## 3 Results and Discussion
### Wine Sensory Characteristics
Figure 4: Variation in alcohol content in wine (vol.%) in 2017 and 2018 and concentration of total anthocyanins in wine (mg/L) in 2018 for different combinations of treatments (FC-HC—full crop combined with high canopy; FC-SST—full crop combined with severe shoot trimming; CT-HC—cluster thinning combined with high canopy; and CT-SST——cluster thinning combined with severe shoot trimming). Data were analyzed via one-way ANOVA in randomized blocks design. Different letters indicate significantly different means. quality of wines benefitted from this practice. The taste balance of CT wines even increased, suggesting that the alcohol content in these wines was not above the threshold that can negatively affect the sensorial perception of the wine, while the wine composition was adequate to support the given alcohol content. The higher alcohol content in CT wines resulted in enhanced perception of wine body, which is in accordance with the results previously reported by other authors [64; 65]. The same wines were also characterized by improved persistency (length in mouth), which is a wine sensorial characteristic that may be positively affected by the ethanol content [21; 66]. On the other hand, SST treatment had less enhanced persistency and lower taste balance than HC in 2017, as well as lower wine body in 2018. Interestingly, although no differences in titratable acidity among the investigated treatments were observed (Table 3), CT decreased the sensorial perception of acidity in both years and SST increased it in 2017 (Table 4). This outcome is presumably due to differences in perceived wine body and its ethanol concentration, which is capable of suppressing the perception of acidity in wines [20; 67]. [PERSON] et al. [67] reported that the reduction in perceived acidity may be due to the increase in the sensation of sweetness caused by the increased concentration of ethanol. Even though SST did not negatively affect the concentrations of total anthocyanins and phenolics in wine as compared to HC (Table 3), the sensory characteristics observed in some SST wines, such as the more pronounced vegetal aroma and acidity or the decreased perception of wine body and persistency, are usually obtained using unripe grapes [20; 65; 66; 62; 65]; these characteristics are commonly associated with lower wine quality by professional wine judges and consumers [21; 66]. From these results, it can be deduced that the lower accumulation of sugars in berries with the application of late source limitation and the lower content of alcohol in SST wines resulted in a negative impact of this treatment on the sensory quality of wine. In 2017, wines from SST had a more intense perception of coarse astringency; this trend was most probably associated with the less ripened grapes and the resultant higher amount of seed proanthocyanidins, which contribute to coarse astringency [60], and also possibly because of the increased acidity perception in the wines as the coarse astringency sensation perceived in wines may result from higher acidity [68; 69]. The same wines also had lower taste balance because of the mentioned stronger perception of acidity and coarse astringency. Higher grades of aroma intensity, aroma complexity and dark berry aroma observed in CT treatment are usually found in wines obtained with more ripe grapes and/or higher sugar content [21; 59; 65; 66; 70]. On the other hand, the more pronounced vegetal aroma perception in SST wines from 2018 is a typical sensory characteristic of grapes which are less ripened or early harvested [59; 62; 65; 66]. The higher intensity of tannin perception in CT wines from 2018 (Table 4) was most probably due to their higher concentration of total phenolics (Table 3).