PrecisionPrecision :Viticulture: UpdateUpdate andand EconomicEconomic ConsiderationsConsiderations

RobertRobert L.L. WampleWample Collaborators:Collaborators:

Dr. Odair Santos, Dr. William Browning, Sivakumar Sachidhanantham, Oren Kaye, Robert Cochran, Jim Orvis, Steve Kupina, JJ Gonsalves, Jon Holmquist, Greg Berg, Dr. Dan Rooney (STI); Dr. Kaan Kurtural; Craig Buxton and Michelle Frey (PureSense) and a host of undergraduate students and visiting young scientists.

Support: Constellation US; Oxbo-Korvan, Inc.; American Foundation; CSUF – Agriculture Research Initiative. Topography Information (STI); PureSense Inc. MappingMapping FruitFruit QualityQuality UsingUsing NNearear IInfranfra--RReded SSpectrometrypectrometry ((NIRSNIRS),), GPSGPS andand GISGIS ¾¾ Definition:Definition: WhatWhat isis quality?quality?

z SizeSize

z BrixBrix

z pHpH

z TATA

z ColorColor

z FlavorFlavor typicaltypical ofof thethe cultivarcultivar

z ““FitFit forfor purposepurpose”” 2750

2500

2250

2000

1750 ~680 Samples taken on August 24 and September 8, 1500 processed using the Zeiss NIR 1250 (ft) ORTH N 1000 Total of 1360 samples of 10 750 TANCE

IS clusters per location with D 500 subsamples of approximately

250 500 grams for anthocyanin 0 -750 -500 -250 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 analysis. DISTANCE EAST (ft)

08_24_07 (SOUTH) 09_08_07

Figure 1. Locations of Anthocyanin Level Measurements 15 14 13 12 Merjan Anthocyanin 01/22/08 @ 1400 11 August 24 and September 3, 2007 10 9 8 24-AUG-07 DATA

S 7 08-SEP-07 DATA LE 6 AMP

F S 5 O

GE 4 1.0 TA 3 0.92 PERCEN 1 0.8 0

0.7 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30 1.35 1.40 1.45 1.50 1.55 ANTHOCYANIN LEVEL 0.6

0.5 Y

0.4 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6

EQUENC 24-AUG-07 DATA

FR 0.3 E 08-SEP-07 DATA

LATIV 0.2 1.06 0.93

CUMU 0.1

0.0 ANTHOCYANIN LEVEL ~40 yds MerjanMerjan VineyardVineyard HarvestHarvest MapMap 20072007

Anthocyanin levels 0.4 to 1.05 mg/g Or 1.05 to 1.5 mg/g Merjan Vineyard Map 2007

Anthocyanin levels 0.4 to 1.0 mg/g Or 1.1 to 1.5 mg/g

Approximately 500m x 750m KorvanKorvan 3016xl3016xl ¾ Convert final map layer into shape file ¾ Generate Prescription file in SMS Basic ¾ In this case feed/no feed or 0 & 1 signals ¾ Simulation Run 20052005--0808 OverviewOverview

¾¾ 20052005

z 33 MerlotMerlot vineyardsvineyards // smallsmall winewine lotslots ¾¾ 20062006

z 11 CabernetCabernet SauvignonSauvignon vineyardvineyard • 45 acre vineyard • Large lots ¾¾ 20072007--0808

z 22 CabernetCabernet SauvignonSauvignon vineyardsvineyards • 45 and 160 acres • Large wine lots 20062006 --0808 SiteSite LocationsLocations

Twin Creeks Vineyard

Merjan Vineyard

Fresno State 2006-07-08 2007-08 Twin Creeks Vineyard Merjan Vineyard

North Central California Central California 45 acres 160 acres Cabernet Sauvignon Cabernet Sauvignon 8 ft X 8 ft (row x vine) 10 ft x 7.5 ft (row x vine) 110R and 1103P Freedom Hand Pruned Mechanically pruned Drip irrigated Drip irrigated Average 6 tons/acre Average 10 tons/acre Sample ~10 sites/acre Sample ~9 sites/acre TwinTwin CreeksCreeks VineyardVineyard 20052005

26.6 26.4 26.2 26 150 25.8 ¾ Note lack of 25.6 25.4 25.2 correlation between 25 100 24.8 BRIX 24.6 Brix and 24.4 24.2 WESTING, m 24 anthocyanin 50 23.8 23.6 23.4 23.2 23 0 22.8 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 22.6 22.4 NORTHING, m 0.56 0.55 0.55 0.54 150 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.52 0.52 100 0.51 0.51 0.5

WESTING, m 0.5 0.49 Anthocyanin, Anthocyanin, mg/g 50 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.47 0 0.47 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0.46 0.46 AnthocyaninNORTHING, m mg/g 20052005 MerlotMerlot WineWine AnalysisAnalysis

Vineyard Ethanol pH Folin C Twin Creeks High Anthocyanin 12.6 3.65 32.8 Twin Creeks Low Anthocyanin 11.6 3.6 33.1 Joe Cotta High Anthocyanin 11.5 3.48 36.8 Joe Cotta Low Anthocyanin 11.6 3.6 33.1 WT High Anthocyanin 11.9 3.76 32.1 WT Med. Anthocyanin 12.0 3.63 33.8 WT Low Anthocyanin 8.7 3.45 26.5 20052005 MerlotMerlot TasteTaste PanelPanel ResultsResults

¾ JoeJoe Cotta:Cotta: 99.9%99.9% ConfidentConfident thatthat thethe twotwo wineswines areare different.different. ¾ TwinTwin Creeks:Creeks: 94.2%94.2% ConfidentConfident thatthat thethe twotwo wineswines areare different.different.

¾ (Based(Based onon 1414 panelpanel members)members) WineWine Lots:Lots:

¾¾ 20062006 TwinTwin CreeksCreeks CabernetCabernet SauvignonSauvignon

z SmallSmall lotslots (1000(1000 lblb each)each) basedbased onon handhand harvestedharvested fruitfruit fromfrom severalseveral regionsregions

z LargeLarge lotslots (40(40 tons/tank)tons/tank) differentiallydifferentially harvestedharvested fruitfruit usingusing KorvanKorvan harvester:harvester: ¾¾ 20072007 MerjanMerjan CabernetCabernet SauvignonSauvignon

z TwoTwo :wineries: PaulPaul MassonMasson andand WoodbridgeWoodbridge • 40 tons/tank differentially harvested fruit of each category to each 20062006 TasteTaste PanelPanel ResultsResults

¾¾ SmallSmall lotslots (1000(1000 lblb each)each) basedbased onon handhand harvestedharvested fruitfruit fromfrom severalseveral regions:regions:

z 2020 panelpanel membersmembers

z NoNo significantsignificant differencesdifferences (down(down toto 90%90% level)level) ¾¾ LargeLarge lotslots (40(40 tons/tank)tons/tank) differentiallydifferentially harvestedharvested fruitfruit usingusing KorvanKorvan harvester:harvester:

z 2020 panelpanel membersmembers

z 99.4%99.4% confidenceconfidence thatthat therethere werewere differencesdifferences MerjanMerjan WineWine AnalysisAnalysis

Adams-Harbertson Wine Assay

mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L Malv-3-G Catechin Catechin Catechin Equiv. Equiv. Equiv. Equiv.

Total Total Total ACY Phenols Tannins NTP Date Treatment

24-Mar-08 HQ - Paul Masson (free run only) 101 560.89 259.161 301.729

24-Mar-08 NQ - Paul Masson (free run only) 93 433.81 79.339 354.471 NQ - Paul Masson (free run + 1st 24-Mar-08 Press fraction) 110 867.14 344.607 522.533 HQ - Paul Masson (free run + 1st 24-Mar-08 Press fraction) 149 826.37 168.152 658.218

24-Mar-08 NQ - Woodbridge (free run only) 154 1417.59 345.964 1071.626 HQ - Woodbridge (free run only) 24-Mar-08 125 1472.8 755.143 717.657 Non Differential Harvest - 24-Mar-08 Woodbridge (free run only) 156 1307.47 647.732 659.738 CommercialCommercial application?application?

¾¾ DemonstratedDemonstrated thethe technologytechnology cancan workwork ¾¾ RequiresRequires trainedtrained personnelpersonnel (service(service providedprovided byby winerywinery oror ““consultantconsultant””)) ¾¾ RequiresRequires equipmentequipment andand softwaresoftware toto acquireacquire andand processprocess datadata ¾¾ RequiresRequires preparationspreparations toto accomplishaccomplish differentialdifferential harvestharvest ¾¾ RequiresRequires ““qualityquality streamingstreaming”” atat thethe winerywinery DetailsDetails

¾ EquipmentEquipment CostsCosts ¾ ApplicationApplication

z NIR $25,000 z 40 ac/day

z GPS/GIS $14,000 z 10 yrs for most equipment

z Software $ 7,000 z 3 years for computers

z Vehicles $ 7,000 z Calibration of NIR

z Training $ 2,000 z Minimum of two people (1

z Computers $10,000 to collect data; 1 to • Total $65,000 process data) z Personnel / travel costs

z Possible use of equipment for other purposes EstimatedEstimated CostsCosts andand BenefitsBenefits

¾ AssumeAssume applyingapplying toto 1,8001,800 acresacres ¾ AssumeAssume 55 samplessamples perper acreacre @@ $20.00/sample$20.00/sample == $100/acre$100/acre == $180,000$180,000 ¾ AssumeAssume thatthat 25%25% ofof thethe fruitfruit isis higherhigher qualityquality andand isis differentiallydifferentially harvestedharvested (450(450 acres)acres) toto produceproduce wineswines worthworth $2.00$2.00 moremore perper bottle.(commercialbottle.(commercial exampleexample $10/$10/ bottle)bottle) ¾ AssumeAssume 55 ton/acton/ac (@800(@800 bottles/ton)bottles/ton) =4000=4000 bottles/acre.bottles/acre. ¾ TheThe addedadded value/acrevalue/acre == $8000$8000 ¾ TheThe totaltotal addedadded valuevalue == $3,600,000$3,600,000 PotentialPotential ValueValue ¾ Need for understanding the potential impact/benefit to growers z Who absorbs the cost of fruit segregation? z How is the grower compensated? ¾ Need for fruit “streaming” at the winery ¾ Observed differences between hand pruned and machine pruned fruit (-quality relationship) ¾ Use of NIR and FTIR instruments may facilitate pre-harvest mapping

z Concerns: • sampling protocols • sample processing • effects of temperature ¾ Established that pre-harvest maps can be used to accomplish differential harvest ¾ Potential significant economic value

¾ Other issues? ThankThank you!you!