Copyrighted. Rights are owned by the American Society for Enology and Viticulture. The Sonoma County Library makes no assertions as to ownership of any original copyrights to digitized work and can claim only physical ownership of the work(s) described in these records. However, these materials are intended for Personal or Research use only. Any other kind of use, including, but not limited to commercial or scholarly publication in any medium or format, public exhibition, or use online or in a web site, may be subject to additional restrictions including but not limited to the copyrights held by parties other than the Library. USERS ARE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE for determining the existence of such rights and for obtaining any permissions and/or paying associated fees necessary for the proposed use. Preferred credit line is: Courtesy, the Sonoma County Library. Please see <a href='https://sonomalibrary.org/locations/sonoma-county-history-and-genealogy-library/order-photo' target='_blank' rel='noopener noreferrer'>additional reproduction and reuse information</a>
Description
Three different pruning methods (hedge [H], minimal [M], and standard spur [S]) pruning in combination with two trellis systems (bilateral cordon [BC], single canopy, and quadrilateral cordon [QC] divided canopy) on growth, yield, and fruit, and wine composition of Cabernet Sauvignon grown at the Oakville Experimental Vineyard was investigated over a period of four years (1988 to 1991). The data which follows represent fouryear means of S, H, and M pruning treatments (BC and QC data averaged together) respectively; node number per vine after winter pruning 48, 220, and 680; total shoots per vine 72, 151, and 250; average shoot length (cm) 150, 63, and 40; average shoot weight (g) 62, 16, and 6; total pruning weight/vine (kg) 3.91, 2.10 and 1.07; yield per vine 14, 5, 21.3, and 21.3 kg; clusters per vine 121, 259 and 419; berry weight (g) 1.19, 1.10 and 0.95; cluster weight (g) 120, 83, and 58; berries/cluster 101, 77 and 67; and 0 Brix it harvest 22.7, 22.1, and 20.8. The average date of harvest ofS, H, and M vines was Sept. 20, Oct. 7, and Oct. 9, respectively. At harvest, Hand M fruits had significantly lower titratable acidity, malate, and K than S fruits, but level of anthocyanin did not differ significantly between treatments. It is concluded that S and H pruned vines were capable of producing relatively high quality wines but not M pruned vines.
If you're wondering about permissions and what you can do with this item, a good starting point is the "rights information" on this page. See our terms of use for more tips.
Share your story
Has Calisphere helped you advance your research, complete a project, or find something meaningful? We'd love to hear about it; please send us a message.
