Abstract
Background and Aims: The aim of the study was to investigate anthocyanin composition and accumulation in grape berries in response to the partial rootzone drying (PRD) irrigation technique. Method and Results: The experiment was on Vitis vinifera cv. Cabernet Sauvignon, wherein PRD had a 40% water deficit relative to the control treatment. PRD decreased berry weight compared with the control, but did not influence total anthocyanin concentration. A significant increase in glucosides of delphinidin, cyanidin, petunidin and peonidin was found in response to PRD from the onset of anthocyanin accumulation (veraison), while malvidin-glucosides were unaffected by the irrigation treatment. The PRD treatment did not cause changes in the proportions of acetyl-, 3-p-coumaroyl- and monoglucoside anthocyanins. Wines produced from the treatments showed no difference in total monomeric anthocyanin, but relative increases (15%) in wine colour density, total tannin and polymeric pigment occurred in response to the PRD treatment. The anthocyanin composition of the wines reflected the response shown in the grapes, where the relative contribution of non-malvidin anthocyanins to total anthocyanins was significantly increased in wines from the PRD treatment. Conclusions: The differences in anthocyanin composition observed in response to PRD could not be accounted for by changes in bunch microclimate, and most likely reflect differences in the methylation step of anthocyanin synthesis. Significance of the Study: The observed changes in anthocyanin composition under the PRD irrigation system have not been previously reported in response to water deficit, and may reflect a unique response to within-vine signalling induced by PRD.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 10
Claim · model-written summary
PRD decreased berry weight compared with control.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera
Vitis viniferat0 - Treatment
- PRDe0
- Outcome
- berry weighte0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Comparator
- the controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PRD decreased berry weight compared with the control”
t0“Vitis vinifera”
Claim · model-written summary
PRD did not change total anthocyanin concentration.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- PRDe1
- Outcome
- total anthocyanin concentratione0
- Direction
- did not influencee0
- Comparator
- the controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“but did not influence total anthocyanin concentration.”
e1“PRD decreased berry weight compared with the control”
t0“Vitis vinifera”
Claim · model-written summary
PRD significantly increased glucosides of delphinidin, cyanidin, petunidin and peonidin from veraison.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Organ / stage
- veraisone0
- Treatment
- PRDe0
- Outcome
- glucosides of delphinidin, cyanidin, petunidin and peonidine0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Comparator
- the controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A significant increase in glucosides of delphinidin, cyanidin, petunidin and peonidin was found in response to PRD from the onset of anthocyanin accumulation (veraison)”
e1“PRD decreased berry weight compared with the control”
t0“Vitis vinifera”
Claim · model-written summary
PRD left malvidin glucosides unchanged.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- PRDe1
- Outcome
- malvidin-glucosidese0
- Direction
- unaffectede0
- Comparator
- the controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“while malvidin-glucosides were unaffected by the irrigation treatment.”
e1“PRD decreased berry weight compared with the control”
t0“Vitis vinifera”
Claim · model-written summary
PRD did not change proportions of three anthocyanin classes.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- PRD treatmente0
- Outcome
- proportions of acetyl-, 3-p-coumaroyl- and monoglucoside anthocyaninse0
- Direction
- did not cause changese0
- Comparator
- the controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The PRD treatment did not cause changes in the proportions of acetyl-, 3-p-coumaroyl- and monoglucoside anthocyanins.”
e1“PRD decreased berry weight compared with the control”
t0“Vitis vinifera”
Claim · model-written summary
Wines from treatments had no difference in total monomeric anthocyanin.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- PRDe1
- Outcome
- total monomeric anthocyanine0
- Direction
- no differencee0
- Comparator
- the controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Wines produced from the treatments showed no difference in total monomeric anthocyanin”
e1“PRD decreased berry weight compared with the control”
t0“Vitis vinifera”
Claim · model-written summary
PRD wines showed 15% relative increases in colour density, tannin and polymeric pigment.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- PRD treatmente0
- Outcome
- wine colour density, total tannin and polymeric pigmente0
- Direction
- increasese0
- Value
- 15%e0
- Comparator
- the controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“relative increases (15%) in wine colour density, total tannin and polymeric pigment occurred in response to the PRD treatment.”
e1“PRD decreased berry weight compared with the control”
t0“Vitis vinifera”
Claim · model-written summary
The share of non-malvidin anthocyanins was significantly higher in PRD wines.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- PRD treatmente0
- Outcome
- relative contribution of non-malvidin anthocyanins to total anthocyaninse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- the controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the relative contribution of non-malvidin anthocyanins to total anthocyanins was significantly increased in wines from the PRD treatment.”
e1“PRD decreased berry weight compared with the control”
t0“Vitis vinifera”
Claim · model-written summary
Bunch microclimate changes did not explain PRD-related anthocyanin composition differences.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- PRDe0
- Outcome
- differences in anthocyanin compositione0
- Qualifier
- could not be accounted for by changes in bunch microclimatee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The differences in anthocyanin composition observed in response to PRD could not be accounted for by changes in bunch microclimate”
t0“Vitis vinifera”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors suggest methylation differences likely explain the PRD anthocyanin response.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- PRDe1
- Outcome
- differences in anthocyanin compositione1
- Qualifier
- differences in the methylation step of anthocyanin synthesise0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“most likely reflect differences in the methylation step of anthocyanin synthesis.”
e1“differences in anthocyanin composition observed in response to PRD”
t0“Vitis vinifera”
The same questions in other papers
processing · yield · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
processing · quality: phytochemicals · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →processing · molecular: metabolites · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.