Paper · 2010 · Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca

Salinity Responses of Grafted Grapevines: Effects of Scion and Rootstock Genotypes

Nuray SIVRITEPE; H. Ozkan SIVRITEPE; Hakan CELIK; et al.

17
claims
34
verbatim quotes
35
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.) grafted onto Rupestris du Lot (Vitis rupestris Scheele) and 110 R (Vitis berlandieri Vitis rupestris) were grown in soil, sand, sphagnum peat and farmyard manure mixture (2:1:1:1 v/v) irrigated with 0.3, 2.7 and 5.45 dS m-1 NaCl solutions for a period of 60 days. Biomass accumulation, relative chlorophyll content, leaf water potential, stomatal conductance and transpiration were significantly reduced by salinity in all graft combinations. The inhibiting effect of salinity on growth varied according to the characteristics of the scion genotype and the level of salinity. The results imply the predominance of the scion genotype in determining variation in the leaf-level physiological characteristics of grafted vines because stomatal conductance and transpiration were higher in Sultana than in Mke at the same leaf water potential and the level of salinity, regardless of the rootstock genotype. NaCl treatments did not affect leaf Cu concentration while inducing significant Na, K, Ca, N, P, Mg, Fe, Mn and Zn elevations in the leaves of all scion/rootstock combinations. While salinity caused an increase in N content and a decrease in K content in the roots of all graft combinations, it had no influence on Ca, P, Cu and Zn concentrations. In contrast to the Sultana grafted vines, NaCl salinity led to a decrease in Mg, Fe and Mn concentrations in the roots of Mke grafted vines. Nevertheless, ion accumulation in leaves and roots of grafted vines under saline or non-saline conditions was controlled predominantly by the genotype of the scion. In response to salinity, Sultana grafts accumulated higher amounts of ions in their leaves than in their roots. However, in Mke, higher ion concentrations were seen in the roots. Therefore, the increase in the transport of inorganic ions up to the leaves seems to be the major component of osmotic adjustment in salt-stressed Sultana vines.

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 17

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Salinity significantly reduced biomass accumulation, relative chlorophyll content and leaf water potential in all graft combinations.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Material
Sultana and Mkee0
Treatment
salinitye1
Outcome
Biomass accumulation, relative chlorophyll content, leaf water potentiale1
Direction
reducede1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“Biomass accumulation, relative chlorophyll content, leaf water potential, stomatal conductance and transpiration were significantly reduced by salinity in all graft combinations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 319–496 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Salinity significantly reduced stomatal conductance and transpiration in all graft combinations.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Material
Sultana and Mkee0
Treatment
salinitye1
Outcome
stomatal conductance and transpiratione1
Direction
reducede1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“Biomass accumulation, relative chlorophyll content, leaf water potential, stomatal conductance and transpiration were significantly reduced by salinity in all graft combinations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 319–496 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NaCl treatments significantly increased leaf Na, K and Ca.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Organ / stage
leavese1
Treatment
NaCl treatmentse1
Outcome
Na, K, Cae1
Direction
elevationse1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“NaCl treatments did not affect leaf Cu concentration while inducing significant Na, K, Ca, N, P, Mg, Fe, Mn and Zn elevations in the leaves of all scion/rootstock combinations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 958–1133 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NaCl treatments significantly increased leaf N, P and Mg.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Organ / stage
leavese1
Treatment
NaCl treatmentse1
Outcome
N, P, Mge1
Direction
elevationse1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“NaCl treatments did not affect leaf Cu concentration while inducing significant Na, K, Ca, N, P, Mg, Fe, Mn and Zn elevations in the leaves of all scion/rootstock combinations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 958–1133 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NaCl treatments significantly increased leaf Fe, Mn and Zn.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Organ / stage
leavese1
Treatment
NaCl treatmentse1
Outcome
Fe, Mn and Zne1
Direction
elevationse1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“NaCl treatments did not affect leaf Cu concentration while inducing significant Na, K, Ca, N, P, Mg, Fe, Mn and Zn elevations in the leaves of all scion/rootstock combinations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 958–1133 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NaCl treatments did not affect leaf Cu concentration.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Organ / stage
leafe1
Treatment
NaCl treatmentse1
Outcome
leaf Cu concentratione1
Direction
did not affecte1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“NaCl treatments did not affect leaf Cu concentration while inducing significant Na, K, Ca, N, P, Mg, Fe, Mn and Zn elevations in the leaves of all scion/rootstock combinations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 958–1133 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Salinity increased root N content in all graft combinations.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Organ / stage
rootse1
Treatment
salinitye1
Outcome
N contente1
Direction
increasee1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“While salinity caused an increase in N content and a decrease in K content in the roots of all graft combinations, it had no influence on Ca, P, Cu and Zn concentrations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1135–1304 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Salinity decreased root K content in all graft combinations.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Organ / stage
rootse1
Treatment
salinitye1
Outcome
K contente1
Direction
decreasee1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“While salinity caused an increase in N content and a decrease in K content in the roots of all graft combinations, it had no influence on Ca, P, Cu and Zn concentrations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1135–1304 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Salinity had no influence on root Ca, P and Cu concentrations.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Organ / stage
rootse1
Treatment
salinitye1
Outcome
Ca, P, Cue1
Direction
had no influence one1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“While salinity caused an increase in N content and a decrease in K content in the roots of all graft combinations, it had no influence on Ca, P, Cu and Zn concentrations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1135–1304 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Salinity had no influence on root Zn concentration.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Organ / stage
rootse1
Treatment
salinitye1
Outcome
Zn concentrationse1
Direction
had no influence one1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“While salinity caused an increase in N content and a decrease in K content in the roots of all graft combinations, it had no influence on Ca, P, Cu and Zn concentrations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1135–1304 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In Mke grafted vines, salinity decreased root Mg, Fe and Mn concentrations.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Material
Mkee1
Organ / stage
rootse1
Treatment
NaCl salinitye1
Outcome
Mg, Fe and Mn concentrationse1
Direction
decreasee1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“In contrast to the Sultana grafted vines, NaCl salinity led to a decrease in Mg, Fe and Mn concentrations in the roots of Mke grafted vines”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1306–1445 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ion accumulation in leaves and roots under saline or non-saline conditions was controlled predominantly by the scion genotype.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Material
genotype of the scione1
Outcome
ion accumulation in leaves and rootse1

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“Nevertheless, ion accumulation in leaves and roots of grafted vines under saline or non-saline conditions was controlled predominantly by the genotype of the scion”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1447–1610 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sultana grafts accumulated higher amounts of ions in their leaves than in their roots under salinity.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Material
Sultana graftse1
Organ / stage
leavese1
Treatment
salinitye1
Outcome
higher amounts of ions in their leavese1
Direction
highere1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“In response to salinity, Sultana grafts accumulated higher amounts of ions in their leaves than in their roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1612–1722 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In Mke, higher ion concentrations were seen in the roots.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Material
Mkee1
Organ / stage
rootse1
Outcome
higher ion concentrationse1
Direction
highere1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“However, in Mke, higher ion concentrations were seen in the roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1724–1789 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stomatal conductance and transpiration were higher in Sultana than in Mke at the same leaf water potential and salinity level.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Material
Sultanae1
Outcome
stomatal conductance and transpiratione1
Direction
highere1
Qualifier
at the same leaf water potential and the level of salinitye1
Comparator
Mkee1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“stomatal conductance and transpiration were higher in Sultana than in Mke at the same leaf water potential and the level of salinity, regardless of the rootstock genotype”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–956 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The inhibiting effect of salinity on growth varied according to the scion genotype.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Material
scion genotypee1
Treatment
salinitye1
Outcome
inhibiting effect of salinity on growthe1

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“The inhibiting effect of salinity on growth varied according to the characteristics of the scion genotype and the level of salinity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 498–629 · show in text ↑
Mechanismhypothesisoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Inorganic ion transport up to the leaves seems to be the major component of osmotic adjustment in salt-stressed Sultana vines.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferae0
Outcome
osmotic adjustmente1
Qualifier
increase in the transport of inorganic ions up to the leavese1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two-year-old Sultana and Mke vines (Vitis vinifera L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
e1

“Therefore, the increase in the transport of inorganic ions up to the leaves seems to be the major component of osmotic adjustment in salt-stressed Sultana vines”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1791–1951 · show in text ↑

sodium chloride · nutrient: content · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Results agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. no effect
See all 2 papers →

salinity · physiology: water · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 1 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative
See all 4 papers →

salinity · physiology: gas exchange · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Results agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

salinity · nutrient: content · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Results agree

4 papers: 0 positive, 4 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect
See all 4 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.