Development of a new cold hardiness prediction model for grapevine using phased integration of acclimation and deacclimation responses
Abstract
Cold injury limits distribution of perennial agricultural crops, though replacement of plants and other management practices may allow for some damage tolerance. However, winter damage to crops such as grapevines (Vitis spp.) can result in losses in yield the following year if buds are damaged, but over many years when vines must be replaced and reach maturity before fruiting. Despite risks, grapevines are cultivated at the edge of permissible climate and rely on cold hardiness monitoring programs to determine when cold damage mitigation and management practices are required. These monitoring programs represent a critical, but laborious process for tracking cold hardiness. To reduce the need for continuous monitoring, a model (WAUS.2) using cold hardiness data collected over many years from Washington state, USA, growers was published in 2014. Although the WAUS.2 model works well regionally, it underperforms in other regions. Therefore, the objective of this work was to develop a new model (NYUS.1) that incorporates recent knowledge of cold hardiness dynamics for better prediction outcomes. Cold hardiness data from V. labruscana Concord, and V. vinifera Cabernet Sauvignon and Riesling from Geneva, NY, USA were used. Data were separated in calibration (~2/3) and validation (~1/3) datasets. The proposed model uses three functions to describe acclimation, and two functions to describe deacclimation, with a total of nine optimized parameters. A shared chill response between acclimation and deacclimation provides a phased integration where acclimation responses decrease over the course of winter and are overcome by deacclimation. The NYUS.1 model outperforms the WAUS.2 model, reducing RMSE by up to 37% depending on cultivar. The NYUS.1 model also tends to be more conservative in its prediction, slightly underpredicting cold hardiness, as opposed to the overprediction from the WAUS.2 model. Some optimized parameters were shared between cultivars, suggesting conserved physiology was captured by the new model. Highlights- Multi-year cold hardiness data from three grapevine cultivars were used for modeling - Cold hardiness was modeled based on daily temperature and accumulated chill - Phased acclimation and deacclimation processes result in cold hardiness predictions - The new model was compared to the currently available model for grapevines - The model proposed here outperforms the currently available model
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Organism
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Cold hardiness dynamics predict budbreak and associated low temperature threats in grapevine
Francisco Campos‐Arguedas, Erica Kirchhof, … Alisson P. Kovaleski·New PhytologistPeer-reviewed·Mar 8, 2026
- Integrating cold hardiness and deacclimation resistance demonstrates a conserved response to chilling accumulation in grapevines.
Jason P. Londo, Alisson P. Kovaleski·Journal of Experimental BotanyPeer-reviewed·Feb 8, 2025
- VineColD: an integrative database for global historical tracing and real-time monitoring of grapevine cold hardiness
Hongrui Wang, Jason P. Londo·DatabasePeer-reviewed·Jan 1, 2025
- NYUS.2: an Automated Machine Learning Prediction Model for the Large-scale Real-time Simulation of Grapevine Freezing Tolerance in North America
H. Wang, G. D. Moghe, … J. P. Londo·bioRxiv·Aug 21, 2023
- Cold hardiness-informed budbreak reveals role of freezing temperatures and daily fluctuation in chill accumulation model
Michael G. North, Beth Ann Workmaster, … Alisson P. Kovaleski·Journal of Experimental BotanyPeer-reviewed·Jun 28, 2024
- Tetralone-ABA enhances winter cold acclimation, reduces deacclimation, and delays budbreak in V. vinifera and V. hybrid grapevines
Hongrui Wang, Yue Pan, Jason P. Londo·Plant StressPeer-reviewed·Apr 17, 2025