Table 1. Effects on Pruning Weights (lbs./vine).
|
Treatment
|
Jan. 1998
|
Jan. 2000
|
Jan. 2001
|
|||
| Native Grass |
2.2
|
b |
3.7
|
c |
2.5
|
c |
| Gr. Manure |
2.9
|
a |
4.2
|
b |
3.3
|
ab |
| Clovers |
2.9
|
a |
4.5
|
b |
3.2
|
b |
| Cereals |
2.8
|
ab |
4.4
|
b |
3.1
|
b |
| Disked |
3.2
|
a |
5.3
|
a |
3.6
|
a |
Means followed by the same letter in each column are not significantly different (LSD, P<0.05).
Table 2. Nutrient analyses of grape leaf tissue, May 2001
|
Treatment
|
Nitrate-N
(petiole) |
Total N
(blade) |
||
|
--ppm--
|
--%--
|
|||
| Native Grass |
28.0
|
c |
0.92
|
d |
| Gr. Manure |
693.3
|
a |
1.40
|
a |
| Clovers |
94.5
|
bc |
1.05
|
cd |
| Cereals |
321.5
|
b |
1.22
|
b |
| Disked |
303.5
|
b |
1.15
|
bc |
Means followed by the same letter in each column are not significantly different (LSD, P<0.05).
Table 3. Effects on juice quality.
|
Treatment
|
Brix
(% Soluble Solids) |
pH
|
Titratable Acidity
(g/100 ml) |
|
1997
|
|||
| Native Grass | 21.8 a | 3.33 a | 0.57 a |
| Gr. Manure | 22.2 a | 3.33 a | 0.62 a |
| Clovers | 22.6 a | 3.33 a | 0.65 a |
| Cereals | 22.3 a | 3.31 a | 0.61 a |
| Disked | 22.0 a | 3.30 a | 0.65 a |
|
1998
|
|||
| Native Grass | 22.7 a | 3.67 a | 0.57 b |
| Gr. Manure | 22.5 a | 3.65 a | 0.60 a |
| Clovers | 22.2 a | 3.63 a | 0.60 a |
| Cereals | 22.6 a | 3.64 a | 0.61 a |
| Disked | 22.7 a | 3.67 a | 0.60 a |
|
1999
|
|||
| Native Grass | 22.2 ab | 3.62 ab | 0.64 a |
| Gr. Manure | 22.8 a | 3.54 b | 0.64 a |
| Clovers | 21.9 b | 3.63 a | 0.65 a |
| Cereals | 22.6 ab | 3.64 a | 0.64 a |
| Disked | 22.2 ab | 3.66 a | 0.68 a |
|
2000
|
|||
| Native Grass | 23.6 a | 3.62 a | 0.54 b |
| Gr. Manure | 23.8 a | 3.57 a | 0.59 a |
| Clovers | 23.8 a | 3.66 a | 0.57 ab |
| Cereals | 23.6 a | 3.55 a | 0.59 a |
| Disked | 23.6 a | 3.57 a | 0.62 a |
Means followed by the same letter in each column are not significantly different (LSD, P<0.05).
Table 4. results of blind tasting of wines from each treatment1.
|
Treatment
|
Ranking
|
Total Votes2
|
No. of First Place Votes3
|
| Native Grass |
4
|
42
|
2
|
| Gr. Manure |
1
|
28
|
4
|
| Clovers |
2
|
31
|
3
|
| Cereals |
3
|
35
|
2
|
| Disked |
5
|
44
|
0
|
1Grapes from all replicates combined in each treatment.
2Based on scale for individual evaluations: 1 = Favorite, 5 = Least
Favorite
3Total of 11 tasters.
Table 5. Cover crop biomass (measured in mid-April).
|
Cover Crop Biomass
-- lbs. dry wt./planted acre -- |
||||||||
|
Treatment
|
1998
|
1999
|
2000
|
Mean
|
||||
| Native Grass |
6,477
|
b
|
3,179
|
bc
|
1,947
|
c
|
3,868
|
b
|
| Gr. Manure |
8,070
|
a
|
3,960
|
ab
|
4,005
|
a
|
5,345
|
a
|
| Clovers |
4,833
|
c
|
4,796
|
a
|
2,837
|
b
|
4,155
|
b
|
| Cereals |
6,634
|
b
|
2,305
|
c
|
3,282
|
b
|
4,074
|
b
|
Means followed by the same letter in each column are not significantly different (LSD, P<0.05).
Table 6. Weed biomass (measured in mid-April).
|
Weed Biomass
-- lbs. dry wt./planted acre -- |
||||||||
|
Treatment
|
1998
|
1999
|
2000
|
Mean
|
||||
| Native Grass |
367
|
b
|
7
|
b
|
31
|
b
|
135
|
a
|
| Gr. Manure |
156
|
b
|
324
|
a
|
304
|
ab
|
261
|
a
|
| Clovers |
241
|
b
|
88
|
b
|
569
|
a
|
299
|
a
|
| Cereals |
678
|
b
|
95
|
b
|
317
|
ab
|
363
|
a
|
Means followed by the same letter in each column are not significantly different (LSD, P<0.05).
Table 7. Nitrogen content of cover crop mixes
|
N Content
|
N Content
|
||||||||||||||||
|
-- % --
|
-- lbs/planted acre --
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Treatment
|
1998
|
1999
|
20001
|
Mean
|
1998
|
1999
|
2000
|
Mean
|
|||||||||
| Native Grass |
1.12
|
b
|
1.27
|
b
|
2.02
|
1.29
|
b
|
73
|
40
|
39
|
50
|
||||||
| Gr. Manure |
2.40
|
a
|
2.59
|
a
|
2.13
|
2.45
|
a
|
194
|
103
|
85
|
131
|
||||||
| Clovers |
2.72
|
a
|
2.56
|
a
|
2.91
|
2.67
|
a
|
132
|
123
|
83
|
111
|
||||||
| Cereals |
0.68
|
c
|
0.93
|
c
|
1.00
|
0.83
|
c
|
45
|
21
|
33
|
33
|
||||||
1One sample per treament only
Means followed by the same letter in each column are not significantly
different (LSD, P<0.05).
Table 8. Biomarker trends in berm and cover crop regions
over time
(Average values in nanomoles/gram dry soil)
|
Location
|
Apr-99
|
st dev
|
Jul-99
|
st dev
|
Apr-00
|
st dev
|
Aug-00
|
st dev
|
|
| Gram+ Bacteria | Berm |
23.5
|
3.0
|
23.3
|
2.0
|
24.7
|
1.3
|
30.2
|
4.9
|
| CC |
22.5
|
2.3
|
25.3
|
1.6
|
22.8
|
1.6
|
29.3
|
4.3
|
|
| Aerobic Bacteria | Berm |
2.7
|
0.4
|
3.4
|
0.5
|
2.9
|
0.1
|
3.4
|
0.5
|
| CC |
3.1
|
0.3
|
4.5
|
0.4
|
3.7
|
0.4
|
4.4
|
0.4
|
|
| Fungi | Berm |
9.9
|
3.2
|
7.0
|
2.2
|
8.1
|
2.0
|
4.8
|
1.7
|
| CC |
7.1
|
2.0
|
3.9
|
0.9
|
6.2
|
1.1
|
4.4
|
1.2
|
|
| Total PLFA (relative biomass) |
Berm |
15.6
|
6.8
|
24.7
|
5.2
|
13.8
|
3.7
|
15.4
|
5.2
|
| CC |
22.0
|
8.0
|
22.9
|
4.0
|
22.6
|
4.9
|
24.7
|
11.1
|
Table 9. Microbial biomarker lipids in cover crop and berm soils.
(Average values in nanomoles/gram dry soil)
| Gram+ Bacteria | Aerobic Bacteria | Fungi | Number of Lipids | Total PLFA | |
|
-- Cover Crop Soil --
|
|||||
| Native Grass |
24.9
|
3.7
|
5.8
|
37.0
|
28.0
|
| Gr. Manure |
24.5
|
4.1
|
5.5
|
37.0
|
23.2
|
| Clovers |
23.6
|
4.2
|
5.0
|
37.0
|
26.0
|
| Cereals |
26.6
|
3.9
|
5.4
|
35.0
|
20.2
|
| Disked |
26.6
|
4.0
|
4.6
|
35.0
|
18.0
|
|
-- Berm Soil --
|
|||||
| Native Grass |
25.0
|
3.1
|
7.7
|
36.0
|
21.0
|
| Gr. Manure |
25.0
|
3.1
|
6.9
|
34.0
|
16.6
|
| Clovers |
25.4
|
3.2
|
7.9
|
36.0
|
19.9
|
| Cereals |
25.6
|
3.1
|
7.1
|
34.0
|
16.3
|
| Disked |
25.4
|
3.1
|
8.0
|
35.0
|
18.2
|
