Volume 25(2), 109 - 114, 2021

JOURNAL of Horticulture, Forestry and Biotechnology

www.journal-hfb.usab-tm.ro

The influence of the leaf area and crop load on Pinot Noir
grape quality
Nistor Eleonora1, Dobrei Alina Georgeta1*, Tirziu E.1, Ciorica G.2, Dobrei A.1
1Banat University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine “King Michael I of Romania”, Faculty of
Horticulture and Forestry, 119 Aradului Street, 300645 Timisoara; Romania
2University of Medicine and Pharmacy „Victor Babeş”, Timişoara, 300041-Timisoara P-ta Eftimie Murgu, 2,

Romania

*Corresponding author. Email: ghitaalina@yahoo.com

Abstract Among many others methods, the yield per vine (Vitis vinifera L.) Key words
control can be achieved by removing the apical or basal clusters on individual
shoots or removing all the clusters alternately from the shoots or alternatively grape cluster, leaf area,
removing the apical clusters versus basal. The relationship between thinning, ripening, sugars,
carbohydrate source, phenology and grape composition of Pinot noir grapes has titratable acidity, pH
been studied to determine how the change in leaf area ratio: fruiting load shortly
after berry lag influences the ripening stage, for establishing the importance of
changing the fruiting load or leaf area and for evaluation of the variety response
to similar leaf area ratio: fruiting load. Shortly after the berry lag, four canes were
shortened to seven or 14 leaves per shoot and between 0.5 and 75% of clusters
were removed. Thinning the leaf area had larger influence on the ripening stage
than the clusters thinning which influenced only the vines with seven leaves on
shoot. Sugar, pH, titratable acidity and berry weight were measured weekly,
from first stage of ripening to harvest; the leaf area and production were
measured at harvest. There were no differences in berry composition between
the thinning methods. However, the leaf area thinning from 14 to seven leaves
delayed the ripening, decreased sugar accumulation and berry weight. Thinning
the leaf area gives the possibility to control of berry development delaying during
different phenological stages and can be used to balance the influence of high
temperatures and manage with climate variability, while achieving optimal berry
sugars in colder/hot growing areas. The cluster thinning had no effect on the
sugar content, the titratable acidity, the pH or the berry weight, showing that
carbohydrates can be removed from shoots without clusters to those with grape
clusters, and that the shoots behave like a homogenous system and not as
individual units.

Understanding the influence of management
practices on grapevine canopy that influences the leaf
area: crop load ratio and the development cycle of the
vine, respectively, is important to achieve a desired
berry composition at harvest. [15]. Crop load can be
adjusted by different training and pruning systems,
leaves and crop removal or shoots thinning [1;18].
Pruning and trimming are also used to improve the
microclimate around grape bunches, mainly by
improving aeration in the vine bush and sunlight
exposure of grape bunches [10;8]. The ratio between
the leaf area and the crop load is influenced by the
competition between vegetative and reproductive
growth; however, the photosynthetic rate can be
influenced by the canopy manipulation [22]. Bunch
thinning, either manually or mechanical, is a common
practice in viticulture to help in controlling the grape
yield and quality, but also to remove the undesired or
with diseases bunches. [7]. Research has shown that
thinning bunches after flowering influences to a small
extent the accumulation of sugars, titratable acidity or
pH until harvest [17]. Shoots thinning or leaf removal
after flowering [21] may delay the onset of ripening
(colour change and berry growth). Stoll et al., [2011]
[25] found that sugar accumulation in grape berries
decreased after summer pruning. Several studies have
shown different amounts of sugar achieved at harvest
even during ripening stage similar amounts of sugar
accumulation were found at different leaf area: crop
load ratio [26]. It is not fully understood yet, how
sugars accumulation is influenced by the change of leaf
area: crop load ratio at the fruiting set stage, or how
much the growing season, the location of the vineyard
or the pruning/trimming time of execution influenced
the sugars in berries at harvest [23;24]. When there are
two or more inflorescences on the same shoot, the best
shape has the one from the base (the first on the shoot);
is recommended one, or two inflorescences on the most

109
vigorous shoots, and the others must be removed
[5;20]. After thinning (five to seven days after flower
cap fall) it is recommended to keep on each shoot from
28 to 42 bunches, usually those with good berry set and
upper position on the shoot [9]. However, the bunch
development and berries composition are influenced by
the whole vine bush and the crop loads [13]. Previous
studies showed that the bunch position on the shoot
influence the sugar concentration in berries at harvest
[19]. Grape juice acidity have influence on wine
sensory attributes like tartness or crispness and
correlated with sugars concentration, help winemakers
to decide the best harvest time [4]. Crop load can
influence grape must acidity; therefore it is considered
that high titratable acidity is found in high crop load
vines and vice versa, while for pH the opposite is true
[11]. The objective of the paper was to evaluate how
much the change the ratio of leaf area: crop load,
influences the yield components in the Pinot Noir
variety.
Material and Method
The experiment was conducted in Recas
vineyards, Timis County, during the 2018-2020
growing season on Pinot Noir variety, planted in 1998.
The rows were oriented on north-south direction; the
planting distance between the vines per row was 1.8 m
and 2.5 m between rows, respectively. The
experimental method was organized for removing the
number of leaves (10 leaves or six leaves) x thinning
methodology (alternative shoots or bunches) in
randomized design with four replications per treatment.
Bunches on alternate shoots were removed (one shoot
with all bunches and the other one without bunches) in
the first treatment, and the basal or apical bunches from
alternative shoots in the second treatment. Samples of
40 berries were collected once a week from each vine,
starting before veraison and lasting until harvest. For
each sample was measured the berry weight. During
veraison the berries were assessed for softness by
pressing with the finger. Harvesting was done by hand
and were registered the grape yield and the number of
bunches per vine. Berry samples were crushed and the
grape juice filtered and then analysed. Sugars were
determined by refractometer (Kern ORA Analogue).
The titratable acidity was determined by Mettler
Toledo's titrator DL 50 (Mettler Toledo Analytical,
Switzerland) and pH by Orion Star T910 pH titrator
(Orion Star T910 pH titrator without electrode).
All the leaves from the lower vine bush were
removed. The samples of fresh leaves were weight and
the area for the leaves removed from each vine was
measured with LI- 3100C leaf area meter (LI-COR,
Biosciences GmbH, Bad Homburg, Germany).
Results were analysed with GraphPadPrism,
Version 7.04. (GraphPad Software, Inc. San Diego, CA
92108).by ANOVA one way, for each parameter from
samples collected during veraison, maturation stages
110
and for grape yield. The differences between the means
were determined by the difference of the least squares
(LSD) by Fisher at the significance level of 5%.
XLSTAT Microsoft Excel version 2017.5 by Addinsoft
was used to create the graphics.
Results and Discussions
The grape yield capacity or vine performance
is largely influenced by pruning and trimming, by leaf
area and crop load and certainly by the climate [15; 3].
Extensive leaf area reduces grape quality parameters by
shading and smaller leaf areas delays ripening and vine
vigour [2].
The main influence of bunch thinning on the
grape yield removed registered a small but significant
difference between treatments. The grape yield was not
significantly influenced by the shoots and number of
leaves tinning or bunch removing, regardless of leaf
area thinning. The differences between the ratio leaf
area: bunch weight, were mainly assigned to the leaf
area.
Figure 1. PCA for the influence of experimental
treatments on grape yield main parameters
YR% = yield (bunch) removed; nB = number of
bunches/vine; Y = grape yield; LA:BW = Leaf area: bunch
weight ratio; 10L AS = 10 leaves removed on alternate
shoots; 10L AB = 10 leaves and bunches removed on
alternate shoots; 6L AS = 6 leaves removed on alternate
shoots; 6L AB = 6 leaves and bunches removed on alternate
shoots.
Between the grape yield (%) removed and leaf
area: crop yield ratio there is a positive correlation
when ten leaves on alternate shoots thinning treatment
was applied. Grape yield was strongly positive
influenced by the number of bunches on vine, in the
treatments with six leaves removed from alternate
shoots and also for six leaves and bunches removed
from alternative shoots (Figure 1). However, grape
yield was negatively influenced when ten leaves where
removed in both treatments (leaves removed on
alternate shoots; leaves and bunch removed on
alternate shoots; p < 0.05).

Figure 3. Sugar content for different number of leaves

and thinning methods
Figure 2. PCA for the influence of experimental 6L AS = 6 leaves removed on alternate shoots; 6L AB = 6
treatments on veraison parameters leaves and bunches removed on alternate shoots; 10L AS =
V1 = 20% veraison; V2 = 60% veraison; Vd = 10 leaves removed on alternate shoots; 10L AB = 10 leaves
veraison duration; DR = rate of berry development during and bunches removed on alternate shoots;
veraison according to berry softness; 10L AS = 10 leaves
removed on alternate shoots; 10L AB = 10 leaves and The number of leaves removed had a
bunches removed on alternate shoots; 6L AS = 6 leaves significant effect (p <0.05) in any veraison phase on
removed on alternate shoots; 6L AB = 6 leaves and bunches the berry weight (Figure 4). The same influence of six-
removed on alternate shoots. and 10-leaf thinning method, respectively, was on day
96 (at harvest); no statistically significant differences
In the second diagram (Figure 2), the thinning were found for berry weight for the thinning method
method (alternative shoots or alternative bunches) did with six leaves removed from alternative shoots and 10
not influence the veraison stage starting, nor does its leaves - alternative bunches.
duration for a certain number of thinning leaves (either
six or 10). Certainly, between the veraison duration and
the rate of berry development during veraison there is a
very strong significant correlation (p < 0.05). Except
the first veraison phase (V1) and phase two (V2)
among other veraison parameters there was no
significant influence from one to each other. However,
the number of leaves removed had a significant
influence on veraison stage (p < 0.001); it was found
that the beginning of ripening (veraison stage) is
significantly delayed in the treatment with six thinning
leaves compared with 10 leaves thinning.
In any pre- harvest stage and at harvest time,
there was no difference in grape berries sugars
concentration between the two thinning methods
(alternating shoots or alternating bunches) for a given
number of leaves (Figure 3) but there was a significant
difference for the rate of yield removed for both
treatments with 10 leaves thinning. The number of
Figure 4. Grape berry weight for different number of
leaves removed always had a significant influence at leaves and thinning methods
each veraison phase (p <0.001). 6L AS = 6 leaves removed on alternate shoots; 6L AB = 6
leaves and bunches removed on alternate shoots; 10L AS =
10 leaves removed on alternate shoots; 10L AB = 10 leaves
and bunches removed on alternate shoots;

111
 Therefore the leaves or bunch removal has analyzed, for the six-leaf thinning method, higher pH
influence on the entire vine bush: there were no values were observed. The application of the method of
significant differences in sugar concentration when the thinned bunches produced substantially equal values
thinning method alternative bunches was applied for 12 or 6 leaves thinning (Figure 6).
compared with leaves removed from alternative shoots,
even when the number of leaves was reduced to six per
shoot.
The results are supported by the research of
Intrigliolo et al. (2009) [13] which found that thinning
the basal or apical bunches from shoots have similar
influence on berry quality at harvest time. The results
of Zhuang et al. (2014) [27] showed that the removal of
the first six basal leaves did not influence the further
growth of the shoots but influenced the microclimate of
the bunch growth area, through directly exposure to
solar radiation; when cluster thinning was applied the
grape yield decreased between 34 and 38%.
Titratable acidity (TA) was not significantly
influenced by thinning method excepting the juice TA
from grape samples collected at 33 and 76 days after
growing season started, from the alternate bunch
tinning with six leaves on shoots and 10 leaves
respectively (Figure 5). The 62-day results suggest that
small differences due to the number of leaves can be
observed during the ripening phase, with bunches of Figure 6. pH for different number of leaves and thinning
berries on shoots with a small number of leaves having methods
a slightly higher acidity. Basal leaf removal show 6L AS = 6 leaves removed on alternate shoots; 6L AB = 6
significantly reduced TA in Cabernet Franc variety, but leaves and bunches removed on alternate shoots; 10L AS =
the time when the treatment was applied was not 10 leaves removed on alternate shoots; 10L AB = 10 leaves
important, according to the results presented by and bunches removed on alternate shoots;
Zhuang et al. (2014) [27].
On control day 92, the bunch thinning brought
statistically significant pH values, but on control day
96 these values were balanced, between 3.05 and 3.44,
which are close to those recommended for red wines of
3.3 -3.6 according to Jackson (2008) [14]. Malinovski
et al. (2017) [16] found in Syrah variety from Brazil,
the pH values ranging from 3.31 to 3.26 among
different thinning treatments. Zhuang et al. (2014) [27]
studies in Cabernet Franc variety doesn’t show
significant differences for grape juice pH, no matter if
leaf removal or cluster thinning methods were applied.

Conclusions

The study showed that reducing the leaf area:

Figure 5. Titratable acidity for different number of leaves
and thinning methods
6L AS = 6 leaves removed on alternate shoots; 6L AB = 6
leaves and bunches removed on alternate shoots; 10L AS =
10 leaves removed on alternate shoots; 10L AB = 10 leaves
and bunches removed on alternate shoots;
For the pH value, a significant influence of the
leaves thinning during veraison / ripening or at harvest
was observed. When samples from day 76 were
crop load ratio also decrease the accumulation of
sugars in grape berries without significant influence on
the titratable acidity concentration or pH. However, by
changing the leaf area: crop load ratio is influenced not
only the composition of grape berries, but can also be
changed the phenological phases and grape bunches
development, including the harvest time. Reducing the
leaf area is a way to change the beginning of the
ripening phase, while reducing the leaf area combined
with bunches removing is a method to manipulate the
sugar accumulation. Basal leaf removal improved the
grape bunch microclimate and yield quality, while
bunch thinning is useful for crop load manipulation.

112
Thinning methods are useful for vineyard managers
and winemakers to improve grape quality correlated
with climate during growing season.
References
[1] Andraş–Sauca, V., Dobrei, A., Dobrei ,Alina,
Nistor, Eleonora, Farcaș, D. 2018. The influence
of biostimulators and foliar fertilizers on the vigor
and photosynthetic yield to a few varieties of
vine. JOURNAL of Horticulture, Forestry and
Biotechnology. Vol. 22(3), 27- 36. www.journal-
hfb.usab-tm.ro.
[2] Bates, T.R. 2008. Pruning level affects growth and
yield of New York Concord on two training
systems. American Journal of Enology and
Viticulture, 59(3): 276- 286.
[3] Borca, F., Nan, Roxana, Dobrei, Alina, Nistor,
Eleonora, Dobrei, A. 2020. The anthropogenic
influence of soil management on grape yield and
economic parameters in grapevine growing.
JOURNAL of Horticulture, Forestry and
Biotechnology 24 (4), pp.58-65.
[4] Carbonneau, A. 1997. General relationship within
the whole-plant: examples of the influence of
vigour status, crop load and canopy exposure on
the sink "berry maturation" for the grapevine.
Acta Horticulturae 427: 99-118.
[5] Caspari, H.W., Lang, A. Alspach, P. 1998. Effects
of girdling and leaf removal on fruit set and
vegetative growth in grape. American Journal of
Enology and Viticulture 49, 359-366.
[6] Dobrei, A., Nistor, Eleonora, Nan, Roxana-Daniela,
Dobrei, Alina. 2020. The influence of manual and
mechanical pruning on grape quantity and quality
and the efficiency of vineyards management.
JOURNAL of Horticulture, Forestry and
Biotechnology. Vol. 24(2), pp. 1 – 8.
www.journal-hfb.usab-tm.ro.
[7] Dobrei, A., Dobrei, Alina, Poșta, Gh., Danci, M.,
Nistor, Eleonora., Camen, D., Mălăescu,
Mihaela., Sala, F. 2016. Research concerning the
correlation between crop load, leaf area and grape
yield in few grapevine varieties, Agriculture and
Agricultural Sci. Procedia 10, 222-232, 2210-
7843, doi: 0.1016 /j.aaspro. 2016.09.056.
[8] Dobrei, Alina, Dobrei, A., Nistor, Eleonora,
Cristea, T., Boldea, M., Sala, F. 2016.
Optimization of grapevine yield by applying
mathematical models to obtain quality wine
products. International Conference of Numerical
Analysis and Applied Mathematics 2015
(ICNAAM 2015) AIP Conf. Proc. 1738, 350008-
1– 350008-4; doi: 10.1063/1.4952131 Published
by AIP Publishing.
[9] Dobrei, Alina Georgeta, Dobrei, A., Sala, F.,
Nistor, Eleonora, Mălăescu, Mihaela,
Drăgunescu, Anca, Cristea, T., Costea, B. 2014.
Researches concerning the evolution of grapes
ripeness in some varieties from Recaş vineyards,
JOURNAL of Horticulture, Forestry and
Biotechnology, Vol. 18(1), pp.174- 181.
www.journal-hfb.usab-tm.ro
[10] Guidoni, S., Oggero, G., Cravero, S., Rabino, M.,
Cravero, M.C., Balsari, P. 2008. Manual and
mechanical leaf removal in the bunch zone (Vitis
vinifera L., cv barbera): Effects on berry
composition, health, yield and wine quality in a
warm temperate area. Journal International des
Sciences de la Vigne et du Vin 42, 49-58.
[11] Gómez, J., Lasanta, C., Palacios-Santander, J.M.
Cubillana-Aguilera, L.M. 2015. Chemical
modelling for pH prediction of acidified musts
with gypsum and tartaric acid in warm regions.
Food Chemistry, 168: 218–224.
[12] Jackson, R.S. 2008. Wine Science Principles and
Applications. Third Edition. Academic Press
Elsevier. ISBN: 978-0-12-373646-8. pp. 664-668.
[13] Hunter, J.J., Visser, J.H. 1988. The effect of
partial defoliation, leaf position and
developmental stage of the vine on the
photosynthetic activity of Vitis vinifera L. cv.
Cabernet Sauvignon. South African Journal for
Enology and Viticulture 9, 9- 15.
[14] Intrigliolo, D.S., Lakso, A.N. Centinari, M. 2009.
Effects of the whole vine versus single shoot-crop
level on fruit growth in Vitis labruscana
'Concord'. Vitis 48, 1-5.
[15] Kliewer, W.M., Dokoozlian, N.K. 2005. Leaf
area/crop weight ratios of grapevines: Influence
on fruit composition and wine quality. American
Journal of Enology and Viticulture 56, 170-181.
[16] Malinovski, L.I., Brighenti, A.F., Cipriani, R.,
Cesconeto J.F., Vanderlinde, G., Simon, S.,
Silva,A.L., Allebrandt R., de Bem B.P. 2017.
Effect of crop load per leaf area ratio on the
quality of ‘Merlot’ and ‘Syrah’ grown in high
altitude in Santa Catarina, Brazil. Acta
Horticulturae, DOI: 10.17660/ ActaHortic.
2017.1157.55.
[17] Nan, Roxana Daniela, Borca, Florin, Dobrei,
Alina, Dobromir, Daniela, Dobrei, Alin, 2019,
Research on the characteristics of superior white
wines produced in Petrovaselo Winery, Timiș
County, of Horticulture, Forestry and
Biotechnology Vol. 23(4) pp. 75-79.
[18] Nistor, Eleonora, Dobrei, Alina Georgeta, Dobrei,
A., Ciorica G. 2020. Influence of crop loading on
berries composition in Cabernet Sauvignon
variety. JOURNAL of Horticulture, Forestry and
Biotechnology. Vol. 24(2), pp. 28 - 34,
www.journal-hfb.usab-tm.ro .
[19] Nistor, Eleonora., Dobrei, Alina Georgeta, Dobrei,
A., Ciorica, G. 2019. Studies on growth and yield
components in Merlot, Pinot noir and Syrah
varieties, Journal of Horticulture, Forestry and
Biotechnology, Vol. 23(1), 44-50.
113
[20] Parker, A.K., Garcia de Cortázar-Atauri, van
Leeuwen, C., Chuine, I. 2011. General
phenological model to characterise the timing of
flowering and veraison of Vitis vinifera L.
Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research
17, 206-216.
[21] Petrie, P.R., Trought, M.C.T. Howell, G.S. 2000.
Growth and dry matter partitioning of Pinot Noir
(Vitis vinifera L.) in relation to leaf area and crop
load. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine
Research 6, 40-45.
[22] Petrie, P.R., Trought, M.C.T., Howell, G.S.
Buchan, G.D. 2003. The effect of leaf removal
and canopy height on whole-vine gas exchange
and fruit development of Vitis vinifera L.
Sauvignon Blanc. Functional Plant Biology 30,
711-717.
[23] Reynolds, A.G., Molek, T., De Savigny, C. 2005.
Timing of shoot thinning in Vitis vinifera: Impacts
on yield and fruit composition variables.
American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 56,
343-356.
[24] Sadras, V.O. Petrie, P.R. 2012. Predicting the
time course of grape ripening. Australian Journal
114
of Grape and Wine Research 18 (1), pp.48-56.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-
0238.2011.00169.x
[25] Stoll, M., Scheidweiler, M., Lafontaine, M.,
Schultz, H.R. 2011. Possibilities to reduce the
velocity of berry maturation through various leaf
area to fruit ratio modifications in Vitis vinifera L.
Riesling. Progrès Agricoles et Viticole 127, pp.
68- 71.
[26] Wolf, T.K., Dry, P.R., Iland, P.G., Botting, D.,
Dick, J., Kennedy, U., Ristic, R. 2003. Response
of Shiraz grapevines to five different training
systems in the Barossa Valley, Australia.
Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research 9,
pp. 82-95.
[27] Zhuang Shijian, Tozzini Letizia, Green A.,
Acimovic Dana, Howell G.S., Castellarin
Simone D., Sabbatini P. 2014. Impact of cluster
thinning and basal leaf removal on fruit quality of
Cabernet Franc (Vitis vinifera l.) Grapevines
grown in cool climate conditions. HortScience
Vol. 49: Issue 6, pp. 750–756,
https://doi.org/10.21273/ HORTSCI. 49.6.750.