Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Precision Viticulture Tools for Wine Grape Vineyard
Management in California
Brent Sams
California Plant and Soil Conference
American Society of Agronomy
Fresno, February 1 , 2017
Variable vineyards
Plant Available Water
Colony 13 – Petite Sirah
5x yield differences in the same row
Manage with Precision Viticulture:
• Management to optimize vineyard performance
– Responding to field variability
– Maximizing grape yield and quality
– Minimizing environmental footprint
Irrigation is biggest tool
• Other crops:
– Sensor-driven systems in nurseries
– Center pivot systems in grain crops
• Wine grapes: management zones
– Australia (McClymont et al. 2012; Proffitt and
Pearce 2004)
– Spain (Bellvert et al. 2012; Martínez-
Casasnovas et al. 2009)
– ….and California
Variable Rate Irrigation
Soil 1
Soil 2
Zon
al Ir
riga
tio
n
VF PUMP
Irrigation management zone 1
Irrigation management zone 2
Zon
al Ir
riga
tio
n
VF PUMP
Soil 3
Irrigation management zone 2
Irrigation management zone 1
Zon
al Ir
riga
tio
n
Soil 3
Soil 1
Soil 2
Mo
du
lar
Irri
gati
on
VF PUMP
Soil 3
Soil 1
Soil 2
Mo
du
lar
Irri
gati
on
VF PUMP
Soil 3
Soil 1
Soil 2
Mo
du
lar
Irri
gati
on
VF PUMP
Soil 3
Soil 1
Soil 2
Mo
du
lar
Irri
gati
on
VF PUMP
Wine Program A
Wine Program B
Mo
du
lar
Irri
gati
on
Research Objective
• Design and deploy a proof-of-concept VRDI prototype
• Increase yield in low vigor/low yielding areas while improving overall water use efficiency
Experiment location
Colony Ranch, Wilton CA
Field layout
Colony 2A Cabernet Sauvignon
• Wilton, California • 31.5 acres • 5 x 11 feet • 17-year old • Teleki 5C • Hand-pruned • Drip-irrigated
• San Joaquin silt loam (~ 75%) • San Joaquin-Galt complex (~ 25%) • 500 mm (20”) annual rainfall • Highly variable
2012 Yieldtons per acre
12
9
6
3
Block area: 31.5 acresVRI & CI: 10.0 acres
Field average: 9.17 tons/acre
Vari
ab
le r
ate
VR
DI
Co
nven
tio
na
l
CD
I
Field layout Landsat data
30 x 30 meter
2012 Yieldtons per acre
12
9
6
3
Block area: 31.5 acresVRI & CI: 10.0 acres
Field average: 9.17 tons/acre
140 Irrigation Zones
15 x 15 meter
VRDI General layout
Node-Solenoid, Check Valve, Tee
Flow meter
Flushing solenoid valve
Sub-main Valves
4 DL
4 DL
5 DL
5 DL
5 DL
4 DL
4 DL
4 DL
4 DL
5 DL
5 DL
5 DL
4 DL
5 DL
4 DL
4 DL
5 DL
5 DL
5 DL
4 DL
4 DL
4 DL
4 DL
5 DL
5 DL
5 DL
4 DL
5 DL
Variabl
e Flow
Pump
VRDI System design
solenoid valve
check valve
emitters
4”
Check valve
2” 2” Solenoid valve
Power loc adapter
Power loc tee
Tubing, 0.69”ID
emitters emitters
VRDI System design
Control board 480 VAC
115 VAC
Communications to South and North
12 VDC to 14 subnets
UPS box
Cell Antenna
Power distribution
box
Control box
Lightning arrestor
• METRIC (Mapping evapotranspiration at high resolution and internalized calibration)
• ET residual of surface energy balance
Rn + LE + G + H = 0
• Inputs – Landsat (visible & infrared) – CIMIS weather data
• Outputs – ETc – Kc (f/NDVI)
• Watering of each zone: ETc * Km (ETc = ETref * Kc)
Variable rate irrigation scheduling
Rn
G
LEH
• System can be used to:
1. Irrigate each zone according to vine size with-out altering natural variability uniform Km
2. Apply more water to low vigor areas in order to increase vine size and yield and decrease vineyard variability variable Km
We want #2!
But can default to #1 under severe water shortage
Variable rate irrigation scheduling
Irrigation management factor (Km)
May 4 weeks
June 4 weeks
July - Oct 16 weeks
0.0 – 1.0 0.5 – 0.8 0.6 – 1.0
Variable rate irrigation scheduling
Adjusting Km based on vine vigor
Landsat NDVIs NDVI = Normalized Difference Vegetation Index
% maximum
5/24/15 6/25/15 7/27/15 8/25/15
Variable rate irrigation scheduling
Normalized Yield
Mean = 8.9 t/a Mean = 7.4 t/a Mean = 8.7 t/a Mean = 4.6 t/a
Mean = 8.9 t/a Mean = 7.7 t/a Mean = 10.1 t/a Mean = 5.1 t/a
2012 2013 2014 2015
Var
iab
le R
ate
C
on
ven
tio
nal
VRI CI VRI CI
2012 8.9 8.9 0.0 5.93 5.93 0.0
2013 7.7 7.4 4.1 5.63 4.93 14.2
2014 10.1 8.7 16.1 7.43 7.08 4.9
2015 5.1 4.6 10.9 4.27 3.65 17.1
Year
Yield
(tons/acre)Gain
VRI/CI
(%)
WUE
(tons/acre-foot)Gain
VRI/CI
(%)
Yield and water use efficiency
Average 10% Average 12%
Yield and water use efficiency
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Freq
uenc
y
Yield class (% max)
VRDI
CDI
2012
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Freq
uenc
y
Yield class (% max)
VRDI
CDI
2013
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Freq
uenc
y
Yield class (% max)
VRDI
CDI
2014
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Freq
uenc
y
Yield class (% max)
VRDI
CDI
2015
Conclusions • Modular variable rate drip irrigation system
prototype was successfully implemented
• Vine growth was effectively and immediately manipulated with precision irrigation
• Yield was increased during 3 seasons by an average of 10% with up to 17% gain in water use efficiency
• Prototype expensive and complex but excellent template for 2nd generation system
Next steps: 2nd generation system
System tested in Israel on wine grapes and citrus during 2015
All valves and controls outside the vine rows!
Cheaper and simpler!
Next steps: 2nd generation system
Next steps:
• Streamline energy balance models for use in vineyards
• Automate calculation of appropriate management factors for VRDI through modeling
• Economics of irrigation zone (pixel) size
• Overlaying of variable rate fertilization
Acknowledgments • E&J Gallo Winery
– Viticulture Lab: Brent Sams, Maegan Salinas, Erin Troxell, George Zhuang, Cassandra Plank, Tian Tian, Cody Lichtfield, Nona Ebisuda
– Chemistry: Hui Chong, Bruce Pan, Natalia Loscos, Bianca Wiens
– Research Winery: David Santino
– GVI-CV: Alan Reynolds, John Owens VII, Christopher Bach, Evan Goldman
– GIS-CE: Andrew Morgan
– Nick Dokoozlian
• IBM (TJ Watson Lab & Data Center Services)
– TJ Watson Lab, NY: Levente Klein, Nigel Hinds, Hendrik Hamann
– Data Services, CA: Alan Claassen, David Lew
• Netafim Israel: Avi Schweitzer, Itamar Nadav, Yoram Engel, Gilad Narkis
• James Taylor, New Castle University, UK
• Ernie and Jeff Dosio, Pacific Agrilands
• Scott Britten & Associates, Bennett & Bennett
• Bernd Kleinlagel, ATV, Australia
Thank you
