Abstract
The irrigation water available for agriculture will be scarce in the future due to increased competition for water with other sectors, and the issue may become more serious due to climate change. In Chile, the table grape is only cultivated under irrigation. A five-year research program (2007–2012) was carried out in the Aconcagua Valley, the central area of grapes in Chile, to evaluate the response of table grape vines (Vitis vinifera L., cv Thompson Seedless) to different volumes of irrigation water. Four irrigation treatments were applied: 60, 88, 120 and 157% of crop evapotranspiration (ETc) during the first four years, and 40, 54, 92 and 108% of ETc in the last year. Irrigation over 90%–100% of ETc did not increase fruit yield, whereas the application of water below 90% ETc decreased exportable yield, berry size and pruning weight. For example, 60% ETc applied water reduced exportable yield by 20%, and only 40% of the berries were in the extra and large category size, while pruning weight was 30% lower in comparison to the treatment receiving more water.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 5
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation over 90%–100% of crop evapotranspiration did not increase table grape fruit yield compared with water below 90% ETc.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.
Vitis viniferae0 - Treatment
- Irrigation over 90%–100% of ETce4
- Outcome
- fruit yielde4
- Direction
- did not increasee4
- Comparator
- water below 90% ETce4
- Setting
- Aconcagua Valleye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A five-year research program (2007–2012) was carried out in the Aconcagua Valley, the central area of grapes in Chile, to evaluate the response of table grape vines (Vitis vinifera L., cv Thompson Seedless) to different volumes of irrigation water”
e4“Irrigation over 90%–100% of ETc did not increase fruit yield, whereas the application of water below 90% ETc decreased exportable yield, berry size and pruning weight”
Claim · model-written summary
Water applied below 90% of ETc decreased exportable yield, berry size and pruning weight compared with irrigation over 90%–100% of ETc.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
- Treatment
- the application of water below 90% ETce4
- Outcome
- exportable yield, berry size and pruning weighte4
- Direction
- decreasede4
- Comparator
- Irrigation over 90%–100% of ETce4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A five-year research program (2007–2012) was carried out in the Aconcagua Valley, the central area of grapes in Chile, to evaluate the response of table grape vines (Vitis vinifera L., cv Thompson Seedless) to different volumes of irrigation water”
e4“Irrigation over 90%–100% of ETc did not increase fruit yield, whereas the application of water below 90% ETc decreased exportable yield, berry size and pruning weight”
Claim · model-written summary
At 60% ETc applied water, exportable yield was reduced by 20% compared with the treatment receiving more water.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
- Treatment
- 60% ETc applied watere5
- Outcome
- exportable yielde5
- Direction
- reducede5
- Value
- 20%e5
- Comparator
- the treatment receiving more watere5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A five-year research program (2007–2012) was carried out in the Aconcagua Valley, the central area of grapes in Chile, to evaluate the response of table grape vines (Vitis vinifera L., cv Thompson Seedless) to different volumes of irrigation water”
e5“For example, 60% ETc applied water reduced exportable yield by 20%, and only 40% of the berries were in the extra and large category size, while pruning weight was 30% lower in comparison to the treatment receiving more water”
Claim · model-written summary
At 60% ETc applied water, only 40% of the berries were in the extra and large size category.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
- Treatment
- 60% ETc applied watere5
- Outcome
- berries were in the extra and large category sizee5
- Direction
- lowerinferrede5
- Value
- 40%e5
- Comparator
- the treatment receiving more watere5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A five-year research program (2007–2012) was carried out in the Aconcagua Valley, the central area of grapes in Chile, to evaluate the response of table grape vines (Vitis vinifera L., cv Thompson Seedless) to different volumes of irrigation water”
e5“For example, 60% ETc applied water reduced exportable yield by 20%, and only 40% of the berries were in the extra and large category size, while pruning weight was 30% lower in comparison to the treatment receiving more water”
Claim · model-written summary
At 60% ETc applied water, pruning weight was 30% lower than under the treatment receiving more water.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
- Treatment
- 60% ETc applied watere5
- Outcome
- pruning weighte5
- Direction
- lowere5
- Value
- 30%e5
- Comparator
- the treatment receiving more watere5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A five-year research program (2007–2012) was carried out in the Aconcagua Valley, the central area of grapes in Chile, to evaluate the response of table grape vines (Vitis vinifera L., cv Thompson Seedless) to different volumes of irrigation water”
e5“For example, 60% ETc applied water reduced exportable yield by 20%, and only 40% of the berries were in the extra and large category size, while pruning weight was 30% lower in comparison to the treatment receiving more water”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · yield · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
37 papers more in this group
See all 41 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.