Paper · 2022 · Agronomy

A Study on the Efficiency of Sustainable Wine Grape Vineyard Management Strategies

Rita Perria; Alice Ciofini; William Antonio Petrucci; et al.

4
claims
8
verbatim quotes
24
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Crop protection strategies based on cupric products and mainly adopted in organic viticulture produce a consistent environmental impact due to the persistence of copper in soils and its negative effects on edaphic biodiversity. In this work, trials were carried out during the crop years 2018–2020 in a vineyard with an organic management by a low-copper strategy and in a conventional IPM management with an IPM strategy with reduced use of fungicides. Phytosanitary treatments have been strictly planned according to forecasting models, and fungicides have been partially substituted with substances improving the resistance mechanisms of plants. Different strategies of green manure management, in order to improve the health of vines, were also adopted. Results suggest the efficacy of the “GreenGrapes” plant protection strategy in conditions of low downy mildew pressure. Furthermore, no declines in the production quality have been recorded; conversely, the synergic effect of the green manure and the tested biostimulant substances (“GreenGrapes” protocols) and the green manure management improved yield and grape quality, compared with conventional conduction (IPM and Organic) with a grass covering.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The GreenGrapes plant protection strategy was efficacious in wine grape under low downy mildew pressure.

Taxon
wine grapeVitis viniferat0
Treatment
plant protection strategye1
Interactor
downy mildewPeronosporaceaee1pathogen
Outcome
efficacye1
Qualifier
in conditions of low downy mildew pressuree1

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Sustainable Wine Grape Vineyard Management Strategies”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–82 · show in text ↑
e1

“Results suggest the efficacy of the “GreenGrapes” plant protection strategy in conditions of low downy mildew pressure”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 758–876 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wine grape production quality was not reduced under the tested vineyard strategies.

Taxon
wine grapeVitis viniferat0
Outcome
production qualitye2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Sustainable Wine Grape Vineyard Management Strategies”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–82 · show in text ↑
e2

“no declines in the production quality have been recorded”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 891–947 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Green manure with biostimulant substances improved wine grape yield compared with conventional IPM and organic management with grass covering.

Taxon
wine grapeVitis viniferat0
Treatment
green manure and the tested biostimulant substancese3
Outcome
yielde3
Direction
improvede3
Comparator
conventional conduction (IPM and Organic) with a grass coveringe3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Sustainable Wine Grape Vineyard Management Strategies”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–82 · show in text ↑
e3

“the synergic effect of the green manure and the tested biostimulant substances (“GreenGrapes” protocols) and the green manure management improved yield and grape quality, compared with conventional conduction (IPM and Organic) with a grass covering”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 961–1209 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Green manure with biostimulant substances improved wine grape quality compared with conventional IPM and organic management with grass covering.

Taxon
wine grapeVitis viniferat0
Treatment
green manure and the tested biostimulant substancese3
Outcome
grape qualitye3
Direction
improvede3
Comparator
conventional conduction (IPM and Organic) with a grass coveringe3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Sustainable Wine Grape Vineyard Management Strategies”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–82 · show in text ↑
e3

“the synergic effect of the green manure and the tested biostimulant substances (“GreenGrapes” protocols) and the green manure management improved yield and grape quality, compared with conventional conduction (IPM and Organic) with a grass covering”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 961–1209 · show in text ↑

other · quality: general · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

fertilization · quality: general · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results

13 papers: 8 positive, 5 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 papers →

fertilization · yield · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results

21 papers: 17 positive, 4 negative or no effect

16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

17 papers more in this group

See all 21 papers →

other · yield · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.