Smart viticulture practices such as efficient use of rootstocks, canopy management, and bud testing can help produce higher quality grapes by balancing the vine, improving light harvesting, and minimizing stresses. These practices aim to close the gap between potential and actual yields impacted by drought, salinity, and climate variation. Adopting techniques enabled by artificial intelligence and digital platforms can further help combat biotic and abiotic stresses and sustain grape production under changing climatic conditions.

1. Smart viticulture practices to produce quality grapes
Dr. P. H. Nikumbhe, Dr. Sharmistha Naik and Dr. R. G. Somkuwar
ICAR-National Research Centre for Grapes, Pune, Maharashtra (India)-412 307
Summary
Smart viticulture practices play vital role in production of quality grapes. Vine
balance, efficient light harvesting, minimization of stresses is the focus area in quality grape
production. Major viticulture practices are efficient use of rootstock, canopy regulation, bud
fruitfulness, artificial intelligence and use of digital platform to combat different biotic and
abiotic stress and sustain production under changing climatic condition. There is large gap
between potential yield of variety and the actual yield may be due to drought, soil and water
salinity etc. The seasonal variation in climatic factors are also responsible for the differential
performance of vines. Thus, adoption of smart viticulture practices are the way forward for
the quality grape production. This paper provides a comprehensive review of relevance of
smart viticulture practices for quality grape production and also to meet current and future
challenges associated with climate change, shortages of labour and escalating production
costs.
Introduction:
Indian viticulture is unique as it is being practiced in almost all climatic conditions
from tropical to temperate. Grape is a high value export-oriented fruit crop which has gained
significance in tropical climate due to location specific suitable modifications. In India,
around 75% of grape is produced for fresh consumption and about 25% for raisin making and
around 2% collectively for juice and wine production. If we look 25 years back into the grape
production scenario of the country, the area under the grape cultivation was about 45000 ha
with the production of 1100 thousand tones.
Presently grapes are grown in India over an area of 1.40 lakh ha with production of
31.25 lakh MT and productivity of 21.00 MT/ha (NHB, 2020). India ranks first in world for
grape productivity and secured 7th position in the world for table grape export with the
quantum of exported fresh grapes 2.22 lakh MT. India is a major producer of the fresh
grapes (after China, Italy, USA, Spain, France and Turkey) producing around 6% of total
world grapes. Over 50% of Indian grapes are exported to the European Union (EU). The EU
continues to be the most preferred destination by Indian table grape exporters. Top importing
countries for Indian grapes remain the Netherlands (51%), Russia (36.53%), United Kingdom
(13%), Bangladesh (9%) and Germany (8%) as per agriexchange.apeda.gov.in.

2. Earlier, the vineyards were grown on the own roots of commercial varieties, as the
soil and water used for grapevine cultivation had no problem associated with salinity.
However, with the onset of situations like drought, salts in available water, etc. it forced the
grape growers to use rootstock in grape cultivation as some of the rootstocks are known to
tolerate water scarcity and soil salinity situations. Since the grapevine is a weak stem which
requires support for its growth. During the initial stage of vineyard establishment, the use of
proper trellises system with proper degree of angle as per the vigour of vine is the major
requirement. Vineyard once established can remain productive for more than 15 years. To
retain its economic value for longer period, it is necessary to establish a vineyard with an
industrialist’s vision. This review considers the climate adaptation strategies which are
essential to minimize the detrimental effects on grapevine.
Smart practices are listed below
1. Use of Rootstock:
1.1 Need for Rootstocks
Grapevines in India were exclusively grown on their own roots as most of the areas
were considered free from soil borne problems. Till recently commercial exploration of
rootstocks was not known in India. But with the reports of declining yield in the states of
Maharashtra and Northern Karnataka due to problems associated with soil and water salinity,
chlorides in the irrigation water, excess levels of sodium and free lime in the soil and drought,
the interest on the rootstocks has grown based on the reports and references of rootstocks
researches done in USA, Australia, USSR and Europe. Rootstocks have not only potential
for combating the soil and water problems, but can also be a potential tool for manipulating
vine growth and productivity (Shinde, Prabhakar, 2016). Even though horticultural practices
like mulching, green manuring, leaching of salts and application of soil amendments have
been employed by growers to overcome these adverse situations, the benefits realised by
these practices are not fully satisfactory. Hence, the usage of rootstocks to sustain the
productivity of grapes under adverse situation is gaining popularity (Jogaiah et al, 2010).
1.2 Use of rootstocks under the situations
Before deciding to employ the rootstocks to increase the productivity and quality of
grapes, one should identify the problem (Romero Azorin, P., & Garcia Garcia, J. 2020). If
the water is adequate, its quality is good with reference to EC, SAR and Cl-
content and the
soil is also good with reference to ESP and free Calcium content, there is no need to employ
rootstocks. Even, if we use rootstocks in situations where soil and water characteristics are

3. ideal and adequate, it may lead to more vigorous growth and thus cost of cultivation for
suppressing shoot vigour poses a problem to achieve desired level of productivity.
Table 1 Suitable rootstocks based on different production constraints
Sr. No. Situation/problem Rootstock
1. Water shortage 1103 P, 140 RU, 110 R, 420 A, SO 4, 99 R,
St. George, Dogridge
2. Soil EC more than 2 m mohs/cm and water EC
more than 1 m mohs/cm
Ramsey, Dogridge, 140 RU, 99 R, 110 R.
3. Soil ESP more than 15 per cent and/or water
SAR more than 8.
140 RU, 1613, Ramsey, Dogridge.
4. Free calcium content of soil is more than 12% 140 RU, SO 4, 420 A.
5. Chloride content of water is more than 4
meq/litre
Ramsey, Dogridge B, 140 RU. Teleki 5-C
6. Poor vigor of the variety without any
soil/water problem
Dogridge, St. George, SO 4, 140 RU.
7. For increased nitrogen, potassium uptake. Dogridge, St. George, 34 EM, Ramsey.
8. For increased bud break 1613, B2-56.
(Source: Adsule et al. 2013)
2. Canopy management of grafted vines
Grapevines are a climber. It has indeterminate growth with weak steam. It needs
support not only to support, the weight of its aerial parts and fruits but also maintain the
canopy architecture. The canopy architecture of vines is shaped by the trellis and the system
of training (Tarara et al, 2005). The fabricated structure used for training the vines is called
the trellis while the process of shaping the canopy is called training (Adsule et al, 2013).
The manner in which a grapevine is trained does not only influence the vine growth,
productivity and quality but also brings about variation in microclimate (Van Leeuwen, C., &
Seguin, G. 2006). An ideal training system should fulfil the following requirements.
i. It should be convenient for mechanization of cultural operations.
ii. Convenient to carry out manual operations efficiently.
iii. Give rise to adequate number of fruiting units (canes).
iv. Support heavy crop load of good quality per unit area of land.
v. Should be simple and less expensive.
vi. Should allow good ventilation and light into the vine canopy.
vii. Avoid microclimate congenial for the growth and spread of diseases.
Many other training systems were tried in India, a few to mention are T, V and extended Y
(Smart et al, 1990). Currently the gable system is becoming very popular. It has the good
features of both bower and V systems of training (Chadha, K. L. 2006, February). The
salient features of this system are:

4. (i) The young shoots are exposed to sun and the buds get complete illumination for
fruit bud formation.
(ii) Shoots do not overlap and there is no mutual shading of leaves. As a result, all the
leaves are functional photosynthetically. All canes mature well.
(iii)It offers scope to develop adequate number of fruiting of canes as per the vine
vigour.
(iv)The flower clusters can be reached conveniently by an average tall person for
various manual operations. Labour efficiency increases.
(v) Less disease problem as micro-climate is not built-up and the fungicidal sprays
reaches all leaves.
(vi)Fruits develop under diffused sun light. They are not exposed to direct sun.
Hence little sun scorching of berries.
Ideal canopy:
Canopy refers to the size and shape of the aerial parts of the vine. The canopy
components are stem, arms/cordons, canes shoots and leaves. The size, shape and orientation
of these components determine the canopy architecture. The ideal canopy architecture can be
brought about by the trellis we use, the system of training and also certain practices to
increase the vigour retard the growth etc (Wani et al, 2021).
Tools in canopy management:
Canopy architecture is natural expression of genetic makeup of the tree. Genotypes
vary in their canopy size and shape. However, the size and shape of the canopy can also be
manipulated through the following means:
i. Training
ii. Pruning
iii. Employing rootstocks
iv. Use of growth regulators
v. Imposition of soil moisture stress
vi. Nutrition
3. Training of vines
1. On bower trained and closely spaced vines, develop only two primary arms without
secondary branches. Develop canes from the primary arms. Allow the primaries in
North-South direction.

5. 2. In vigorous vines trained to bower: Develop two primaries in North-South direction
Develop two pairs of secondary arms on each primary at 45 cm and 135 cm away
from the main stem. The gap between two adjacent secondaries should be 90 cm.
3. In vigorous vines trained to extended Y trellis: Induce primary branching on the
main stem at 120 cm above the ground level. Develop four secondaries on two
parallel wires stretched at least 60 cm apart at a height of 135 cm. Allow the
primaries in East-West direction.
a. Spray CCC @ 500ppm on the shoots at 5 leaf stage.
b. Pinch the shoots to 7 leaves at 9 leaf stage of the shoots.
c. Spray CCC @ 500 ppm on the shoots at 5 leaf stage on the new shoot (7+ 5 leaves from
the base of the shoot)
d. Impose soil moisture stress at 7+5 leaf stage.
e. op the shoot to 15 leaves (7+8) when the shoots start maturing.
4. Importance of Bud Testing:
In peninsular India, grapes are pruned twice in a year. The vines are pruned in April for
shoot formation and cane development which also leads to fruit bud formation and storage of
food reserve in the cane (Adsule et al, 2013). The pruning is again done in October for yield.
Number of bunches are the indicator of yield in a particular vine which depends on the
fruitfulness of the canes. (Greven et al, 2014). Yield is a product of number of flower
clusters over unit area and the mean weight of the cluster. Fruitfulness of the canes is
decided during the same period after back pruning. Yield in grape is dependent on the
cultural practices followed after back pruning (April to September).
Productivity refers to the inherent capacity of grapevine to produce maximum yield
(Walker et al, 1997). The productivity of grape varies from variety to variety. There is a
large gap between the productive potential of vine and the actual yield, hence; there is scope
for reducing the gap between productive potential of vine and the actual yield by adopting
various cultural practices. These include crop regulation, use of growth regulators, training
and canopy management and disease and pest management, etc. (Fischer et al, 2005).
In other words, a fruiting cane is the unit of production. Even though yield per unit area is
more in tropical and subtropical regions of India, the cluster / cane ratio is far less as
compared to temperate regions of the world.
It has been reported that the farmers are facing the problems of unfruitfulness of the
vineyards causing serious concern. There are number of reasons for the unfruitfulness but the
major one is incorrect pruning level at the time of forward pruning (Chen et al, 2015). There

6. are lots of thumb rules being followed by the growers while pruning based on the individual
experience. But to determine the level of pruning in a vineyard scientifically by microscopic
testing of buds is very much required. This will not only help to achieve the potential
fruitfulness of the vine but also overall quality of the produce being enabled to carry out the
cultural practices at the scheduled time. The measures to increase the productivity of vines
by drawing out the total yield potential of the vine by the way bud testing has been discussed
in detail in this bulletin.
Grape bud
In grapevine, a bud develops at each node, just above the leaf i.e. the axil. It is a
mixed bud because both leaves and flowers develop from the same bud. As generally, two
growing points are formed in the axil since, they are enclosed in a common protective scale,
they appear as one bud.
One of these develops and gives rise to lateral. However, in proximal bud positions no
laterals are formed, two primary buds may be formed at the node. The other growing point
meantime develops two accessory or secondary buds, one on each side, and the three remain
enclosed in common scales so that they appear as one large bud, which is referred to an eye.
The accessory buds seldom develop and the central bud constitutes the main unit. All these
buds are called auxiliary buds. The compound bud remains dormant over the winter in
temperate climate and resumes growth in the following season. These are called latent buds.
If due to some reason, the central bud is killed, secondary buds can take its place. The buds
located in the angle where the young shoot joins the previous year’s wood are called basal
buds. In fact, every bud is potential flower bud; capable of differentiating into fruit bud
however, it is practically not experienced.
Factors affecting fruitfulness of grapevine buds
I. Environmental factors
1. Temperature
i. Percent total fruitfulness
ii. Size (fresh weight) of primordial.
iii. Optimum temperature (30 - 35°C)
iv. Varieties differ in performance at low temperature
v. Qualitative
2. Light
39,000 lux or one fourth of that of full sunlight
II. Inherent factors

7. A. Variety
III. Fruitfulness of primary buds in relation to cane character
I. Origin of the cane
ii. Position of the bud on the cane
iii. Morphological characters of the cane
IV. Management factors
i. Canopy management
ii. Water management
iii. Nutrient management
iv. Use of growth hormones
v. Disease and pest management
V. Horticultural techniques
i. Pruning, training
ii. Pinching
iii. Topping
iv. Bending and girdling
v. Shoot removing
vi. Cane thinning
Fruit Bud Formation:
Key processes in Fruit Bud formation
i. Inflorescence initiation, differentiation.
ii. Flower formation
iii. Inflorescence of morphology development
iv. Position and size of flowers.
v. Conclusively, flowering in grapevine involves three main steps:
vi. Formation of anlagen or uncommitted primordial.
vii. Differentiation of Analogue to form inflorescence primordial.
viii. Differentiation of flowers.
Bud Testing:
At this stage it is quite clear that fruit bud formation in grapevine is a complex process
involving many biochemical changes in bud. The exact end results of the work done for this
purpose cannot be forecasted exactly in viticulture. To bring some kind of certainly in respect
of no. and position of fruitful buds on a cane, bud testing for evaluating fruitful/unfruitful

8. buds and their status and position on a cane is becoming more and more popular in modern
days.
Objectives of bud Testing
i. To determine the pruning level.
ii. To judge the yield potential of the vineyard.
iii. To conclude pre-pruning scenario of fruitfulness.
iv. To investigate the abnormalities in fruitfulness.
v. To suggest appropriate connective measures. What so ever.
vi. Methods of Bud Testing
vii. Visual method.
viii. Pre-pruning forced sprouting.
ix. Microscopic method.
5. Artificial Intelligence
Artificial intelligence is particularly relevant to grape growers in many parts of the
world face disruptive challenges caused by climate change and variable weather patterns,
compressed seasons, drought, heat, shortages of labour and higher production costs. (Koufos
et al, 2020). Viticulture or Digital Viticulture are terms commonly used to describe the smart
development and deployment of such technologies in viticulture. (Ammoniaci et al, 2021).
In this review we discuss how they present opportunities for grape growers to respond to
increasing environmental issues such as the impacts of changing climate and soil conditions
in order to improve operational procedures and accuracy, as well as reducing production
costs. AI can be very useful as it can be used to transform data into different pieces of
information used by the grape grower for making informed decisions.
Machine learning (ML) is the discipline mostly chosen for automated knowledge in agri-
culture, and viticulture in particular (Cai et al,2019) ML with the already available large
number of options for data acquisi- tion allows grape growers and wine producers to
implement data-driven solutions to improve and optimize production systems.
AI can be very useful as it can be used to transform data into different pieces of
information used by the grape grower for making informed decisions. All sensing
technologies and platforms discussed below converge to a high data acquisition capability for
today’s grape grower, even at low scales. However, a steady progress in research will be
required and many other applications and developments need to be discovered in order to
gain more knowledge about how to model the crop into precise numbers to obtain a greater

9. amount of information from it. Additionally, this information, while useful to grape growers
for crop management, has both direct and indirect applications with respect to the
environment because the acquisition of crop information allows for the precise management
of environmentally critical resources such as water and soil. (Tardaguila et al, 2021).
Fig. 1 Artificial intelligence in digital agriculture
Digital technologies and their application in viticulture:
The current and future application of sensing technologies in vineyards can be used in
relation to:
1. Soil properties and topography: Proximal soil sensors can be mounted to mobile
platforms and moved over the field to acquire geo-referenced soil data on the go.
(Brillante et al, 2016).
2. Vegetative growth, nutritional status and canopy architecture: spectral indices such as
PCD and NDVI, computed from MSI acquired either from space (satellites) (Darra et
al, 2021)), the air (light aircraft, drones), or at ground level have been widely
employed to evaluate vine canopy growth and health in commercial vineyards.

10. 3. Pests and diseases: forecast Non-invasive technologies such as CV, thermography,
spectroscopy, Chl fluorescence, MSI and HSI can be used for disease detection in
grapevines.
4. Vine water status: Thermography has been applied to determine vine water status
manually (Fuentes et al, 2012), and remotely using UAVs and other aerial platforms
for irrigation scheduling.
5. Yield components and crop forecasting: Yield within a single block of vines has been
shown to vary up to ten-fold (Bramley et al, 2004).
6. Fruit composition and quality attributes: Tisseyre, Mazzoni, and Fonta showed that
yield and vine vigour maps from previous years are relevant in designing site-specific
management strategies for the upcoming year. (Cogato et al, 2020).
7. Vineyard sampling: The ability to map the spatial variability in vine and soil
characteristics allows grape growers to move from a ‘random sampling’ approach to a
methodology based on ‘sampling zones of uniform vine characteristics”.
8. Selective harvesting: Selective harvesting refers to the separation of fruit at harvest
ac- cording to differences in yield and/or quality criteria based on some form of
spatial information derived from the use of digital technologies such as remotely-
sensed imagery and yield maps. (Trought et al, 2011).
Technologies used in viticulture
Non-invasive sensing technologies:
An important group of technologies are those associated with remote (i.e. far from the
ground) and proximal (i.e. close to the ground) sensing which acquire information about on-
ground targets such as plants and soil.
1. Spectroscopy
2. Multispectral imaging
3. Hyperspectral imaging
4. Chlorophyll fluorescence
5. Thermography
6. Electrical resistivity and conductivity
7. LiDAR
8. Computer vision
9. Platforms
10. Space-based platforms

11. 11. Air-based platforms
Climate change:
Climate is the main factor affecting grape quality. Grapevines are one of the crops that suffers
more negative impacts under climate change, not only due to changes in temperature but also
due to water availability. Changes in timing of phenology events and in the length of the
growing season are some of the first already observed effects during the last decades, which
have further effects on grape quality and that could increase under climate change. Climate
plays an important role on berry composition, in addition to other factors such as soil
characteristics, management and cultivar. Temperature may be considered as one of the main
drivers of the evolution of the growing cycle and of the final maturity and berry composition.
Although some days with high temperatures may be beneficial during the ripening period, in
excess may induce plant stress, a reduction of photosynthesis. Under extreme temperatures,
metabolic processes and sugar accumulation may be completely stopped, although an
increase in sugar concentration may occur due to higher evaporative demand and a decrease
in berry size and weight. (Gutiérrez-Gamboa et al, 2021).
Another factor influencing grape development is water availability. Water deficit can affect
shoot growth, berry weight, berry anthocyanin and sugar content being the effect dependant
on the level of stress. The changes in temperature and in water availability may produce
changes in vine physiology and the metabolism can be modified. There is an impacts of
climate change on phenology and grape composition (sugar, acidity and anthocyanins) could
be different depending of the location of the vineyard in the landscape.
Global warming provokes in the accumulation of soluble solids in grapes, together
with a lower content of anthocyanins and acidity. This result in economic losses. Climate
adaptation strategies are essential to minimize the detrimental effects of global warming on
grape and wine quality. Following are some viticultural techniques to delay grapevine
ripening with emphasis on canopy management that may delay grapevine ripening close to 15
days. (Van Leeuwen et al., 2019)
The choose of late ripening varieties or clones.
1. Use of more vigorous rootstocks.
2. Increase the proportion of the use of autochthonous varieties
3. Irrigation.
4. Canopy management:
a. early/late pruning

12. b. severe shoot trimming
c. minimal pruning
d. late winter pruning
e. apical leaf removal
Forcing regrowth is the most interesting technique since it allows to delay grape ripening at
least of two months which can be essential in warm grapevine production areas.
Global warming incidence on the current viticulture
a. Effects of high temperatures on grapevine ripening: Different authors worldwide have
reported accelerated phenological stages for grapevines as well as, earlier dates of
phenological events including harvest. (Fraga et al., 2016)
b. Effects of high temperatures on grapevine yield: Grapevine yield depends of the
number of buds per grapevine, the number of clusters per bud (bud fertility), the
number of berries per cluster, and the berry weight. (Keller, 2020).
c. Floral initiation influenced by light: It was reported that bud fruitfulness was mostly
influenced by bud light interception, while the size of inflorescence primordia was
positively correlated with shoot growth capacity and the carbohydrate level of buds.
d. Fruit set: The flower differentiation and the percentage of fruit set determine the
number of berries per cluster and the availability of carbohydrate is the determining
key of these factors.
e. Berry size: During the second phase of grape berry development, a rapid loss of berry
weight can be registered, causing berry shrinkage phenomena. Shrinkage disorder is
associated to berry dehydration and direct sun exposure of clusters so extreme
temperatures can trigger its process. (Guti´errez-Gamboa, Pardo, & Moreno-
Simunovic, 2019).
i. CO2 accumulation: Due to global warming, it is considered that the continuously
rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentration will be likely to increase the
canopy photosynthetic potential thus increasing the grapevine productivity. (Schultz,
2000).
f. Spring frost risk: Recently, climate change influence on spring frost risk has been
discussed controversially in the scientific literature (Santos et al., 2020). High
temperatures in winter may be beneficial to grapevine productivity in cold viticulture
regions because the risk of winter frost injury is getting lower (Rigby & Porporato,
2008).
Three types of viticultural strategies could be used to delay the grape ripening:

13. To change the establishment of the vineyards.
(i) To change plant material.
(ii) To adapt different viticultural techniques.
Certain viticultural techniques can be applied to delay grape ripening based on three
basic principles:
1. Source to sink ratio limitation techniques:
Severe shoot trimming and Leaf removal: to improve cluster microclimate and the
fruit composition and to decrease disease pressure (Mosetti et al., 2016)
Shading nets: Shading net applications over the grapevine reduce the photosynthetic
photon flux at the leaf surface available for photosynthetic process and thus, may to
delay berry ripening.
Mulching strategies: It improves soil amelioration, improvement of canopy
microclimate and weeds control (Ferrara et al., 2012).
Antitranspirant sprays: The use of antitranspirants may reduce transpiration losses,
conserving water loss and by consequence, preventing berry shrinkage.
2. Management of carbon and nutritive competition between vegetative and
reproductive growth-
Late irrigation: At veraison, shoots begin to form a periderm which means the onset
of shoot maturation and along with this process, shoot growth begins to cease. Water
irrigation applied at this moment could be a useful strategy to resume shoot growth
and thus, reducing available photosynthates for the clusters.
3. Techniques related to postpone the phenological stages:
Late winter pruning: It may delay budburst by a few days and it is mainly performed
to avoid the risk of spring frost injury of vegetal tissues (Gatti et al., 2016b).
Forcing regrowth: This technique consists of cutting growing shoots, leaving several
nodes with the aim of forcing the development of new buds and thus break the bud
paradormancy. Forcing bud regrowth have allowed to move berry ripening towards
cooler periods of the growing season.
Conclusion
In case of grape, quality production is completely dependent on practically
implementation of smart viticulture practices. with respective to practical implementation of
practices, there is need to need to improve resource use efficiency, which is directly and
indirectly related to production practices viz. use suitable rootstocks, canopy management,
bud testing and management of environmental factors which plays vital role in quality

14. production. This paper provides a comprehensive review of relevance of smart viticulture
practices for quality grape production and also to meet current and future challenges
associated with climate change, shortages of labour and escalating production costs. This
review considers the climate adaptation strategies which are essential to minimize the
detrimental effects on grapevine. AI and digital technological use in viticulture with relation
to climate change, can be very useful as it can be used to transform data into different pieces
of information used by the grape grower for making informed decisions. It can be the basis
for making the correct decisions related to remaining productive as well as environmentally
and financially sustainable
References
Cogato, A., Meggio, F., Collins, C. and Marinello, F. 2020. Medium-resolution multispectral
data from sentinel-2 to assess the damage and the recovery time of late frost on vineyards.
Remote Sens (Basel) 12 (11): 18-96.
Adsule, P. G., G.S. Karibasappa, I. S. Sawant, S. D. Sawant, R.G. Somkuwar, A.K.
Upadhyay, K. Banerjee, S.D. Ramteke, J. Sharma, A.K. Sharma, J. Satisha, D.S. Yadav,
Ahammed Shabeer T.P., Amala U. and G. Hande. (2013) Good agricultural practices for
production of quality table grapes, 1-54.
Chadha, K. L. (2006). Indian viticulture scenario. In International Symposium on Grape
Production and Processing 785 (pp. 59-68).
Chen, M., Zhang, X., Pu, G., Fu, X., & Mishra, P. (2015). Efficient resource constrained
scheduling using parallel structure-aware pruning techniques. IEEE Transactions on
Computers, 65(7): 2059-2073.
Ferrara, G., Fracchiolla, M., Chami, Z. A., Camposeo, S., Lasorella, C., Pacifico, A., Aly, A.,
& Montemurro, P. (2012). Effects of mulching materials on soil and performance of cv. Nero
di Troia grapevines in the Puglia Region, southeastern Italy. American Journal of Enology
and Viticulture, 63(2): 269–276.
Fischer, G., Shah, M., N. Tubiello, F., & Van Velhuizen, H. (2005). Socio-economic and
climate change impacts on agriculture: an integrated assessment, 1990–2080. Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 360(1463): 2067-2083.
Fraga, H., Santos, J. A., Moutinho-Pereira, J., Carlos, C., Silvestre, J., Eiras-Dias, J., Mota,
T., & Malheiro, A. C. (2016). Statistical modelling of grapevine phenology in Portuguese
wine regions: Observed trends and climate change projections. Journal of Agricultural
Science, 154(5): 795–811.

15. G.C. Koufos, T. Mavromatis, S. Koundouras, & G.V. Jones. (2020). Adaptive capacity of
wine- grape varieties cultivated in Greece to climate change: current trends and future
projections, OENO One 54 (4): 1201–1219.
Gatti, M., Pirez, F. J., Chiari, G., Tombesi, S., Palliotti, A., Merli, M. C., & Poni, S. (2016).
Phenology, canopy aging and seasonal carbon balance as related to delayed winter pruning of
vitis vinifera L. cv. sangiovese grapevines. Frontiers. Plant Science, 7, 659.
Greven, M. M., Bennett, J. S., & Neal, S. M. (2014). Influence of retained node number on S
auvignon B lanc grapevine vegetative growth and yield. Australian Journal of Grape and
Wine Research, 20(2): 263-271.
Gutierrez-Gamboa, G., & Moreno-Simunovic, Y. (2019). Terroir and typicity of Carignan
from Maule Valley (Chile): The resurgence of a minority variety. Oeno One, 53(1): 75–93.
Gutiérrez-Gamboa, G., Zheng, W., & de Toda, F. M. (2021). Current viticultural techniques
to mitigate the effects of global warming on grape and wine quality: A comprehensive
review. Food Research International, 139: 109946.
Jogaiah, Satish & Somkuwar, Ramhari & Sharma, Jagdev & Upadhyay, Ajay Kumar &
Adsule, P.G. (2010). Influence of Rootstocks on Growth Yield and Fruit Composition of
Thompson Seedless Grapes Grown in the Pune Region of India. South African Journal of
Enology and Viticulture. 31. 10.21548/31-1-1392.
Keller, M. (2020). The science of grapevines. Academic Press.
L. Brillante, B. Bois, O. Mathieu, & J. Lévêque. (2016). Electrical imaging of soil water
availability to grapevine: a benchmark experiment of several machine-learning techniques,
Precision Agriculture 17 (2016): 637–658.
M. Ammoniaci , S.P. Kartsiotis , R. Perria , & P. Storchi . (2021). State of the art of
monitoring technologies and data processing for precision viticulture, Agriculture 11: 201.
M.C.T. Trought & R.G.V. Bramley. (2011). Vineyard variability in Marlborough, New
Zealand: characterising spatial and temporal changes in fruit composition and juice quality in
the vineyard, Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 17: 79–89.
Monteiro, A. I., Malheiro, A. C., & Bacelar, E. A. (2021). Morphology, physiology and
analysis techniques of grapevine bud fruitfulness: A review. Agriculture, 11(2):127.
Mosetti, D., Herrera, J. C., Sabbatini, P., Green, A., Alberti, G., Peterlunger, E., Lisjak, K., &
Castellarin, S. D. (2016). Impact of leaf removal after berry set on fruit composition and
bunch rot in “Sauvignon blanc”. Vitis, 55(2): 57–64.

16. N. Darra, E. Psomiadis, A. Kasimati, A. Anastasiou, E. & Anastasiou, & S. Fountas. (2021).
Remote and proximal sensing-derived spectral indices and biophysical variables for spatial
variation determination in vineyards, Agronomy 11: 741.
R.G.V. Bramley, & R.P. Hamilton. (2004). Understanding variability in grapevine production
systems. 1. Within vineyard variation in yield over several vintages, Aust. J. Grape Wine Res.
10: 32–45.
Rigby, J. R., & Porporato, A. (2008). Spring frost risk in a changing climate. Geophysical
Research Letters, 35(12).
Romero Azorin, P., & Garcia Garcia, J. (2020). The Productive, economic, and social
efficiency of vineyards using combined drought-tolerant rootstocks and efficient low water
volume deficit irrigation techniques under Mediterranean semiarid conditions. Sustainability,
12(5): 19-30.
S. Fuentes, R. De Bei, J. Pech, & S. Tyerman. (2012). Computational water stress indices
obtained from thermal image analysis of grapevine canopies, Irrigation Science 30 (6): 523–
536.
Santos, J. A., Fraga, H., Malheiro, A. C., Moutinho-Pereira, J., Dinis, L.-T., Correia, C.,
Moriondo, M., Leolini, L., Dibari, C., Costafreda-Aumedes, S., Kartschall, T.,Menz, C.,
Molitor, D., Junk, J., Beyer, M., & Schultz, H. R. (2020). A review of the potential climate
change impacts and adaptation options for European viticulture. Applied Sciences, 10(9): 30-
92.
Schultz, H. R. (2000). Climate change and viticulture: A European perspective on
climatology, carbon dioxide and UV-B effects. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine
Research, 6(1): 2–12.
Shinde, Prabhakar. (2016). Management of grapes rootstock vine: A business
entrepreneurship opportunity for horticulturists. International Journal of Research in
Management, Economics and Commerce. 6: 31-33.
Smart, R. E., Dick, J. K., Gravett, I. M., & Fisher, B. M. (1990). Canopy management to
improve grape yield and wine quality-principles and practices. South african journal of
Enology and Viticulture, 11(1): 3-17.
Tarara, J. M., Ferguson, J. C., Hoheisel, G. A., & Peña, J. P. (2005). Asymmetrical canopy
architecture due to prevailing wind direction and row orientation creates an imbalance in
irradiance at the fruiting zone of grapevines. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 135(1-
4):144-155.

17. Tardaguila, J., Stoll, M., Gutiérrez, S., Proffitt, T., & Diago, M. P. (2021). Smart applications
and digital technologies in viticulture: A review. Smart Agricultural Technology, 1, 100005.
Van Leeuwen, C., and Seguin, G. (2006). The concept of terroir in viticulture. Journal of
wine research, 17(1): 1-10.
Van Leeuwen, C., Roby, J. P., & Ollat, N. (2019). Viticulture in a changing climate:
Solutions exist. Vine and Wine: IVES Technical Reviews.
Walker, R. R., Blackmore, D. H., Clingeleffer, P. R., and Iacono, F. (1997). Effect of salinity
and Ramsey rootstock on ion concentrations and carbon dioxide assimilation in leaves of
drip‐irrigated, field‐grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana). Australian journal of
grape and wine research, 3(2): 66-74.
Wani, R. A., Din, S., Khan, M., Hakeem, S. A., Jahan, N., Lone, R. A., & Khan, J. A. (2021).
Canopy management in fruit crops for maximizing productivity. IJCS, 9(3): 160-165.
Y. Cai, K. Guan, D. Lobell, A.B. Potgieter, S. Wang, J. Peng, & B. Peng. (2019). integrating
satellite and climate data to predict wheat yield in Australia using machine learning
approaches, Agric For Meteorol 274: 144–159.
Satisha J, Oulkar D P, Banerjee K, Sharma J, Patil A G, Maske S R and Somkuwar R G. 2013.
Biochemically induced variations during some phenological stages in Thompson Seedless
grapevines grafted on different rootstocks. South African Journal for Enology and Viticulture
34(1): 36-45.
Satisha J, Somkuwar R G, Sharma J, Upadhyay A K and Adsule P G. 2010. Influence of Rootstocks
on Growth Yield and Fruit Composition of Thompson Seedless Grapes Grown in the Pune
Region of India South. African Journal for Enology and Viticulture 31(1):1-8.
Satisha J and Prakash G S. 2006. The influence of water and gas exchange parameters on grafted
Grapevines under conditions of moisture stress. South African Journal for Enology and
Viticulture 27(1):40-45.
Satisha J, Raveendran P and Rokade N D. 2008. Changes in polyphenol oxidase activity during
rooting of hardwood cuttings in three grape rootstocks under Indian conditions. South African
Journal for Enology and Viticulture 29: 94–97.
Satisha J, Ramteke S D and Karibasappa G S. 2007. Physiological and biochemical characterisation of
grape rootstocks. South African Journal for Enology and Viticulture 28 (2):163-168.
Shaffer R G. 2002. The Effect of Rootstock on the performance of the Vitis vinifera cultivars Pinot
Noir, Chardonnay, Pinot Gris and Merlot. A thesis submitted to Oregon State University,
United States.
Shelake T S, Shikhamany S D, Kalbhor J N and Mungare T S. 2019. Performance of Thompson
Seedless grape and its clones on Dogridge rootstock. International Journal of Horticulture 9(1):
1-9.
Singh M and Sharma J K. 2005. Effect of rootstocks on disease intensity of Perlette grape vine.
Haryana Journal of Horticultural Sciences 34:234-235.
Somkuwar R G, Satisha J and Ramteke S D. 2006a. Effect of different rootstocks on fruitfulness in
Thompson Seedless (Vitis vinifera L.) Grapes. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences 5:150-152.

18. Somkuwar R G and Ramteke S D. 2006b. Yield and quality in relation to different crop loads on Tas-
A-Ganesh Grapes. Journal of Plant Sciences 1(2):176-181.
Somkuwar R G, Jogaiah S, Sawant S D, Taware P B, Bondage D D and Itroutwar P. 2014b.
Rootstocks influence the growth, biochemical contents and disease incidence in Thompson
Seedless grapevines. British Journal of Applied Science & Technology 4(6): 1030-1041.
Somkuwar R G, Taware P B, Bhange A M, Sharma J and Khan I. 2015. Influence of different
rootstocks on growth, photosynthesis, biochemical composition and nutrient contents in Fantasy
Seedless grapes. International Journal of Fruit Science 00:1-16.
Somkuwar R G, Taware P B, Bondage D D and Navale S. 2012: Root length, root mass, and
distribution of dry matter in different parts of ‘Thompson Seedless’ grapevine grafted on
different rootstocks in heavy soil of Maharashtra. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry
36: 543–552.
Sommer K J, Islam M T and Clingeleffer P R. 2001. Sultana fruitfulness and yield as influenced by
season, rootstock and trellis type. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research 7:19-26.