in which the chemical is applied) determines whether a lethal dose is achieved.

Concentrate spraying
Concentrate spraying is a relatively recent development and refers to the application of a pesticide in a water volume that is less than the volume required for dilute spraying to the point of run-off. But the same amount of chemical is sprayed that would have been applied if dilute spraying had been used. For this to be achieved, the concentration of product in the spray mixture must be increased proportionally, as the volume of water is decreased using a concentration factor.
Figure 9. A step-by-step guide to help determine the pesticide rates needed to achieve coverage and dose during vine spraying.

Determining dilute volumes

When using new chemical label directions that provide only a rate per 100 litres, the water volume required to spray a canopy to run-off, or dilute volume, must always be determined before a chemical rate can be calculated. This is the cornerstone of the new label directions because it sets the amount of product that must be applied to a particular canopy, whether by dilute or concentrate spraying. Currently there are four options for estimating the dilute water volume required for a particular vine canopy: Measure in-field dilute volumes by test-spraying to run-off. Use estimates based on past experience or regional practices (i.e. what has worked before?). Vine-row-volume methods, such as unit canopy row (UCR) (see below). Avcare recommendations. Any of the above methods can be used to estimate the dilute volume, although all have their limitations, but in-field measurement will probably provide the most accurate result. Remember that if a sprayer has been optimised to achieve good coverage throughout a canopy then the estimated dilute water volume need be only within 10% to 15% of the true value to achieve an effective application.

1. What is the target vine canopy and pest

2. Sprayer set up adjust air quality to maximise coverage 3. Select/adjust water volume to give good coverage and work rates Was the vine canopy sprayed to run off? Yes Dilute spraying Dilute volume has been determined No Concentrate spraying Need to determine the dilute volume

Use chemical label rate grams or ml/100 L

Determine the dilute volume Calculate concentration factor and amount of chemical required Spray vines in selected spray volume using concentrate chemical rate

Spray vines to the point of run off

Test spraying to run-off

When equipment is available that can be used for dilute spraying (regardless of whether dilute or concentrate spraying is conducted), test spraying to run-off is the most accurate method of determining the dilute water volume.
61

Source: Research to Practice (CRCV)

 For a particular vine canopy the sprayer is set up first to provide maximum spray coverage, and this remains unchanged when determining the dilute volume. Correct set-up of the sprayer will ensure that droplets cover all parts of the canopy as evenly as possible. If wetting agent will be used for spraying then it should be added to the water before test runs begin During test spraying, water volumes are increased or decreased until a point is reached where the spray liquid is considered to cover all parts of the canopy more or less to the point of run-off. Observe the vine canopy immediately after testspraying both sides of the row at the best sprayer set-up. When using spray equipment designed to achieve coverage at low spray volumes, such as airshear equipment, difficulties can arise in attempting to use test spraying to run-off, as this type of sprayer cannot be adjusted easily to thoroughly wet some canopies. On relatively small vines it may be possible to determine an approximate dilute volume using a concentrate sprayer, as the test water volumes used will be within the normal operating range of the equipment. Unit canopy row (UCR) is a method that enables chemical rate adjustments to be made for different canopies or growth stages in order to achieve consistent chemical doses during the season. It can be used to estimate the dilute water volume based on canopy size and is a relatively simple method, using litres per 100 metres of row length rather than litres per hectare as the standard unit of measure for water volumes. The unit canopy row system is described in more detail and sample calculations provided in Furness and Magarey (1999). Avcare recommendations may be useful for viticulturists with concentrate sprayers who do not spray to run-off and so cannot determine dilute volumes directly or have little experience in estimating these volumes. A table of indicative dilute volumes has been developed by Avcare for sprawl and VSP (vertical shoot positioned) canopy types, based on vine dimensions (see Radunz 2001). It shows a range of suggested dilute volumes for four canopy sizes and has been developed mainly for operators with airshear equipment who concentrate spray, but may also be used when dilute spraying. Growers who are using volumes more dilute than those recommended in the table with consistent results should continue to do so but may consider using the suggested volumes in a high-pressure season or when spraying to save a crop.

Once the dilute water volume has been determined then it is relatively straightforward to calculate the amount of chemical required in that volume to ensure a sufficient dose is achieved.

Evaluating spray coverage

A number of techniques are available to rapidly identify problems with applications without having to wait for crop damage to appear. Evaluation has the potential to save chemical and reduce environmental contamination by identifying overdosing or where spray is missing the target. It is also important to have tools such as water-sensitive cards and fluorescent dyes to evaluate the effectiveness of changes to sprayer set-up and operation and to determine appropriate spray volumes.

Why test spray coverage?

Spray deposit assessment should be conducted regularly to ensure even coverage across the target and enough coverage for the pest or disease being sprayed. Different pesticides may also require different levels of coverage to work effectively. Fungicides and contact herbicides are examples of chemicals that require thorough coverage while translocated, and systemic pesticides may not require such high levels of coverage for effective results. It is also important to assess how well an application is conducted: so that due diligence can be demonstrated by the applicator to determine whether improvements can be made to be able to compare spray deposits in the future or under different spraying conditions to improve sprayer set-up to provide peace of mind to meet environmental management system and quality assurance requirements.

Direct observation
Direct observation of droplets on foliage immediately after spraying can give a reasonable guide to spray coverage when using dilute (i.e. high-volume) sprays. Dry foliage (especially lower leaf surfaces and inner canopy sites) generally indicates inadequate coverage. A visual assessment aid, such as a dark glass bottle, placed in the centre of larger canopies may help you in evaluating deposit penetration and distribution.

62

 When assessing grape bunches you should break them open so that you can observe spray deposits in the centre of the bunch. Remember that fine droplets dry on impact, and many areas of good coverage may not be obvious. Hence this technique, especially with concentrate spraying, is of little value in accurately assessing spray deposits with most air-assisted sprayers. Another issue is that no permanent record of spray deposits is possible when using direct observation for comparison of sprayer adjustments or future reference.

These cards are good for relatively quick assessments, but they underestimate the number of droplets landing on foliage and bunches and represent a worst-case scenario (deposits on the canopy will be better than on cards). Water-sensitive cards on fixed targets provide a quick, repeatable and permanent record of spray deposits and can be useful tools for optimising sprayer set-up. They can be used in two ways: to check sprayer performance in different canopies as tools for quick optimisation of a particular sprayer. If you are using a spray pole as a fixed target with WSC for spray coverage assessment, place it in the centre of the most difficult-to-spray canopy on the vineyard, with vertical papers facing along the row. Cards can be stapled to recording sheets, which can then be kept as permanent records. This allows many important comparisons to be made: for example, changes in coverage as the canopy grows and under

Water-sensitive cards
Water-sensitive cards (WSC) have a coated, yellow surface that is stained blue when contacted by water droplets. They have been developed for field use and allow rapid evaluation of spray coverage. Watersensitive cards give a true relative indication of droplet size from different nozzles, although the droplets spread and appear twice as large (the diameter of the stain is related to the droplet size and is known as the spread factor).

Example: calculating chemical rates

Vine canopy: Dense late season VSP Dilute label rate: 10 mL/100L (from the chemical label) Spray tank volume: 2000 L Dilute water volume (determined from one of the methods suggested above): 1500 L/ha For dilute spraying the amount of product specified on the label is added for each 100 L of water, ensuring then that the tank mix is sprayed to run off. Amount of chemical added to the tank = 10 mL/100 L 2000 L = 200 mL This tank mix is now sprayed to run-off with a spray volume of 1500 L/ha. The chemical application rate can also be calculated: Application rate = 10 mL/100 L 1500 L/ha = 150 mL/ha For concentrate spraying the appropriate dilute volume for the vine canopy being sprayed is used to calculate the concentrate mixing rate that determines how much chemical to put into the spray tank. Using a sprayer that produces fine droplets (e.g. airshear equipment) you select a concentrate spray volume that provides good coverage as well as a reasonable work rate, such as 500 L/ha. The concentration factor is the dilute spray volume divided by the concentrate spray volume: 1500 L 500 L = 3 i.e. 3 The dilute label rate from the chemical label is 10 mL/100 L, so then the concentrate mixing rate becomes: 3 10 mL/100 L = 30 mL/100 L. This then becomes the chemical rate per 100 L that is added to the spray tank. Amount of chemical added to the tank = 30 mL/100 L 2000 L = 600 mL. The chemical application rate can also be calculated: Application rate = 30 mL/100 L 500 L/ha = 150 mL/ha.

63

different weather conditions. It is important that the cards are placed on the recording sheets so that their positions on the spray pole remain obvious. As the spray pole is a fixed target, any changes in coverage during test spray runs should be caused only by a change in sprayer adjustment and not by the random placement of cards in the canopy. Important things to look for during visual assessment include: major gaps in spray coverage: yellow papers where the spray is failing to penetrate or reach uneven coverage (some papers heavily or totally blued, whereas others are still mostly yellow); even if there is an even spread of droplets on poorly covered cards, this area will be underdosed relative to areas with greater coverage run-off (totally blue papers with streak marks), particularly if this occurs when concentrate spraying.

impacted droplet size will vary with the formulation and target characteristics comparisons should be made only between treatments applied at the same concentration and application volume and using the same droplet size most people tend to pick a more concentrated spray as producing better deposition because it appears brighter to the naked eye dye particles in large droplets tend to collect at the base of each droplet on the foliage, and this can sometimes be mistaken for poor coverage in comparison with finer droplets. It is possible to use fluorescent dyes during sprayer set-up, but this is usually too time-consuming and it is difficult to keep permanent records of different dye deposits on foliage. Detailed information on the use of fluorescent dyes is available in SARDI Fluorescent Pigment, available from Geoff Furness (SARDI/ PIRSA).

Fluorescent dye
To assess spray coverage, fluorescent dye is added to a small volume of water in the spray tank and sprayed onto the foliage as normal. Deposits are assessed directly on the foliage using a black light at night, or on picked foliage in a dark room. Features of fluorescent dye include: provides a measure of spray coverage throughout a canopy shows where off-target impacts may be occurring shows the pattern of spray deposit on berries is ideal to show capture of sprays inside the canopy. Spray coverage assessment using fluorescent dye should be performed at least once in the life of the sprayer and once every few seasons if possible. Most assessments are made visually by rating coverage or estimating the number of droplets per square centimetre. Geoff Furness (PIRSA) has developed a dropletrating chart for use with dyes for fine and mediumsized droplets. The number of droplets is estimated by comparison with the closest pattern on the chart. Just as there are limitations to the use of watersensitive cards, when visually assessing spray deposits using fluorescent dyes remember that: dye deposits contain pigment particles and do not necessarily behave in the same way as all pesticides; they should only be used as a guide to where the spray is deposited

SpraySmart CD
Most of the information presented in this article is contained in the Research to Practice SpraySmart CD. The CD provides vineyard managers, growers, and spray applicators with comprehensive information on pesticide application in viticulture. It describes the basic principles of effective pesticide application and provides practical advice on: targeting pests and diseases selecting pesticides and improving pesticide performance spray droplet behaviour selecting, adjusting and calibrating spray equipment evaluating spray coverage spray planning, minimising environmental impacts and keeping records. A simple web-based layout allows easy navigation between pesticide application topics, and the CD is designed as a concise reference containing essential information to help users in properly planning and conducting spray application in vineyards. For more information about SpraySmart contact Winetac on (08) 8373 7090 or at www.winetac.com.au

64

Further information
Ciba-Geigy (year unknown) Water-sensitive Paper for Monitoring Spray Distribution. Ciba-Geigy, Switzerland, 5th edition, 15 pp. Furness G (2000) SARDI Fluorescent Pigment. Fact Sheet No. 12000, SARDI/ PIRSA, Urrbrae, SA. Furness G (2002) Distance Calibration. SARDI/ PIRSA, Urrbrae, SA. Furness G, Magarey P (1999) Unit Canopy Row: a Better Way to Calibrate your Sprayer for Fruit Trees and Grapevines. FS1298, PIRSA / SARDI, Urrbrae, SA. Jones A, Gray B (2003) AgVet Chemical Users Course Resource Manual. ChemCert Australia, 8th edition, 354 pp. Kent J, Early R (2003) Pesticide Application in Vineyards. Charles Sturt University, 2nd edition, 93 pp. Manktelow D (2000) Getting pesticide application right: spray volume, deposition and chemical rate requirements for grape canopies. Australian Grapegrower and Winemaker, November, p. 4647. Nicholas P, Magarey P, Wachtel M (1994) Diseases and Pests. Winetitles, Adelaide, SA. Radunz L. (2000) New label directions for vine chemicals. Australian Grapegrower and Winemaker, August, p. 4345. Radunz L (2001) New label directions for spraying a review of experiences over the past year. Australian Grapegrower and Winemaker, August, p. 4547. Smart R, Robinson M (1991) Sunlight into Wine a Handbook for Winegrape Canopy Management. Winetitles, Adelaide, SA.

65

insert GrowthStages.pdf across these 2 pages -- Syngenta Growth Stages in Grapevine

insert GrowthStages.pdf across these 2 pages -- Syngenta Growth Stages in Grapevine

Bud-fruitfulness assessments in grapevines

JASON SMITH , RESEARCH FELLOW , CSU , NWGIC , WAGGA WAGGA LEO QUIRK , EXTENSION VITICULTURIST , NSW DPI , NWGIC , WAGGA WAGGA . BRUNO HOLZAPFEL , SENIOR RESEARCH VITICULTURIST , NSW DPI , NWGIC , WAGGA WAGGA .

Introduction
The number of buds retained on the vine after pruning has a considerable impact on canopy development and vine yield in the following season. If too few buds are retained, yields may be reduced to below what the vine would otherwise have the capacity to ripen. Shoot growth may be excessively vigorous because of a lack of competition with the fruit and other shoots, and in some varieties (such as Pinot Noir) this may increase the number of suckers or non-fruitful shoots arising from older wood. In contrast, retaining too many buds at pruning may result in reduced percentage budburst or higher than desired yield, and a higher number of weaker or nonviable shoots. Ideally, the objective of pruning is to leave an intermediate number of buds that will provide balanced competition between fruit development and shoot growth. The aim of this article is to provide some information on bud-fruitfulness assessments, and how these can be used to help with vine management, pruning decisions, and meeting target yield objectives. Another aim is simply to provide a better understanding of one of the factors that can contribute to yield variations from season to season.
Cross-section of a compound bud from Chardonnay. The primary bud (1) is the largest of the three buds, with secondary buds (2) just visible on either side. In this case two inflorescence primordia (ip) can be seen among the surrounding leaf primordia. Inset: dormant compound bud (top) and primary bud necrosis in Shiraz (lower). Photo: J. Smith

The grapevine bud

During the growing season, buds form at the base of each leaf along the shoot. Part of each of these buds will develop into a small shoot to form a summer lateral. The other part of the bud, which is known as a compound bud, remains dormant until the next spring. The compound bud, in turn, consists of a primary bud, which is the largest and dominant bud, and smaller secondary buds on either side. Normally the primary bud is the one that grows in spring. Therefore, both the number of inflorescences formed in the buds during the previous season (i.e. the bud fruitfulness) and the number of buds retained at pruning will determine the cropping potential for the next season. However, if the percentage bud burst is low or the primary bud is damaged or dies before leaf fall, then this will have an effect on the actual bunch number per vine. When the primary bud is damaged or dies before leaf fall, the next-largest secondary bud (or sometimes both secondary buds) will develop in the following spring instead. Secondary buds are usually less fruitful, so bunch numbers and yield can be reduced if a significant proportion of the shoots on a vine are from secondary buds. This condition is known as primary bud necrosis (PBN) and is particularly a problem with Shiraz. However, it also occurs with other varieties, and it can be one of the main causes of reduced bud fruitfulness or variations in fruitfulness between seasons. It has been estimated that levels of PBN above 20% are sufficient to reduce yield in the following season.

Bud-fruitfulness assessments
There are two main methods for determining the number of bunches in a dormant bud. The first method is to cut the cane up into separate nodes, and then grow each one as a single node cutting until the shoot has developed sufficiently to enable the bunches to be counted. This method has been useful for research purposes, but for commercial applications it is too slow and labour intensive. The technique has an additional limitation in that the basal buds (which are the most important for next
68

years crop) often do not burst when grown as cuttings. The question then arises as to whether the bud would have burst if still on the vine, and if not, what was the cause? A second method for determining fruitfulness, which addresses both of these limitations, is to dissect the bud under a microscope and count the number of inflorescences. As bud dissections can be performed rapidly, results can be obtained well before decisions on pruning levels are made. This method has the additional advantage of being able to detect completely dead buds, PBN, or even the presence of undesirable mite species. There are a number of commercial bud dissection services, and the cost is approximately $1.50 per bud. These services will count the number of inflorescences in the primary bud and, ideally, in the next-largest secondary bud if the primary bud is dead. Detection of PBN and determination of the likely fruitfulness of the replacement shoot are particularly important, as PBN is one of the main causes of reduced shoot fruitfulness in the next season. Assessments are typically made to the third or fourth clear bud. The first clear bud is often defined as the first bud with 5 mm or greater separation from the spur, but this definition can vary across the industry. The number of nodes requiring fruitfulness assessments will vary among pruning systems, but the most important are those likely to be retained for the next season.

Bud-fruitfulness results and implications for pruning

Once bud-fruitfulness results have been obtained, the next question is how these results can be used to either estimate, or regulate through the number of buds retained at pruning, bunch numbers in the following season. Unfortunately there is no general formula that can be applied across all vineyards. The use of bud-fruitfulness results really needs to be considered in conjunction with the normal growth pattern of the vines, the management practices, and the production objectives for the next season. For growers considering the use of bud dissections, a good initial approach would be to sample from selected blocks in the same manner over two or three consecutive seasons without making any changes to the normal pruning or management practice. Counts of buds retained at each position can then be made after pruning and the number of bunches estimated by multiplying these numbers by the average fruitfulness for the respective bud positions. Counts of actual bunch numbers, which distinguish between those on shoots arising from count and non-count buds, should then be done in the next season and compared with the predicted numbers. An assessment of bud-break percentage should also be made, so that after several seasons a good understanding of the factors that influence bunch numbers can be built up for a particular block or vineyard before any decisions are made to change pruning practices on the basis of bud-fruitfulness assessments. The next question that arises is how pruning practices can be modified to allow for variations in bud fruitfulness. Again there are no definitive rules, and the actual approach can depend on the resources available for making the required bud counts, implementing any required changes to pruning, and validating the results in the following season. For example, with smaller areas of spur-pruned vines it may be possible to make accurate changes to the number of retained buds and then equally accurate assessments of bunch numbers and origin in the next season. However, across hundreds of hectares of machine- or hedge-pruned vines it may be possible only to make more approximate adjustments to the amount of wood retained. In either case, it is important that you do not make large changes in bud numbers in response to bud-fruitfulness results. For example, low bud fruitfulness could be a result of weather conditions during a particular season and may not necessarily indicate a long-term problem. This also highlights the importance of doing assessments over the longer term so that seasonal effects on bud fruitfulness can be distinguished from longer-term management effects. If low fruitfulness of basal buds is found to occur season after season, it suggests a problem with
69

Sample collection for bud dissection

As with any type of vineyard sampling, the number of cane or spur samples required to get an accurate assessment of bud fruitfulness will increase with increasing variability. Details on sample numbers and postage requirements can be provided by bud dissection services, but a reasonable guide to the number of nodes required for assessment is 30 canes or spurs per block. Leaving part of the spur with the cane allows the person doing the dissection to identify the start of the cane, but to avoid any confusion there may be a preference for the samples to be cut below what the client defines as the first clear bud. The samples should be placed in sealed plastic bags and stored in a cool place out of the sun so that they do not dehydrate. Research suggests that dissections should be done within 8 weeks of collection and on properly stored samples. There is no additional benefit from storing samples in a fridge or coolroom, and these methods of storage should be avoided if there is any chance of the canes being frozen by mistake. A final consideration is to package the samples so that the buds do not sustain shipping damage that can be misinterpreted as damage sustained in the vineyard.

canopy conditions or management practice that is not going to be solved by leaving more buds. The light exposure of leaves, as well as the ability of those leaves to photosynthesize and supply the developing bud with carbohydrates, is critical for achieving good bud fruitfulness. Therefore, increasing shoot exposure can help to improve fruitfulness. However, low fruitfulness could also be caused by PBN rather than occurring in otherwise healthy primary buds. The exact cause of PBN is not known at this stage, but water stress at the time of initiation (approximately flowering) and excessive shoot vigour appear to contribute to the problem. Therefore, the potential impact of irrigation and nutrition management on fruitfulness also needs to be considered.

water shortages during the past few seasons, and differences in water stress, or at least in the timing of that stress (as regulated-deficit irrigation is widely used with Shiraz in the Riverina), may offer a possible explanation for the differences in the incidence of PBN.
Table 15. Summary of bud-fruitfulness results from a survey of 34 Shiraz and Chardonnay vineyards, the survey was undertaken between winter 2005 and winter 2007 in the Riverina and South West Slopes of NSW. Average bud-fruitfulness 2005 2006 2007 RIVERINA Shiraz node 1 node 2 node 3 1.36 1.52 1.59 1.21 1.32 1.33 1.40 1.55 1.59 0.751.75 0.951.90 1.001.80 Range (minmax)

Bud fruitfulness of spur- and hedge-pruned vines in southern NSW: a case study
During the past 3 years we have surveyed bud fruitfulness at 34 Shiraz and Chardonnay vineyards in Southern NSW as part of a larger research project on carbohydrate reserves. Half of the vineyards sampled were located near Griffith in the Riverina, and the other half in the Hilltops, Gundagai and Tumbarumba grape-growing regions (collectively referred to here as the South-West Slopes). The information collected during this survey is summarized in Table 15 to show: 1) the average fruitfulness of buds on nodes 1 to 3 of dormant canes collected in winter; and 2) the minimum and maximum average fruitfulness for each vineyard observed during the period of the survey. For growers or companies doing their own assessments of bud fruitfulness, this can also provide a guide as to how their results fit with the regional average during the last 3 years. Fruitfulness was higher in the Riverina than on the South West Slopes, but within both regions Chardonnay was more fruitful than Shiraz. However, a key difference between the two regions was that there was a much higher incidence of PBN with Shiraz on the South West Slopes than in the Riverina. At pruning in 2005, levels of PBN for the first bud were 20% in the Riverina and 41% across the South West Slopes. At pruning in 2006, the levels were 23% and 48%, respectively. However, in 2007 PBN was just under 30% for Shiraz in both regions. At this point we do not have an explanation for the difference between regions in 2005 and 2006, or for the similarity in 2007. Carbohydrate reserves in the roots, wood and spurs did vary considerably between vineyards, but there was no trend for vines with low carbohydrate reserve concentrations to have a greater incidence of PBN. Weather conditions across the two regions are reasonably similar, but one clear difference between the regions is in the availability of water. A number of vineyards on the South West Slopes have experienced
70

Chardonnay

node 1 node 2 node 3

1.64 1.49 1.63

1.49 1.49 1.71

1.53 1.48 1.74

1.101.85 1.201.80 1.402.00

S-W SLOPES Shiraz node 1 node 2 node 3 0.97 1.16 0.95 0.91 1.14 1.17 1.28 1.37 1.48 0.351.75 0.701.75 0.651.95

Chardonnay

node 1 node 2 node 3

1.13 1.32 1.44

1.15 1.26 1.38

1.18 1.23 1.44

0.751.65 0.751.70 0.801.90

At the regional level, average fruitfulness was reasonably stable across seasons, and for Riverina Chardonnay, bud fruitfulness was also stable at the individual vineyard level. However, for Shiraz in both regions, and for Chardonnay on the South West Slopes, fruitfulness could vary markedly from season to season at individual vineyards. The practical implications of this finding are that, for Chardonnay around Griffith, an average of approximately 1.5 bunches per bud can be assumed, and bunch numbers per vine will not vary substantially from season to season provided that the pruning practice is kept the same. In contrast, the use of bud-fruitfulness assessments with Shiraz could greatly help with yield estimations and in achieving target yield requirements. As an example of how bud-fruitfulness values can be used to estimate bunch numbers in the following season, the relationship between predicted and actual bunch numbers from the survey is shown in Figure 10. In this case it was found that bunch numbers of up to 150 per vinea value that applied to most of the spur-pruned vineyardscould be predicted with reasonable accuracy (see photo over).

Du pont avatar

benefit in having this done if the fruitfulness of a particular block or vineyard is consistently good. In other cases there may be a preference to regulate bunch numbers by thinning in the following season, rather than risking losing too much fruit by pruning to lower bud numbers. However, low bud fruitfulness can be a significant issue in many areas, and bud dissections can provide a basis by which changes can be made to management or pruning practices to address this problem.

Acknowledgements
Figure 10. Comparison of predicted and actual bunch numbers from a survey of 34 vineyards in southern NSW. Predicted bunch numbers are based on the number of retained buds and the average fruitfulness at each bud position. Actual bunch numbers were determined from inflorescence counts on all shoots before flowering.

At higher bunch numbers, which were mostly from double-cordon or hedge-pruned vines, there was a trend for predictions to overestimate actual bunch numbers. There was also more variability between predicted and actual numbers, reflecting the greater difficulties in counting large numbers of buds, and the uncertainty as to how many of these would burst (see photo at bottom right). This highlights the importance of validating bunch number estimates and, if there is marked variation from yield targets, understanding at least some of the reasons why this may have occurred.

The authors thank David Braybrook of Vitisolutions and Swinbourne University afor his contributin and comments on the draft. Kerry De Garis and Suzanne McLoughlin are also thanked for reading over the final version. We also thank the growers and wine companies involved in the survey for allowing us access to their vineyards. The research is funded by GWRDC as part of a larger project on vine carbohydrate reserves.

Further reading
Clingeleffer P. (2001) Crop development, crop estimation and crop control to secure quality and production of major wine grape varieties: a national approach. Final Report to the Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation (available at: www.gwrdc.com.au). Dry P. (2000) Canopy management for fruitfulness. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research 6: 99108. Rawnsley B., Collins C. (2005) Improving vineyard productivity through assessment of bud fruitfulness and bud necrosis. Final Report to the Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation (available at: www.gwrdc.com.au).
In the second vineyard 187 buds per vine were retained at pruning, leaving a predicted 276 bunches per vine. Actual bunch numbers were 215 from count buds, and seven from non-count buds. Photo: J. Smith

Conclusions
When used in conjunction with bunch weight estimates, bud-fruitfulness assessments are useful tools for estimating bunch numbers and yield potential for the following season. There may not be any

In this vineyard 47 buds were retained at pruning, leaving a predicted 71 bunches per vine. Actual bunch numbers from count buds were 61, with an additional nine from non-count buds. Photo: J. Smith

72

Phylloxera
ANDREW LOCH , VITICULTURE ENTOMOLOGIST , NSW DPI , WAGGA WAGGA JOHN SLACK , POLICY OFFICER , PLANT BIOSECURITY RISK MANAGEMENT , NSW DPI , ORANGE

What is phylloxera?
Grape phylloxera, Daktulosphaira vitifoliae, is an aphidlike insect that lives and feeds on the roots of grapevines and occasionally in distinctive galls on grapevine leaves. Phylloxera originated in from eastern North America, where it lives on native grapevines. However, the insect is now distributed throughout much of the world as a result of the movement of phylloxerainfested grapevines, especially in the late 1800s. European (Vitis vinifera) vines have little or no tolerance to phylloxera feeding and almost always die. Phylloxera is thus regarded as the worlds worst grapevine pest. Phylloxera is a sap-sucking insect that feeds on soft vine root tissue. Yellow, fleshy galls (nodosities) develop on young fibrous roots, and brown, warty galls on storage roots from feeding. Phylloxera insects predominantly live on the surface of root galls, but occasionally crawl to the soil surface or canopy, from where they can disperse to new roots and vines. Leaf galls of phylloxera rarely occur in Australia, and tend to occur mainly in humid conditions and only on the leaves of American Vitis species or hybrids.
Phylloxera leaf galls. Photo: Kevin Powell

Phylloxera adults, crawlers and eggs on a root Photo: Kevin Powell Feeder root galls (nodosities). Photo: Kevin Powell

Life cycle
Recent research in Australia has shown that the insect almost certainly reproduces exclusively by clonal or asexual reproduction. Several generations of phylloxera develop during the growing season. Adults lay eggs during spring and summer; the eggs hatch into crawlers. Crawlers feed on roots and increase in size and moult four times before becoming adults. Winged adults, which are the forerunners of the leafgalling cycle on American vines, sometimes develop later in the season, during March and April in Australia. Winged adults do not appear to undergo a sexual reproduction cycle in Australia. During winter, phylloxera lies dormant, mostly sheltering under bark on roots.

Phylloxera crawlers

Photo: Kevin Powell 73

Symptoms
The first symptom of phylloxera feeding is decline in vigour. Premature yellowing of vines in March tends to occur about 1 to 3 years after the vines are infested. Expression of symptoms tends to be accelerated in stressed vines. Patches of vines become progressively weaker, and the area affected increases as the phylloxera population increases and spreads. Good growing conditions reduce the effects of phylloxera, especially in sandy soils.

and autumn. Any harvesting machines, picking buckets, wine bins or otehr equipment in contact with fruit or foliage may be contaminated with phylloxera crawlers. New infestations of phylloxera are generally a result of unintentional spread by people. Phylloxera can be transferred on grapevine rootlings, through equipment that has been used in infested vineyards, and by people moving from infested vineyards. Observe signs discouraging entry into phylloxera-free vineyards. Planting material should always be purchased from nurseries in phylloxera-free areas, and preferably should have been hot-water treated. The use of tolerant rootstocks is the only established, proven way of managing phylloxera. Rootstocks can also be used to manage nematodes, and various rootstocks can be chosen to suit soil types and cultural conditions. All vineyards in actual or potential danger from phylloxera should be planted with vines grafted onto resistant rootstocks. Even in sandy soils where phylloxera appears less damaging, the use of rootstocks is advisable to manage nematodes. At present there is no effective and economic long-term way of managing phylloxera on ungrafted vines.

Symptoms of phylloxera attack: premature yellowing and poor vigour. Photo: Andrew Loch

Satellite spots develop after 2 or 3 years of infestation. These spots appear to occur at random in the infested vineyard. Spread of phylloxera tends to be more rapid in the direction of the prevailing winds. Crawlers are known to be dispersed by wind. To check vines for phylloxera, examine fibrous roots within 0.5 m of the base of the vine during December to April. Infested vines will have fleshy yellow galls on fibrous roots, with pinhead-sized yellow insects living on the surface of the galls. Most insects are found on vines at the margins of areas of weak vines. Vines in the centre of weak patches have badly damaged root systems. Fibrous roots are lacking, and the older roots have cracks and warty bumps caused by phylloxera. Growers with phylloxera-like symptoms must contact their nearest NSW DPI office.

Phylloxera quarantine
Australia is one of the few countries to keep its main vineyard regions free of phylloxera. Quarantine boundaries have been established in Australia to prevent movement of phylloxera from known infested areas into free or exclusion zones. Areas of unknown status (Phylloxera Risk Zones; PRZ) are also protected under legislation. Three types of quarantine zone exist (see Figures 11 to 13).

Phylloxera Infested Zones (PIZ)

Phylloxera Infested Zones (PIZs) include the North East PIZ (Rutherglen, Wangaratta and King Valley), Nagambie PIZ (Nagambie and Murchison),
Main dispersive stages of phylloxera winged adult (left) and crawler (right). Photo: Kevin Powell

Prevention and control

In Australia, crawlers developing from eggs laid on the root system are the most important dispersive stage. Winged adults may also disperse, but they are not regarded as a risk because in Australia they do not appear to undergo sexual reproduction. Where leaf galls occur, crawlers from eggs in the leaf gall can be wind-blown and thus spread infections. Phylloxera crawlers can be present on the leaves and fruit of infested grapevines, especially during summer
74

Figure 11. The Southern NSW Phylloxera Infested zone. Courtesy Phylloxera and Grape Industry Board of South Australia.

Mooroopna PIZ (Shepparton), Upton PIZ (Upton) and the recently declared Maroondah PIZ between Yarra Glen and Coldstream (Yarra Valley). The New South Wales PIZs include: 1. the Albury/Corowa Infested Zone, which includes the local government areas of Albury, Corowa (that part within the County of Hume) and Greater Hume (excluding Culcairn and Holbrook, which were abolished as part of the amalgamation of local government areas); and 2. the Sydney Region Infested Zone including the Camden zone and part of the Wollondilly local government area (within the County of Cumberland) and the Wollongong local government area.

Phylloxera Risk Zones (PRZs)

Phylloxera Risk Zones (PRZs) are zones that have no evidence of phylloxera infestation but could be a risk to the free areas because of nil or inconclusive investigations. The whole of the State of Queensland and large areas of Victoria have PRZ status.
Figure 12. Phylloxera zoning of the Greater Sydney Area.

75

Figure 13. Phylloxera management zones in south-eastern Australia. Courtesy Phylloxera and Grape Industry Board of South Australia.
Map produced by the Phylloxera and Grape Industry Board of South Australia -February2007 Please note zone boundaries can change, particularly if there is a new phylloxera outbreak Visit www.phylloxera.com.au to check for the latest version. Disclaimer: This map is based on publically available data. PGIBSA do not warrant that this map is definitive nor free from error and do not accept liability for loss arising from use of this product. This product incoporates data which is (C) Copyright: Commonwealth of Australia (GeoScience Australia) 2001 (Political Boundaries, Roads and Localities) Victoria Dept Primary Industries (Vic Phylloxera Zones) New South Wales Dept of Agriculture (NSW Phylloxera Zones)

Phylloxera Exclusion Zones (PEZs)

Phylloxera Exclusion Zones (PEZs) are the States of South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania, the Northern Territory, plus declared areas in Victoria (Henty and West Wimmera and the Sunraysia and Mid Murray Exclusion Zones) and most of New South Wales except those areas declared a PIZ (see above) New South Wales has phylloxera-infested zones in southern New South Wales (AlburyCorowa: Fig 11) and the Sydney Region, including Wollongong (Fig12). The NSW Department of Primary Industries recently completed a 4-year ground survey (20022006) for phylloxera in all vineyards in the previously declared PRZ in NSW. This survey did not find phylloxera or any signs of phylloxera in these vineyards, and therefore legislation changed on 22 December 2006 to declare most of New South Wales a PEZ. Proclamation P176 of the Plant Diseases Act outlines regulations on the movement of the following items into NSW and between infested and exclusion zones within NSW: phylloxera insects or anything infested

The law and phylloxera in NSW

Phylloxera is a declared pest under the Plant Diseases Act 1924, and if the occupier of any land or premises finds it, they must report its presence to a NSW DPI Regulatory Officer within 24 hours after they first discover it or become aware of its appearance.

76

with them, potted grape plants, cuttings and rootlings of the genus Vitis; products such as table and wine grapes, must, juice and marc; used vineyard machinery and equipment, vineyard soil; and garden organics. Movement of grapevine cuttings, rootlings, potted vines, whole wine grapes, must, unfiltered juice, prefermentation marc and soil into a NSW PEZ or PIZ from a NSW or interstage PIZ is prohibited. Vineyard soil is prohibited from entering NSW from interstate. Germplasm, diagnostic samples and used vineyard machinery or equipment are allowed regulated entry into NSW from NSW or interstate PIZs if accompanied by a Permit issued by the Director, Animal and Plant Biosecurity, or the Director, Compliance Operations, as well as by a Plant Health Certificate certifying that all conditions in the approval have been met. Similarly, germplasm and diagnostic samples entering NSW from an interstate PRZ require a Permit and a Plant Health Certificate. Table grapes are allowed entry into NSW from an interstate PEZ if they are free from soil and leaf material, and from interstate PRZs and NSW or interstate PIZs if packed for sale as table grapes with sulfur pads and free from soil and leaf material. Most other grape-related movements between different NSW zones and between NSW and other States are permitted if the goods are accompanied by a Plant Health Certificate certifying that specific conditions have been met.

Phylloxera quarantine contacts

For further information on phylloxera quarantine, contact your nearest Senior Regulatory Inspector, located at: Murwillumbah (Terry Grant, 02 6672 2770), Richmond (Rob Bowman, 02 4588 2109), Goulburn (Paul Anderson, 02 4828 6642), Yanco (Terry Rafferty, 02 6951 2639), or the Plant Biosecurity Risk Management Unit, Head Office, Orange (02 6391 3593).

Further information
Further information on phylloxera and current regulations can be found on the NSW Department of Primary Industries website on http:// www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/horitculture/grapes/ information/grape-phylloxera

Maintenance of phylloxera freedom

Grape growers, winemakers and industry groups in grape-growing regions without phylloxera must demonstrate ongoing passive maintenance to confirm their phylloxera-free status. Maintenance includes ensuring adherence to vineyard, winery and regional entry regulations, increasing industry and public awareness of phylloxera and associated regulations, and reporting of any suspected infestation or violation of regulations.

77

Organic management of mite pests

DAVID MADGE , DPW VICTORIA , MILDURA *

Types of mites and their damage

The common mite pests of grapevines (rust, bunch, blister and bud mites) are only 0.2 to 0.3 mm long and so are usually detected only through the damage they cause. Blister mite (also called erinose mite) and bud mite have until recently been considered morphologically identical strains of one species, Colomerus vitis. They have now been separated as distinct species, although their scientific naming has not been finalised (Melissa Carew, pers. comm.). Rust mite (Calepitrimerus vitis) feeds on grape leaves, damaging the outer layer of cells. The damage shows as a brown-purple discolouring of the leaves. Severe damage can cause premature leaf drop, which may expose the bunches to sunburn. Before leaf fall in autumn, most rust mites migrate from the leaves to the vine wood, where they overwinter. A few overwinter under the outer scales of buds. The mites migrate back to the canes or spurs just before budburst and infest the newly emerging vine shoots. Bud mites overwinter inside grape buds and feed on the bud scales. This can result in distorted leaf, shoot and bunch growth and sometimes bunch abortion, as the damaged buds develop into new shoots in spring. Before budburst, the mites lay eggs that soon hatch and develop into new adults. During budburst, bud mites are exposed for a short time but soon enter new developing buds, where they feed, breed and eventually overwinter. If bud mites are present in large numbers, the buds may be killed. Blister mite feeds on the lower surfaces of grape leaves. Where this feeding occurs, the leaf tissue expands, creating raised blisters on the upper surface of the leaf. The inside of the blisters becomes lined with enlarged leaf hairs and has a downy appearance. Blisters develop mainly when the leaves are young. Blister mite is generally considered unlikely to cause economic damage, although severe blistering may retard the development of young vines. It is believed that blister mites overwinter and migrate in the same way as rust mites. Bunch mites (Brevipalpus species) overwinter under vine bark and the outer scales of buds. They move to the bases of new shoots after budburst and start feeding and egg laying. As new shoots develop, the mites move to the bunches, where their feeding
*Extract from Orrganic viticulture: an Australian manual available for free download from www.dpi.vic.gov.au 78

causes brown scarring on the bunch and berry stems and on the berries. Bunch mite is generally not a problem on wine grapes but can downgrade the visual quality of table grapes. Mites on grapevines are usually under effective biological control. Where mite problems occur, they are generally an indication that the vineyard system is out of balance. That is, mite problems are largely induced by, for example, the use of broad-spectrum insecticides and some fungicides that destroy the mites natural enemies. This is almost certainly the case with the two-spotted mite (Tetranychus urticae), outbreaks of which can occur on grapevines treated with broad-spectrum contact insecticides.

Organic management of mites

Acceptable registered inputs sulfur and lime sulfur dormant oils

Other acceptable inputs predatory mites

Management techniques
Monitoring
Because they are microscopic, grapevine mites are generally not detected by direct observation, but instead through the damage they cause, as listed below. rust mite: brownish-purple discolouration of leaves in autumn bud mite: distorted leaf growth, dead shoot tip, and shortened zig-zag-shaped shoots obvious in the few weeks after budburst blister mite: raised leaf blisters full of downy growth, developing on young leaves bunch mite: dark scarring on bunch and berry stems.

Biological control
Pest mites are usually kept under biological control by their natural enemies, which include predatory mites, lacewing and hover fly larvae, thrips and ladybirds. Predatory mites in particular have been shown to be very effective biological control agents for pest mites in vineyards, with two species, Typhlodromus doreenae (Doreen) and Euseius victoriensis (Victoria) being the most important. The latter is being developed

commercially for some crops by Biological Services and the Beneficial Bug Co. Predatory mites and other natural enemies of pest mites are widespread, but many of them are sensitive to pesticides, including the organically acceptable inputs dusting sulfur, lime sulfur and pyrethrum extract (James and Rayner 1995; Llewellyn 2002; Bernard et al. 2004). The preferred approach to establishing or enhancing biological mite control is to minimise or exclude the use of harmful pesticides and manage the vineyard in a way that encourages beneficial species. Where this is done, natural biological control of pest mites will most likely be very effective. Commercial releases of predatory mites into vineyards are less likely to be cost effective, except where monitoring shows those species to be absent.

to the canes and spurs. To be effective, the spray must thoroughly wet the bark of the vine crown and cordons and must be applied while temperatures are 15 C or more to allow the sulfur to become volatile. Bud mite and blister mite: a drenching spray of wettable sulphur (200 g/100 L) between 100 per cent budburst (on basal nodes) and 1 week later. This application is timed immediately after budburst, as that is the earliest time at which mites that have overwintered inside the buds are vulnerable to treatment. The spray should thoroughly wet all buds, canes and cordons. Given the overwintering and migration behaviour of bunch mite, early-season control is most likely to be achieved by treating bunch mite similarly to rust mite. Organic growers need to ensure that the canola oil they use is not from genetically engineered canola.

Cultural management
Many of the natural enemies of mites require alternative food sources such as nectar and pollen. Pollen is especially useful to predatory mites and helps to maintain predator populations when pest mite numbers are low. Pollen of Rhodes grass (Chloris gayana) is known to be suitable for predatory mites, and other plants are also likely to be useful. Growers interested in pursuing the seasonal availability of pollen in their vineyards may find some useful information in the Australian Pollen Calendar collated for allergy sufferers (Ragg 1996). Euseius victoriensis overwinters on evergreen plants, including citrus and ornamental bushes. Vineyard populations of this mite are more likely to persist if evergreen plants are present within or near the vineyard. Dusty conditions are considered favourable for some pest mites, so it is desirable to minimise dust levels in the vineyard.

References
Bernard M., Horne P. and Hoffmann A. (2001) Preventing restricted spring growth (RSG) in grapevines by successful rust mite controlspray application, timing and eliminating sprays harmful to rust mite predators are critical. The Australian and New Zealand Grapegrower and Winemaker 452:1622 Bernard M., Carew M., Hurst P., Horne P.A. and Hoffmann A.A. (2002) Grapevine bud mite, RSG, and blister mite: an emerging story. The Australian and New Zealand Grapegrower and Winemaker 464: 4148. Bernard M., Horne P. and Hoffmann A. (2004) Ecological pest management. The effect of viticultural fungicides on beneficial predatory mites. The Australian and New Zealand Grapegrower and Winemaker, 32nd Annual Technical Issue 485a: 712. James D.G., Rayner M. (1995) Toxicity of viticultural pesticides to the predatory mites Amblyseius victoriensis and Typhlodromus doreenae. Plant Protection Quarterly 10(3): 99102. Llewellyn R. (ed) (2002) The Good Bug Book. Integrated Pest Management Pty Ltd, Mundubbera Qld. ISBN 0 9580589 0 3. Ragg M. (1996) The Low Allergy Garden. Hodder Headline Australia. ISBN 0 7336 0265 7. Contains the Australian pollen calendar, also available at www.dar.csiro.au/airwatch/docs/PollenCalendar.pdf For suppliers of beneficial insects and mites, refer to the Australasian Biological Control website: http://www.goodbugs.org.au

Pesticides
Wettable sulfur and dormant oil are among the spray materials registered for mite control in conventional viticulture and are acceptable under organic standards. Recent Australian research into the biology of rust and bud mites found that the standard recommendations for control of these pests were ineffective, because the spray timing did not coincide with the period during which the mites were exposed to treatment (Bernard et al. 2001, 2002). The following treatments were shown to be effective and are now reflected in some product labels: Rust mite: a drenching spray of wettable sulfur (600 g/100 L) plus canola oil (2 L/100 L) between budswell and the mid-late woolly bud stage. This timing coincides with the migration of rust mites from their overwintering sites on the vine wood

79

Natural enemies in the vineyard: whats eating your pests?

ANDREW LOCH , NSW DPI , NWGIC , WAGGA WAGGA

Introduction
A number of different types of insects and other arthropods can be important natural enemies of vineyard pests. Arthropods as natural enemies can be broadly divided into two main groups: predators and parasitoids. Predators capture and feed on prey and include spiders, predatory mites, lacewings, ladybirds and predatory shield bugs. In contrast, parasitoids have a free-living adult stage and a parasitic larval stage that kills the host, and are usually wasps and flies. In this article I provide a brief outline on some of the more important natural enemies of grapevine pests in Australia.

Perhaps the most spectacular parasitoid of grapevine moth is Euplectrus agaristae, a small eulophid wasp (2.5 mm long) that lays clusters of eggs on the dorsal surface of caterpillars (Loch 2005). These eggs hatch into yellow maggot-like larvae that then feed externally on the caterpillars contents, killing the caterpillar. Pupation occurs on the caterpillars corpse, and after 1 to 2 weeks the adult wasps emerge, ready to begin the cycle again. Moth eggs are also parasitised by wasps such as Trichogramma. These wasps are very small (less than 0.5 mm) and can provide important control of pests like lightbrown apple moth. Trichogramma wasps can be purchased through Australian suppliers of biological control agents. Mealybugs and scale insects are attacked by a suite of parasitic wasps. Ants that aggregate on vines to feed on honeydew secreted by mealybugs and scale insects are known to provide protection from parasitic wasps and disrupt biological control. Reducing ant numbers around mealybug- and scale-infested sections of the vineyard should lead to improved control by natural enemies. Parasitic wasps have also been reported on some of the important beetle pests like elephant weevil and garden weevil.

Wasps
Insect pests of grapevines are generally attacked by several species of parasitic wasp. A good example is lightbrown apple moth. In the Coonawarra region of South Australia approximately 20 species of parasitic wasps have been recorded on the caterpillars and pupae of this moth (Paull and Austin 2006). Ichneumonid and braconid wasps (1 to 3 cm long) commonly parasitise lightbrown apple moth and grapevine moth caterpillars and can emerge during the moths pupal stages. Ichneumonid wasps often have prominent red, white and black markings on the abdomen, and females have a long ovipositor or sting used to pierce caterpillars to lay eggs. During times of high caterpillar abundance, ichneumonid wasps can be seen flying in vineyards searching for caterpillars.

Lacewings
Many lacewing species are predatory as both adults and immature larvae. Green lacewings (Family Chrysopidae) and brown lacewings (Family

Ichneumonid wasps parasitic on grapevine moth (left) and lightbrown apple moth (right).

Photos: Andrew Loch

80

Ants that tend pests such as grapevine scale (above) can exacerbate the pest problem by protecting the pests from natural enemies.

Adult brown lacewing. Below, adult, larval and egg stages of green lacewing.

Above, egg, pupal and adult stages of Euplectrus agaristae, a parasitic wasp of grapevine moth. All photos: Andrew Loch

Hemerobiidae) are the principal lacewings observed in vineyards. Adult lacewings are usually at least 1 to 2 cm long and are often seen resting on leaves during the day. Larvae are much smaller (1 to 5 mm long) and require more searching effort to find. Lacewing larvae have large protruding jaws for capturing and piercing prey and sucking prey contents. Of particular note are the larvae of certain green lacewing species that carry debris on their bodies, including the remains of prey. Eggs of green lacewings are often laid on long white stalks and may be seen attached to leaves and canes.

81

Four commonly observed ladybird beetles: white-collared ladybird, Hippodamia variegata (top left), transverse ladybird, Coccinella sp. (top right), common spotted ladybird, Harmonia conformis (bottom left) and minute two-spotted ladybird, Diomus notescens (bottom right). Photos: Andrew Loch

Lacewings are known to feed on eggs and larvae of important moth pests such as lightbrown apple moth and grapevine moth, as well as on aphids, thrips, scale insects, mealybugs and mites.

Ladybird beetles
Most species of ladybird beetles (also called ladybugs or ladybeetles) are predatory as both adults and larvae. Exceptions are the common garden pest 26and 28-spotted ladybirds that feed on solanaceous and cucurbit plants, and other species that feed on powdery mildew. Most adult ladybirds can be easily distinguished from other beetles by their rounded shape and their bright yellow, orange or red colouration, with black spots or banding. Ladybird larvae do not resemble the adults and are elongated, soft-bodied and typically black with orange or yellow markings. Ladybird eggs are often yellow or orange and are usually laid in small groups on leaves. Ladybirds consume a range of prey, including aphids, thrips, scale insects, mealybugs, other small insects and mites. Species of ladybirds can differ greatly in their prey preferences. Commonly seen species such as the white-collared ladybird (Hippodamia
82

Mealybug ladybird (Cryptolaemus montrouzieri) feeding on a longtailed mealybug. Photo: Andrew Loch

variegata), transverse ladybird (Coccinella transversalis) and common spotted ladybird (Harmonia conformis) feed on aphids, but in the vineyard they will feed on other soft-bodied insects such as thrips and moth eggs. Several smaller ladybird species such as mite-eating ladybirds (Stethorus spp.) and the minute two-spotted ladybird (Diomus notescens) feed on mites such as two-spotted mite. The mealybug ladybird (Cryptolaemus montrouzieri) can

provide excellent control of mealybugs and some scale insects. Several ladybird species are available for purchase in Australia through suppliers of biological control agents.

Other beetles
Other predatory beetles such as rove beetles (staphylinids) and soldier beetles (cantharids) feed on a range of soft-bodied prey in the vine canopy and on the ground. The red and blue beetle or pollen beetle (Dicranolaius sp.) feeds on moth eggs and caterpillars and other small insects and can reach high numbers in vineyards. Ground beetles (carabids) feed on a range of prey on the ground.

Predatory soldier beetle.

Predatory bugs
Two species of predatory shield bugs, Oechalia schellenbergii and Cermatulus nasalis, can often be seen feeding on caterpillars, especially during periods when caterpillar numbers are high. Both predatory shield bug species feed on a wide range of prey and can be cannibalistic, but they are most commonly recorded attacking slow-moving larval stages of moths, butterflies and beetles. Immature nymph (1 to 10 mm long) and adult (8 to 15 mm long) predatory shield bugs have highly modified mouthparts in the form of long stylets that pierce the prey, inject saliva to immobilise and partly digest the prey, and suck up the liquefied contents. Predatory shield bugs have the impressive ability to attack and consume caterpillars that are much greater in size and mass. Eggs of predatory shield bugs are small (< 1 mm) and black and are laid in small masses of typically 20 to 50 eggs, which can often be seen during pest monitoring. Other species of predatory bugs that may occur in vineyards include assassin (reduviid) and damsel (nabid) bugs.
Predatory sucking bugs, Oechalia schellenbergii (higher) and Cermatulus nasalis (lower), feeding on a grapevine moth caterpillar. All photos: Andrew Loch Predatory red and blue beetle or pollen beetle, Dicranolaius sp.

Egg masses of predatory sucking bugs, Oechalia schellenbergii (above) and Cermatulus nasalis (below).

83

Flies
Tachinid flies (1 cm long) parasitise caterpillars, and they typically lay small white eggs on caterpillars. These eggs hatch and the larvae burrow into the caterpillar and feed on the inner contents. Usually one or two tachinid flies will develop per caterpillar and emerge to pupate during the larval or pupal stage. Tachinid flies are also known to parasitise beetles, bugs and grasshoppers. Robber flies are generalist predators that often capture prey in mid air. Adult hoverflies are also commonly seen in vineyards, but only the larval stage is predatory, feeding on scale insects, mealybugs, moth eggs and caterpillars.

Predatory assassin bug.

Photo: Andrew Loch

Predatory mites
Predatory mites are regarded as the most effective predator of pest mites of viticulture. Two species, Euseius victoriensis (Victoria) and Typhlodromus doreenae (Doreen), are particularly important in several Australian viticultural regions for maintaining low pest mite populations (James and Whitney 1990, 1993). Both species feed on a range of mites, as well as on pollen and some small insects. However, Doreen appears to prefer bunch mites and Victoria feeds mostly on blister and rust mites. Despite their small size, predatory mites are unlikely to reach bud mites deep inside the buds.
Adult (above) and larval (below) tachinid fly, which is parasitic on grapevine moth caterpillars. Photos: Andrew Loch

Spiders
Spiders are generalist predators of insects and other arthropods. Moths can often be seen caught in spiderwebs and caterpillars can be caught in webs or by being ambushed by spiders. However, spiders also capture and kill beneficial insects such as predatory bugs and wasps.

Enhancing vineyard conditions for natural enemies

The natural enemies described above contribute to the overall control of pests in Australian vineyards. To increase the abundance and effectiveness of natural enemies, vineyard conditions that enhance their survival and reproduction should be encouraged. One principal means of enhancing conditions for natural enemies is by reducing or avoiding potentially damaging management practices. The most damaging vineyard management practice to a natural enemy is the spraying of pesticides (insecticides,

84

Spiders are generalist predators that feed on both pest and beneficial arthropods. Left: redback spider (Latrodectus hasseltii) with a grapevine moth caterpillar captured in its web. Right: a predatory shield bug captured in a spiderweb. Photos: Andrew Loch

fungicides and herbicides). Broad-spectrum insecticides have the greatest negative impact, as they kill both pest and beneficial insects more or less equally and can lead to the resurgence of pests such as twospotted mites and mealybugs. Broad-spectrum insecticides are being used less frequently today in Australian viticulture because of these negatives, and use of the few registered chemicals available is restricted during the growing season. For almost all pest problems, a more specific or less toxic insecticide can be used to provide equivalent levels of pest control and have a smaller impact on natural enemies. However, recent research has shown that some of these new specific softer insecticides can still have a strong negative impact on the populations of some natural enemies (Wilson et al. 2006). Fungicide (Thomson et al. 2000; Bernard et al. 2004) and herbicide applications can also have a negative impact on natural enemies. The other principal means of enhancing natural enemy survival and reproduction is by increasing the availability of flowering plants that many natural enemies use as an essential or supplemental food resource. Virtually all parasitoids and many predators feed on nectar and pollen from flowers. Nectar and pollen form an essential part of the diet of parasitic wasps and flies, whereas for predators such as ladybird beetles, predatory mites and lacewings, nectar and pollen can be either essential or supplemental, the latter especially when prey numbers are low. Encouraging the growth of, and planting, flowering plants in the vineyard is the easiest way to increase nectar and pollen availability and thus maintain or increase numbers of natural enemies. Several studies have been, or are being, conducted in Australia to investigate the impact of different interrow vegetation species. Research in this area is still in its infancy, but initial results are encouraging.

Natural enemies such as this sphecid wasp Ammophila sp. (above) and hoverfly (below) feed from flowering weeds. Photos: Andrew Loch

85

A single flowering plant species is not likely to provide a total solution to increasing natural enemy numbers in Australian vineyards. First, many natural enemies are likely to have specific needs and preferences for flowering plants, and second, Australian vineyards grow in a diverse range of climates that are not suitable for all plants. Flowering plants promoted for use in viticulture as enhancing natural enemies must be beneficial to a range of natural enemies, be easy to grow and manage, require minimal input, provide little competition to vines for water and nutrients, flower for extended periods during the grape-growing season, not be suitable host plants for grape pests such as lightbrown apple moth, not have a weedy propensity, and preferably be perennials or self-sowing annuals. Further difficulties are the recent drought conditions experienced throughout the grape-growing regions of Australia, coupled with a reduction in water availability. Plants with the most potential to survive these drought conditions, such as native grasses and prostrate saltbushes, are currently the topic of an Australian research project.

References
Bernard M.B., Horne P.A. and Hoffmann A.A. (2004) Ecological pest management. The effect of viticultural fungicides on beneficial predatory mites. Australian and New Zealand Grapegrower and Winemaker 32nd Annual Technical Issue 485a: 712. James D.G. and Whitney J. (1990) Biological control of grapevine mites. The Australian Grapegrower and Winemaker 321: 3743. James D.G. and Whitney J. (1993) Mite populations on grapevines in south-eastern Australia: implications for biological control of grapevine mites (Acarina: Tenuipalpidae, Eriophyidae). Experimental and Applied Acarology 17: 259270. Loch, A.D. (2005) What is eating your grapevine moth? Australian and New Zealand Grapegrower and Winemaker 500: 3742. Paull C. and Austin A.D. (2006) The hymenopteran parasitoids of light brown apple moth, Epiphyas postvittana (Walker) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in Australia. Australian Journal of Entomology 45: 142 156. Thomson LJ, Glenn DC and Hoffmann AA (2000) Effects of sulfur on Trichogramma egg parasitoids in vineyards: measuring toxic effects and establishing release windows. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 40: 11651171. Wilson L., Deutscher S., Mensah R. and Johnson A. (2006) Integrated pest management (IPM) guidelines for Australian cotton II. pp. 1831 In: Cotton Pest Management Guide 200607. Farrell T. (ed.). NSW Department of Primary Industries and Cotton Catchment Communities CRC. http://www.agric.nsw.gov.au/reader/cotton-pestmanagement

Conclusion
This article has provided information on some of the important natural enemies found in Australian vineyards. Other natural enemies exist and are likely to vary in abundance among grape-growing regions and among seasons. In future, when you are assessing pest numbers and damage in the vineyard, take the extra time to check for natural enemies, as they may already be giving adequate control.

86

Diagnostic services

87

Sourcing grapevine planting material

JULIAN CONNELLAN , DISTRICT HORTICULTURIST , NSW DPI , GRIFFITH

Establishing a vineyard is a costly exercise that requires a great deal of planning to ensure that the establishment phase is undertaken in a cost-effective and timely manner. An extremely important ingredient in a successful vineyard is the quality of the grapevine planting material used. Material used should be free of diseases, true to type and genetically uniform. In Australia it has typically been the role of vine improvement groups to provide industry with highquality planting material. This material is available to nursery operators and growers who choose to propagate their own grapevines. Vine improvement schemes vary between States. However, the fundamental role of these groups is to introduce new clones that are true to type and of a known health status. Material introduced to a region by a vine improvement scheme can be procured from one of several sources. These include: germplasm collections that are managed by State departments such as the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries or Federal agencies such as CSIRO privately imported material from collections in other countries newly imported material from the Australian Vine Improvement Association (AVIA) or South Australian Vine Improvement Inc. (SAVII), both of which import material on behalf of State vineimprovement schemes the AVIA National Nuclear Grapevine Collection or the SAVII nuclear collection virus elimination programs, which are generally undertaken by research facilities and are funded by the organisation that wishes to obtain diseasefree material. Clones that are introduced to a region by vineimprovement schemes and have been obtained from collections within Australia (such as the AVIA National Nuclear Grapevine Collection) are sourced from single virus-tested mothervines. These individual vines have been checked to ensure that they are true to type and have no visible signs of disease. Cuttings taken from these vines are used to establish premultiplication rows. Pre-multiplication rows of 50 to 100 vines are generally established. Cuttings are taken

Established pre-multiplication row Photo: J. Connellan

from these vines to establish source areas that can be up to half a hectare in size. It is from these source areas that vine improvement groups obtain the cuttings to supply industry. The process of establishing source areas and maintaining them is governed by protocols established as part of the accreditation schemes by which vine improvement groups certify their material. There are currently two accreditation schemes used by vine improvement groups in Australia. These are the National Vine Accreditation Scheme, which is managed by AVIA, and the Vine Industry Nursery Accreditation Scheme, which is managed by the Vine Industry Nursery Association (VINA).

Ramsey rootstocks growing under sprawled conditions Photo: J. Connellan

88

Both schemes aim to provide a product delivered through a quality assurance program that incorporates procedures, controls and treatments. The AVIA and VINA accreditation schemes provide an audit trail to allow accurate identification of the source of the grapevine material. To provide certified material, schemes must meet the minimum standards. Nurseries also use accreditation systems such as those offered by AVIA and VINA. Some nurseries use the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) accreditation system. An integral part of any accreditation scheme is the ability to trace the grapevine material back to its source. Independent audits of accredited vine improvement groups and nurseries are also important components of these schemes. When purchasing grapevine material from vine improvement groups or nurseries, some key questions should be asked: Are these cuttings/rootlings/graftlings certified? If they are, under which accreditation scheme? Can you provide documentary evidence that you are an accredited facility? Does this scheme enable full traceability of product? What are the minimum sanitary requirements? Do you have a statement as to what these requirements are? It is important to ask these questions, otherwise the material purchased may not be of the standard expected. The following are examples of unacceptable practices by some nurseries: Informing the purchaser of grapevine material that graftlings are certified or from a certified source, when in fact either the scion or the rootstock is the only certified material. It is important to make sure that both the rootstock and scion are certified materials. If one of the two components of a grafted vine is not a certified material then it is likely that the uncertified material has not undergone any sanitary or trueness to type checks. Poor sanitary status of the uncertified material can result in virus transfer from the rootstock to scion (Coombe and Dry 1992). Viruses are associated with changes in yield, fruit quality, graft incompatibilities, reduced graft-take rates, and in some circumstances vine decline and death. In addition, viruses can cause deformation that makes clonal identification difficult (Constable and Drew 2004).

Nursery operators establishing their own source areas from certified material to use as a source of rootstock or budwood cuttings. Often these source areas do not undergo any sanitary or trueness checks and have little, if any, documentation supporting their origin. Sourcing of scion material from uncertified vineyards. Typically the nursery operator requiring the scion material simply walks into a block and has a quick look at the vines, asks the owner a few questions about the performance of the block, and at best takes a few samples for virus testing. Generally no sanitary checks are undertaken during the growing season for the incidence of diseases such as Phomopsis, downy mildew, Eutypa, black spot or Australian grapevine yellows. Inspections for trueness to type are also often neglected. If these blocks are sampled for viruses the testing may mean little, as the vineyard may have been established from multiple source areas that themselves could have been of questionable health status.

Young vines infected with leafroll virus Photo: J. Connellan

One of the key aspects of vine improvement programs is the ability to trace clones back to the original mothervine. This, in combination with regular virus testing of the source areas, is an extremely powerful tool. Some viruses in grapevines can be difficult to detect from year to year owing to their transient nature within the vine (Rowhani et al. 1997). The genetic variability of the virus can allow them to escape detection by commonly used testing techniques (Constable et al. 2006). The best means of reducing the risk of this occurring is annual testing of all source areas, along with visual inspections. These inspections, combined with the maintenance of a history of the sanitary status of a clone, can be used to help diagnose the health status of the clone.

89

When purchasing dormant cuttings, rootlings or graftlings, hot water treatment can be utilised to control a number of pests and pathogens such as nematodes, mites, mealybugs, scale, crown gall, Australian grapevine yellows and Petri disease (Waite 2005). There are two treatment regimes currently widely used. The first is 50 C for 30 minutes; this is used to treat cuttings for both internal and external pathogens. The second treatment is 54 C for 5 minutes; this treats external pathogens such as Phylloxera and nematodes. (Waite 2005). It is common practice for some nurseries to have cuttings hotwater treated (50 C for 30 minutes) before they propagate them as either grafted or own-rooted vines, and then again (at 54 C for 5 minutes) after the graftlings/rootlings are lifted from the nursery the following winter. The second treatment is given to kill any nematodes, mealy bugs or scale before the material is dispatched to the customer. In treating the

References and further reading

AVIA (1998) National Vine Accreditation Scheme pp. 1011. Australian Vine Improvement Association, Mildura, Victoria Constable F., Connellan J., Bass T., Nicholas P., Habili N., Rodoni B. (2006) Genetic variation of Grapevine virus A and Grapevine leafroll associated virus-3. Seventh Australian Plant Virology Workshop, Rottnest Island, WA Coombe B. and Dry P. (eds) (1992) Viticulture. Volume 2Practices pp. 251255. Winetitles, Adelaide Constable F. and Drew C. (2004) Review of Vine Health Parameters, Implementation Priorities and Capabilities for Vine Improvement Groups and Accredited Nurseries. GWRDC Dry P. and Coombe B. (eds) (2004) Viticulture. Volume 1Resources. Second Edition. Winetitles, Adelaide Priorities and Capabilities for Vine Improvement Groups and Accredited Nurseries. Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation, Wayville, SA Rowhani A., Uyemoto J. and Golino D. (1997) A comparison between serological and biological assays in detecting grapevine leafroll associated viruses. Plant Disease 81, 799801 Waite H. (2005) Hot water treatment: cooling the confusion. The Australian Grapegrower and Winemaker, April, pp. 3436.

Grapevine scale being tended by ants

Photo: A. Loch

material at both stages of production the risk of pests and diseases being transferred to the vineyard is significantly reduced. Hot water treatment, if applied correctly to dormant cuttings, rootlings or graftlings, can be safe, but material must be handled correctly once treated, otherwise losses can occur (Waite 2005). Information on how to handle the material can be supplied by the operators of the hot water treatment facilities or by vine improvement groups. Planting material used for establishing or replanting a vineyard is a significant financial investment. The choice of material can have long-term impacts on the productivity and longevity of the vineyard. Sourcing high-quality planting material from an accredited vine improvement group or nursery is a way of reducing the risk of planting failure due to pests or diseases.

90

Appendix 1

Agrochemicals registered for use in Australian Viticulture 200708

COMPILED BY DR SALLY - JEAN BELL AND CATHERINE DANIEL

REPRODUCED COURTESY OF THE AUSTRALIAN WINE RESEARCH INSTITUTE .

Always read the label

Appendix 1 Dog Book.pdf

Insert p1 (cover of booklet) of

Users of agricultural (or veterinary) chemical products must always read the label, and any Permit before using the product, and strictly comply with the directions on the label and conditions of any permit.

Users are not absolved from compliance with the directions on the label or the conditions of the Permit by reasons of any statement made or omitted to be made in this publication.

delete keyline (shows approx size)

The product trade names in this publication are supplied on the understanding that no preference between equivalent products is intended and the inclusion of a product does not imply endorsement by NSW Agriculture over any other equivalent product from other manufacturers.

Some of the chemical use patterns quoted in this publication are approved under Permits issued by the National Registration Authority and in force at the time the publication was prepared. Persons wishing to use a chemical in a manner approved under Permit should obtain a copy of the relevant Permit from NRA and must read all the detials, conditions and limitations relevant to that Permit, and must comply with the details, conditions and limitations prior to use.

91

Insert p 2and 3 of

Appendix 1 Dog Book.pdf

delete keyline (shows approx size)

92

insert 2 up pages 4-5 of Appendix 1 Dog Book.pdf

93

insert 2 up pages 6-7 of Appendix 1 Dog Book.pdf

94

insert 2 up pages 8-9 of Appendix 1 Dog Book.pdf

95

insert 2 up pages 10-11 of Appendix 1 Dog Book.pdf

96

insert 2 up pages 12-13 of Appendix 1 Dog Book.pdf

97

insert 2 up pages 14-15of Appendix 1 Dog Book.pdf

98

insert 2 up pages 16-17 of Appendix 1 Dog Book.pdf

99

insert 2 up pages 18-19 of Appendix 1 Dog Book.pdf

100

insert 2 up pages 20-21 of Appendix 1 Dog Book.pdf

(Do not print page 22 of pdf, (back cover of booklet)

101

Appendix 2 Internet sites for wine and grape industries

CB PAGE , CR BECKINGHAM AND J BRIGHT , NSW DPI

Internet services include: Electronic mail (e-mail) World Wide Web (www) Internet relay chat (IRC) groups. Listed are some of the websites accessible to wine and grape industries. To access the sites, enter the address into a browser window, or go to the NSW DPI site, www.dpi.nsw.gov.au, and search for grapes.

www.nasaa.com.au www.nasaa.com.au National Association for Sustainable Agriculture (Australia) is Australias premier organic certifier, providing comprehensive certification services from paddock to plate. www.bfa.com.au www.bfa.com.au Biological Farmers of Australia Co Op Ltd is Australias leading and largest certification agency for organic and biodynamic production and certification. Internationally recognised certifier. www.australianorganic.com.au www.australianorganic.com.au Australian Certified Organic is Australias largest certifier for organic and biodynamic produce. ACO has over 1300 operators within its certification system.

General weather sites

www.bom.gov .bom.gov.au www.bom.gov.au Bureau of Meteorology is the national meteorological authority for Australia, providing meteorological, hydrological and oceanographic services. The website features education, publications, news, weather forecasts, warnings and observations, other weather services, climate services, hydrology services. www.longpaddock.qld.gov .longpaddock.qld.gov.au www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au 10-day precipitation outlook for Australia and New Zealand viewed through two 5-day charts and precipitation percentage of normal chart. http://wxmaps.org/pix/aus.vv.html http://wxmaps.org/pix/aus.vv.html 7-day forecast for each panel representing a 24 hour period.

Wine industry organisations

www.awbc.com.au www.awbc.com.au Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation website features newsletters, statistics, vintage reports, publications, contacts, exporting, promotion, geographical indications (wine zones and regions) and a register of protected names. www.gwrdc.com.au www.gwrdc.com.au The Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation is the body responsible for investing in grape and wine research and development on behalf of the Australian wine industry and community. The website features information on grape and wine research, newsletters, research applications, contacts and the National Vine Health Steering Committee. www.awri.com.au www.awri.com.au The Australian Wine Research Institute provides research, development and extension services. The website features industry services, links, agrochemicals, information resources, wine exporting, publications, wine and health and research projects. www.crcv .crcv.com.au www.crcv.com.au The Cooperative Research Centre for Viticulture promotes cooperative scientific research and is a joint venture between the viticulture industry and research and education organisations. The website features information on research programs, education and training, Viticare, AusVit, publications and links.

Australian sites
Organics
www.ofa.org.au www.ofa.org.au Organic Federation of Australia is a peak industry body, organic directory, information forums and events. www.organicfarms.com.au www.organicfarms.com.au Natural Produce Network aims to develop a network to establish, promote and support sustainable production systems that enhance the environment and provide consumers with natural healthy products.

102

www.asvo.com.au www.asvo.com.au The Australian Society of Viticulture and Oenology Inc. serves the interests of practising winemakers and viticulturists by encouraging the exchange of technical information. Activities include seminars, newsletter and industry awards. www.nswwine.org.au www.nswwine.org.au NSW Wine Industry Assoc Inc. (NSWWIA) represents the wine regions in NSW. Committees formed since the Association began cover Research and Development, Education and Training, Licensing, Tourism and Promotion, and Water and Resources. The website provides information on activities of the Association, promotion opportunities and events. www.csu.edu.au\nwgic www.csu.edu.au\nwgic The National Wine and Grape Industry Centre was formed by bringing together the resources of NSW DPI, Charles Sturt University, and the NSW Wine Industry Association. This unique initiative assists the industry in maintaining its internationally competitive edge through research, education, training and extension. The website contains courses available, contact page, research topics. www.phylloxera.com.au www.phylloxera.com.au The Phylloxera and Grape Industry Board of South Australia website provides information about the Board, phylloxera, research results, rootstocks, other pests, young vine management, news, statistics and links to other websites. www.wineaustralia.com.au www.wineaustralia.com.au The National Wine Centre of Australia and official website of the Australian wine industry is a portal to the Australian wine industry, not a site in itself but a provider of links to information sources within the industry. The website features online sales, wine industry information, events and tourism, education, employment, product and service supplies, publications, industry organisations and links. www.winesoforange.com.au www.winesoforange.com.au Orange region vignerons association.

www.agriculture.gov .agriculture.gov.au www.agriculture.gov.au Australian Government Agriculture Portal provides all government services and information under the one web site. www.agric.wa.gov .agric.wa.gov.au www.agric.wa.gov.au Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia. www.dpi.vic.gov .dpi.vic.gov.au www.dpi.vic.gov.au Victorian Department of Natural Resources and Environment. www.pir.sa.gov.au .pir.sa.gov www.pir.sa.gov.au South Australia Primary Industries and Resources. www.dpi.qld.gov .dpi.qld.gov.au www.dpi.qld.gov.au Queensland Department of Primary Industries. www.dpiwe.tas.gov .dpiwe.tas.gov.au www.dpiwe.tas.gov.au Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment. www.csiro.au www.csiro.au CSIRO. www.affa.gov .affa.gov.au www.affa.gov.au Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Australia. www.workcover.nsw.gov .workcover.nsw.gov.au www.workcover.nsw.gov.au Looks at all relevant issues pertaining to safety in your business enterprise. www.aqis.gov .aqis.gov.au www.aqis.gov.au Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service. www.austrade.gov .austrade.gov.au www.austrade.gov.au Austrade provides export and investment services to Australian companies and international buyers and investors in 94 locations worldwide. It is the official trade and investment facilitation agency of the Australian Government. Some of the website features are trade events, useful links, publications, industry and country information and information on exporting and investment. www.abs.gov .abs.gov.au www.abs.gov.au Australian Bureau of Statistics is Australias official statistical organisation. The website features media releases, news, statistics, education resources, census data, products and services.

Government sites
www.dpi.nsw.gov.au .dpi.nsw.gov www.dpi.nsw.gov.au NSW Department of Primary Industries is a leading provider of information for profitable, sustainable food and fibre industries. The website features horticulture, animals, field crops and pasture, pests, diseases and weeds, natural resources and climate, farm business, trade, research, advisory and education services, community services, corporate information, employment, news, media, bookshop and links.

103

www.abare.gov .abare.gov.au www.abare.gov.au Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics (ABARE) is a professionally independent applied economic research agency. It provides stakeholders in Australias rural and resource industries with up-to-date public policy analysis and commodity forecasts. The website features ABARE data, commodity analyses, agricultural surveys, economics, media releases, conferences, publications, related links and feedback. www.customs.gov .customs.gov.au www.customs.gov.au Australian Customs Service is a statutory authority that services the government, the business community and the people of Australia. Some features of the website are: a business guide to customs, media and publications, customs tax reform, customs notices, importing goods into Australia, links to other sites, Ministers Home Page, customs forms. www.efic.gov .efic.gov.au www.efic.gov.au Export Finance and Insurance Corporation helps Australian exports to compete internationally by providing insurance and finance facilities to support their overseas contracts. The website contains customer service, country information, environment policy, news, publications and market watch. www.nfis.com.au www.nfis.com.au National Food Industry Strategy is an industry-led company funded by the Australian Government to be an agent of change in the Australian food industry. Looks at marketing, industry grants, resources and workshops.

with timely information on the potential risk of important diseases and pests like downy mildew, powdery mildew, black spot and light brown apple moth. www.apvma.gov.au www.apvma.gov .apvma.gov.au Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (formerly National Registration Authority) operates the Australian system that evaluates, registers and regulates agricultural and veterinary chemicals. The website includes a PUBCRIS database, which contains details of registered agricultural and veterinary chemical products.

Education and training

www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/aboutus/services/education/ .dpi.nsw.gov www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/aboutus/services/education/ agricultural_education NSW Department of Primary Industries is a provider of short courses and education and training through the Murrumbidgee College of Education at Yanco (NWGIC) and the CB Alexander Agricultural College at Patterson (Tocal). For more details see below, and see the NSW DPI website for information on short courses. www.csu.edu.au/nwgic www.csu.edu.au/nwgic National Wine and Grape Industry Centre (NWGIC). Through Charles Sturt University (CSU) the NWGIC provides higher education to the Australian Wine Industry. CSU provides undergraduate and postgraduate programs in Winegrowing, Wine Science, Food Processing and Food Science. www.tocal.nsw .tocal.nsw.edu.au www.tocal.nsw.edu.au CB Alexander Agricultural College or Tocal is a part of NSW DPI. The site contains details of full-time and part-time courses for school leavers who want to pursue careers in agriculture. It also has details of external courses in agriculture and natural resource management, short courses, coming events and education resources for sale. www.uws.edu.au www.uws.edu.au The University of Western Sydney Some website Western Sydney. features are: search engine, learning, research, academic publications, Internet support, library, news, colleges and schools. www.tafe.com.au www.tafe.com.au NSW Department of Education and Training, Training, Further Technical and Further Education (TAFE NSW). Website features include courses and careers, campuses and institutes, flexible study options, getting started at TAFE and news.

Journals
www.winetitles.com.au www.winetitles.com.au Australian Viticulture www.grapeandwine.com.au www.grapeandwine.com.au Australian and New Zealand Grapegrower and inemaker. W inemaker.

Pest, disease and pesticide information

www.dpi.qld.gov .dpi.qld.gov.au/infopest www.dpi.qld.gov.au/infopest Infopest is a comprehensive listing of registered agricultural and veterinary chemicals and their uses. Also available is a compilation of Material Safety Data Sheets for agvet chemicals. The website provides details on key features of Infopest, how it works, and an order form. www.cropwatch.com.au www.cropwatch.com.au CropWatch SA provides grapegrowers in the Riverland, McLaren Vale, Mildura, Swan Hill and Robin Vale areas
104

USA sites
www.tablegrape.com www.tablegrape.com Table California Table Grape Commission gives a guide to fresh table grapes, including recipes, cooking tips, nutritional information. www.nysaes.cornell.edu www.nysaes.cornell.edu York New York State Agricultural Experiment Station has researchers and extension educators working to develop good farming, food storage and processing practices. Website features departments, information, news, press releases. www.ipm.ucdavis.edu www.ipm.ucdavis.edu University of California develops and promotes the use of integrated pest management. The website features information, education, publications, programs and a directory. http://wineserver.ucdavis.edu http://wineserver.ucdavis.edu Enology, Department of Viticulture and Enology, University of California, Davis is a research and educational institution. The website features wine and grape information, programs, research, newsletters, courses and links.

features research and library information, business and community information, and links.

French sites
www.montpellier .montpellier.inra.fr www.montpellier.inra.fr A leader in wine research and a major teaching site for southern France.

Other overseas sites

www.arc.agric.za www.arc.agric.za The South African Institute for Research in Viticulture and Oenology (Agricultural Research Council) promotes the agricultural and related sectors through research, technological development and transfer. Website features are strategic plan, events, products, opportunities and links. www.stratsplace.com/winetaste_formal.html www.stratsplace.com/winetaste_formal.html Wine tasting terminology www.genres.de/idb/vitis/ www.genres.de/idb/vitis/ Grape and vine variety catalogue website features online search, database and links http://vitis-vea.zadi.de VITIS-VEA VEA, VITIS-VEA, Viticulture and Enology Abstracts is an international English language database in the field of viticulture www.brocku.ca/ccovi/ www.brocku.ca/ccovi/ Cool Climate Oenology and Viticulture Institute, Canada website features research, academic programs, background and links.

New Zealand sites

www.lincoln.ac.nz www.lincoln.ac.nz Lincoln University Centre for Viticulture and Oenology is an internationally renowned university specialising in commerce and management, primary production, natural resources, science, engineering and social science. The website features departments, information, news and press releases. www.massey .massey.ac.nz www.massey.ac.nz Massey University Laboratory for Wine Microbiology is a leader in the fields of sciences, design, social sciences, education and business. The website

105

Appendix 3 Where to buy your planting material

Approved sources for purchasing cuttings in NSW, Victoria and South Australia
Vine improvement organisation Address Mobile Telephone Facsimile MIA Vine Improvement PO Box 167, YENDA NSW 2681 Society miavis@iinet.net.au Richard Wales (business hours) Preference given to orders received by 15 May Victorian and Murray Valley PO Box 460, IRYMPLE VIC 3498 Vine Improvement Association michaelpullen@bigpond.com (VAMVVIA) Michael Pullen Preference given to orders received by 15 May Riverland Vine Improvement PO Box 292, MONASH SA 5342 Committee rvic@hotkey.net.au David Nitschke Preference given to orders received by 30 April Australian Vine Improvement Association Inc. Michael Pullen PO Box 460, IRYMPLE VIC 3498 michaelpullen@bigpond.com 0429 318 397 b.h. (02) 6968 1202 b.h. (02) 6968 1479 a.h. (02) 6968 1291 a.h. (02) 6968 1479

b.h. (03) 5022 8499 (03) 5021 4833

b.h. (08) 8583 5366(08) 8583 5504

b.h. (03) 5022 8499 (03) 5021 4833

Nurseries supplying rootlings from approved sources

The nurseries listed are recognised for using material sourced from vine improvement organisations. However, they may use material obtained from other sources. Buyers should check the source of the material they intend to purchase to ensure it meets their needs.

New South Wales

Nursery name Adro Grafted Vines Aust. Quality Vines Chalmers Nurseries Hanwood Grafted Vines Mallee Point Nursery Omega Grafted Vines Premier Nurseries Riverina Nursery Pty Ltd Sunraysia Nurseries Weares Nursery Address PO Box 539, GRIFFITH 2680 adrografted@bigpond.com PO Box 281, YENDA 2681 info@aqv.com.au PO Box 84, EUSTON 2737 nursery@chalmersnurseries.com PO Box 55, HANWOOD 2680 Indepoli@dragnet.com PO Box 185, YENDA 2681 Mobile Telephone Facsimile 02 6964 4288 02 6961 3077 03 5026 3228 02 6963 0247 02 6968 1786 02 6962 6814 02 6964 1830 02 6962 6814 03 5024 8551 02 6962 5979

0428 447 246 02 6964 4288 0427 681 630 02 6961 3032 N/A 03 5026 1932

0412 699 476 02 6963 0247 0428 690 208 02 6968 1086

PO Box 95, YOOGALI 2680 0429 955 061 02 6962 1135 omegagv@riverinanursery.com.au PO Box 400, GRIFFITH 2680 premiernurseries@bigpond.com 0411 444 004 02 6962 2537

PO Box 95, YOOGALI 2680 0429 955 061 02 6962 1135 omegagv@riverinanursery.com.au PO Box 45, GOL GOL 2738 sunraysianurseries.com.au PO Box 736, GRIFFITH 2680 Weares@iinet.net.au N/A N/A 03 5024 8502 02 6964 2324

Note: Written consent is required to introduce grapevine material, regardless of its origin, into the proclaimed phylloxera-free areas.

106

Victoria
Nursery name Boulevarde Nurseries Chalmers Nurseries Liparoo Nursery, Brian Engelfield Frecks Vine Nursery, Paul Freckleton KC Vines & Rootstocks Fussy Britches Nursery Gaulkes Vine Nursery Jacksons Vine Nursery Lancasters Vine Nursery Lanmar Vine Nursery, K Sharman Lengs Vine Nursery Brenton Leng Mildura Vine Nursery Murray Lea Nurseries Trevor & Heather Schreiber Michael Smith Sunraysia Nurseries Address PO Box 816, IRYMPLE 3498 allan@boulevarde.com.au PO Box 84, EUSTON 2737 nursery@chalmersnurseries.com RMB 4700, ROBINVALE VIC 3549 brianeng@iinet.net.au PO Box 1161, RED CLIFFS 3496 PO Box 1054, MILDURA 3502 PO Box 5033, MILDURA 3502 fussbrit@iinet.au BLK F50 17th St, MILDURA STH 3501 PO Box 20, CARDROSS 3496 PO Box 229, NANGILOC 3494 PO Box 702, RED CLIFFS 3496 lanmar_Nursery@Bigpond.com PO Box 28, IRYMPLE 3498 PO Box 1497, MILDURA 3502 PO Box 201, RED CLIFFS 3496 PO Box 498, IRYMPLE 3498 trevorschreiber@austamet.com.au PO Box 138, RED CLIFFS 3496 PO Box 45, GOL GOL 2738 sunraysianurseries.com.au 0407 349 466 0412 947 426 Mobile Telephone 03 5024 6312 03 5026 1932 03 5026 0255 03 5024 2885 03 5024 8812 03 5023 4370 03 5024 5431 03 5024 2485 03 5029 1487 03 5024 3346 03 5024 5337 03 5024 6029 03 5024 3245 03 5024 5986 03 5024 2669 03 5024 8502 03 5024 8551 03 5024 6596 03 5029 1487 03 5024 3346 03 5024 8834 03 5023 5393 Facsimile 03 5024 6692 03 5026 3228 03 5026 0246

South Australia
Nursery name Glenavon Nursery C/- Mark Cleggett R Hansen Orlando Wines Jacobs Creek Nursery Kemps Nursery Orchard Fruits Nursery McCreanor Nursery River Murray Nursery Schammer, PD & BG Yalumba Nursery Address Bremer Rd, LANGHORNE CREEK 5255 PO Box 15, LOVEDAY 5345 PO Box 943, ROWLAND FLAT 5352 25 Tonkin Avenue, BARMERA 5345 PO Box 1716, LOXTON 5333 paul@pippos.com PO Box 292, MONASH 5345 PO Box 995, LOXTON 5333 PO Box 567, LOXTON 5333 PO Box 10, ANGASTON 5353 www.yalumbanursery.com 0418 819 540 0419 843 221 0407 607 494 0418 815 655 Mobile 0417 883 826 0407 609 023 Telephone 08 8537 3207 08 8588 7417 08 8521 3050 08 8584 5544 08 8584 5544 08 8583 5366 08 8584 4968 08 8584 9063 08 8568 7700 08 8584 9142 08 8568 7710 08 8584 5544 08 8584 7680 08 8583 5504 Facsimile 08 8583 7250 08 8588 7417

107