Vineyard row orientation and grape ripeness level effects on vegetative and reproductive growth characteristics of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Shiraz/101-14 Mgt

Effects of vineyard row orientation (NS, EW, NE-SW, NW-SE) and harvesting dates/grape ripeness levels (23 °B, 25 °B and 27 °B) on vegetative and reproductive growth characteristics of vertically trellised, shoot positioned Vitis vinifera L. cv. Shiraz, grafted onto rootstock 101-14 Mgt, were investigated for seven consecutive seasons on a flat site of approximately 3 ha with uniform clayey loam soil at the experiment farm of ARC Infruitec-Nietvoorbij in the Breede River Valley, Robertson, South Africa. Primary and secondary shoot characteristics showed minor differences between row orientations and canopy sides. Primary shoot lengths and primary leaf area:secondary leaf area ratios averaged 110-120 cm and 0.80-0.90, respectively. Secondary leaf area of primary shoots on S and SW sides tended to be lower. The SW canopy side displayed generally lower values for most characteristics. Higher cane mass was obtained for NS and EW orientations. Bud fertility, berry set and general morphology of bunches were largely unaffected by row orientation. Bunch and berry mass and volume progressively decreased during ripening for all row orientation treatments. The EW row orientation resulted in consistently higher berry mass and volume. Leaf area (10-12 cm2)/g fresh mass values showed equal balance for differently orientated vines, aligned with generally acknowledged criteria. Average yields of three ripeness levels over row orientations and seasons were 19.2, 17.4 and 15.9 tons/ha. Overall total yield losses from ripeness level 1-2 and 2-3 averaged 9.5% and 8.6%, respectively, with an overall total yield loss from ripeness level 1-3 of 17.3%. This is mainly attributed to a decrease in berry mass; rachis mass showed high stability. The NS orientated vines had highest yields over seasons and at all ripeness levels; it also displayed most stable yields over the years of study and may be considered the most ideal row orientation for yield within the terroir of study. Yields of the other row orientations varied according to season/ripeness level: at ripeness level 1, NE-SW was followed by NW-SE and EW; at ripeness level 2, NW-SE was followed by EW and NE-SW; and at ripeness level 3; EW was followed by NW-SE and NE-SW. The NW-SE row orientation was stable at an average level and EW and NE-SW orientations were variable. Overall average yields (over ripeness levels) of NS, EW, NE-SW and NW-SE orientations were 18.2, 17.1, 17.1 and 17.4 ton/ha, respectively. Despite minor differences in vegetative characteristics, yield:cane mass ratios indicated that growth balances were affected by row orientation. These trends are of great significance in considerations of an optimal ripeness level for a specific product objective and are very important aspects of sustainability. Results showed significant trends that can globally be used as guidelines for row orientation choices, even when multiple (straight or curved) row orientations per vineyard are used and when vineyards are established in more complex terrains/terroirs. The study provided the first comprehensive and much needed scientific evidence on the role of row orientation in vegetative and reproductive growth of the grapevine and as viticulture practice.