An experimental vineyard was planted in Geneva, NY, in 2007 to determine the impact of training system [low bilateral cordon with vertical shoot positioning (LVSP), high wire bilateral cordon (HWC)], vine spacing (1.8 and 2.4 m), and root system [own-rooted, grafted onto ‘101–14 Mgt’ (Vitis riparia × Vitis rupestris)] on vine growth, yield, fruit composition, and wine quality of the recently-released winegrape ‘Noiret’ (Vitis hybrid). Yield components were generally unaffected by training system in 2009, but vines spaced at 2.4 m had about six fewer clusters per meter of canopy, lower pruning weights by 0.24 kg·m−1, and clusters that were 0.01 kg greater in mass compared with vines spaced at 1.8 m. In 2010, HWC yielded 0.98 kg·m−1 more than LVSP, and had a higher crop load ratio by 0.8. Larger vine spacing increased yield by 0.32 kg·m−1 and increased crop load ratio by 0.3. Grafted vines increased yield by 0.36 kg·m−1 and crop load ratio by 0.3. Training system and vine spacing had minimal impact on fruit composition in both years. Rank sum analysis indicated a consumer preference for the aroma of wines from the HWC/2.4-m treatment compared with wines from the LVSP/1.8-m treatment in 2009, and a consumer preference for the aroma of wines from the HWC/1.8-m treatment compared with wines from the LVSP/1.8-m treatment in 2010. Results suggest that the LVSP system is not a suitable choice for vigorous ‘Noiret’ vines because of low yields, low crop load ratios, and low preference rankings of LVSP wines by the consumer sensory panel.
Crop load management treatments were applied to ‘Seyval Blanc’ grapevines (Vitis hybrid) as a 2 × 2 factorial design: no shoot thinning (ST)/no cluster thinning (CL) (i.e., control), ST combined with CL (ST + CL), ST only, and CL only. All treatments reduced yield and crop load (yield/pruning weight) in 2009 and had a smaller impact in 2010 due to the carryover effect of previous year treatments on crop potential. Soluble solids were improved by up to 3.2% by the ST + CL treatment in 2009, but were not impacted by treatments in the second year when the range of yield was smaller and the ripening conditions more favorable. Rank sum analysis for the 2009 vintage indicated that wines produced from the CL treatment were preferred by the sensory panel compared with the control wine, but there were no differences in consumer preference for wines produced in the 2010 season. Grower preferred price in 2009 (required to compensate the grower for labor costs and lost yield) increased from $556/t in the control to $824/t in the CL treatment, an increase which could be justified by the demonstrated consumer preference for the CL wine. Grower preferred price was $1022/t in the ST + CL treatment in 2009, a price increase that was not justified by a demonstrated consumer preference for the wine. In 2010, grower preferred price ranged from $541/t for the control to $610/t for the ST + CL treatment, an unjustified increase based on the lack of demonstrated consumer preference for the wines.