“…Different methodological approaches for regional vineyard yield prediction (Barriguinha et al, 2021). In-field Airborne pollen concentration, weather data R 2 = 0,96 (Cour); R 2 = 0,99 (Hirst) (Besselat, 1987) Pollen Based Pollen concentration data In-field Airborne pollen concentration R 2 < 0,98 (for yield) (Cunha et al, 2015) Pollen Based Airborne pollen trap Simulated Airborne pollen concentration 0,71 < R 2 < 0,86 (for annual wine production) (Cunha et al, 1999) Pollen Based Pollen concentration data In-field Airborne pollen concentration R 2 = 0,93 (for yield) (Cunha et al, 2003) Pollen achieved good results simulating the fruit load based on light interception derived gross assimilation and thermal and water limitations with R 2 = 0,96 (for yield in low-density canopies) and R 2 = 0,94 (for yield in high-density canopies). Sirsat et al (Sirsat et al, 2019) focused on grape yield predictive models for flowering, coloring, and harvest phenostages using ML techniques and climatic conditions, yield, phenological dates, fertilizer data, soil analysis, and maturation index data to construct the relational dataset.…”