Abstract
Several recent papers have shown that in grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.), interpretation of responses to drought can differ depending upon the parameter chosen to express water use efficiency (WUE). In the present paper, a series of WUE expressions, including physiological and agronomical, were compared in potted grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sangiovese) that were either well-watered (WW) or subjected to progressive drought before veraison (WS) by supplying decreasing fractions (i.e. 70%, 50% and 30% of daily vine transpiration (Trd) determined gravimetrically before vines were fully rewatered. Although single-leaf intrinsic and instantaneous WUE increased with water stress severity, seasonal and whole-canopy WUE were similar to that before stress, at 70% Trd and upon rewatering, but dropped during severe water stress. WUE calculated as mass of DW stored in annual biomass (leaves, canes and bunches) per litre of water used did not differ on a seasonal basis, whereas WS plants showed lower must soluble solids at harvest, and unchanged colour and phenolic concentration in spite of smaller berries with higher relative skin growth. Results confirm that whole-canopy WUE is a much better index than any single-leaf based WUE parameter for extrapolation to agronomic WUE and actual grape composition. In our specific case study, it can be recommended that water supply to drought-stressed Sangiovese grapevines before veraison should not be lower than 70% of daily vine water use.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Single-leaf intrinsic and instantaneous water-use efficiency increased with water stress severity.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.
Vitis viniferat0 - Treatment
- water stress severitye0
- Outcome
- single-leaf intrinsic and instantaneous WUEe0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Although single-leaf intrinsic and instantaneous WUE increased with water stress severity”
t0“Vitis vinifera L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Seasonal and whole-canopy WUE were similar before stress, at 70% daily transpiration and after rewatering.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- 70% Trd and upon rewateringe0
- Outcome
- seasonal and whole-canopy WUEe0
- Direction
- similare0
- Comparator
- before stresse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“seasonal and whole-canopy WUE were similar to that before stress, at 70% Trd and upon rewatering”
t0“Vitis vinifera L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Seasonal and whole-canopy WUE dropped during severe water stress.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- severe water stresse0
- Outcome
- seasonal and whole-canopy WUEe0
- Direction
- droppede0
- Comparator
- before stresse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“seasonal and whole-canopy WUE were similar to that before stress, at 70% Trd and upon rewatering, but dropped during severe water stress.”
t0“Vitis vinifera L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Seasonal WUE based on dry biomass per litre of water did not differ.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Outcome
- WUE calculated as mass of DW stored in annual biomass (leaves, canes and bunches) per litre of water usede0
- Direction
- did not differe0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“WUE calculated as mass of DW stored in annual biomass (leaves, canes and bunches) per litre of water used did not differ on a seasonal basis”
t0“Vitis vinifera L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Water-stressed vines had lower must soluble solids at harvest.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Organ / stage
- muste0
- Treatment
- WSe0
- Outcome
- must soluble solidse0
- Direction
- lowere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“WS plants showed lower must soluble solids at harvest”
t0“Vitis vinifera L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Water-stressed vines had unchanged grape colour and phenolic concentration.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Outcome
- colour and phenolic concentratione0
- Direction
- unchangede0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“unchanged colour and phenolic concentration”
t0“Vitis vinifera L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Water-stressed vines had smaller berries with higher relative skin growth.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Outcome
- berriese0
- Direction
- smallere0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“smaller berries with higher relative skin growth”
t0“Vitis vinifera L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Whole-canopy WUE was judged a better index than single-leaf WUE for extrapolating to agronomic WUE and grape composition.
Verbatim
e0“whole-canopy WUE is a much better index than any single-leaf based WUE parameter for extrapolation to agronomic WUE and actual grape composition”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend supplying at least 70% of daily vine water use to drought-stressed Sangiovese before veraison.
Verbatim
e0“water supply to drought-stressed Sangiovese grapevines before veraison should not be lower than 70% of daily vine water use”
The same questions in other papers
rewatering · physiology: water · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
drought · physiology: water · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 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.