Abstract
Salinity treatments of 0.43, 1.7 and 3.4 dS/m were applied through a drip-irrigation system to four-year-old vines of own-rooted Sultana (SO) and Sultana on Ramsey rootstock (Sr) The vines were planted in spring 1987 and established for two years under irrigation with low salinity (0.43 dS/m) water before commencing the range of salinity treatments in spring 1989. The effects of salinity and rootstock on yield, size and composition of berries, canopy size, lamina CO2 assimilation, leaf water relations and lamina ion concentrations were studied between veraison and harvest during the second season of salinity treatments. Mature leaves of SR had higher rates of CO2 assimilation (leaf area basis) and stomatal conductance than comparable leaves of SO. The high salinity treatment (3.4 dS/m) reduced CO2 assimilation rate of SO but not of SR. Medium salinity (1.7 dS/m) had no significant effect on CO2 assimilation rate of either type. Laminae of SO accumulated significantly higher concentrations of chloride than SR vines at all salinity levels. There was a significant negative correlation (r2= 0.44) between CO2 assimilation rate and laminae chloride of SO. Leaf sodium concentrations increased with increasing salinity, but concentrations in laminae at high salinity were similar in SO and SR, with SR showing no reduction in CO2 assimilation. Leaf potassium concentrations were higher in SR, but decreased with increasing salinity, whereas magnesium concentrations were similar in SO and SR vines but increased in both at high salinity. Leaf water potential and relative water content were not significantly affected by salinity in either SO or SR vines. Both vine types had reduced total leaf area and pruning wood weights as salinity increased, but they were greater in SR at all salinity levels because of the higher inherent capacity for biomass production in SR vines. The bigger canopies, lower lamina chloride concentrations and ‘normal’ photosynthesis rates of SR vines at 3.4 dS/m enabled these vines to mature crops with similar berry weights, sugar contents and fruit yield compared with those of SO vines at 0.43 dS/m. The research demonstrated the benefit of using Ramsey rootstock for Sultana under saline field conditions and provided a physiological explanation for their higher salt tolerance.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed other-oa. 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 18
Claim · model-written summary
Sultana on Ramsey rootstock had higher rates of CO2 assimilation and stomatal conductance than own-rooted Sultana.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera
Vitis viniferat0 - Material
- Sultana on Ramsey rootstocke0
- Outcome
- rates of CO2 assimilation (leaf area basis) and stomatal conductancee1
- Direction
- highere1
- Comparator
- own-rooted Sultanae0
- Setting
- field-grownt0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“own-rooted Sultana (SO) and Sultana on Ramsey rootstock (Sr)”
e1“Mature leaves of SR had higher rates of CO2 assimilation (leaf area basis) and stomatal conductance than comparable leaves of SO”
Claim · model-written summary
High salinity (3.4 dS/m) reduced CO2 assimilation rate of own-rooted Sultana but not of Sultana on Ramsey rootstock.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Material
- SOe0
- Treatment
- high salinity treatment (3.4 dS/m)e0
- Outcome
- CO2 assimilation ratee0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Setting
- field-grownt0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“The high salinity treatment (3.4 dS/m) reduced CO2 assimilation rate of SO but not of SR”
Claim · model-written summary
Medium salinity (1.7 dS/m) had no significant effect on CO2 assimilation rate of either grapevine type.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- Medium salinity (1.7 dS/m)e0
- Outcome
- CO2 assimilation ratee0
- Direction
- no significant effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“Medium salinity (1.7 dS/m) had no significant effect on CO2 assimilation rate of either type”
Claim · model-written summary
Laminae of own-rooted Sultana accumulated significantly higher chloride concentrations than Sultana on Ramsey rootstock at all salinity levels.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Material
- SOe0
- Organ / stage
- Laminaee0
- Outcome
- concentrations of chloridee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- at all salinity levelse0
- Comparator
- SR vinese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“Laminae of SO accumulated significantly higher concentrations of chloride than SR vines at all salinity levels”
Claim · model-written summary
Across own-rooted Sultana laminae, CO2 assimilation rate correlated negatively with laminae chloride (r2 = 0.44).
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Material
- SOe0
- Compound
- chloridee0
- Outcome
- CO2 assimilation ratee0
- Direction
- negative correlatione0
- Value
- r2= 0.44e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“There was a significant negative correlation (r2= 0.44) between CO2 assimilation rate and laminae chloride of SO”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf sodium concentrations increased with increasing salinity.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Organ / stage
- Leafe0
- Treatment
- increasing salinitye0
- Outcome
- Leaf sodium concentrationse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“Leaf sodium concentrations increased with increasing salinity”
Claim · model-written summary
Laminae sodium concentrations at high salinity were similar in own-rooted Sultana and Sultana on Ramsey rootstock.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Material
- SOe0
- Organ / stage
- laminaee0
- Treatment
- high salinitye0
- Outcome
- concentrations in laminaee0
- Direction
- similare0
- Comparator
- SRe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“concentrations in laminae at high salinity were similar in SO and SR”
Claim · model-written summary
Sultana on Ramsey rootstock showed no reduction in CO2 assimilation at high salinity.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Material
- SRe1
- Treatment
- high salinitye1
- Outcome
- CO2 assimilatione1
- Direction
- no reductione1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e1“concentrations in laminae at high salinity were similar in SO and SR, with SR showing no reduction in CO2 assimilation”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf potassium concentrations were higher in Sultana on Ramsey rootstock.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Material
- SRe0
- Organ / stage
- Leafe0
- Outcome
- Leaf potassium concentrationse0
- Direction
- highere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“Leaf potassium concentrations were higher in SR, but decreased with increasing salinity”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf potassium concentrations decreased with increasing salinity.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Organ / stage
- Leafe0
- Treatment
- increasing salinitye0
- Outcome
- Leaf potassium concentrationse0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“Leaf potassium concentrations were higher in SR, but decreased with increasing salinity”
Claim · model-written summary
Magnesium concentrations were similar in own-rooted Sultana and Sultana on Ramsey rootstock.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Material
- SOe0
- Outcome
- magnesium concentrationse0
- Direction
- similare0
- Comparator
- SR vinese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“magnesium concentrations were similar in SO and SR vines but increased in both at high salinity”
Claim · model-written summary
Magnesium concentrations increased in both grapevine types at high salinity.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Material
- SO and SR vinese0
- Treatment
- high salinitye0
- Outcome
- magnesium concentrationse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“magnesium concentrations were similar in SO and SR vines but increased in both at high salinity”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf water potential and relative water content were not significantly affected by salinity in either grapevine type.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Material
- SO or SR vinese0
- Treatment
- salinitye0
- Outcome
- Leaf water potential and relative water contente0
- Direction
- not significantly affectede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“Leaf water potential and relative water content were not significantly affected by salinity in either SO or SR vines”
Claim · model-written summary
Both grapevine types had reduced total leaf area and pruning wood weights as salinity increased.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Material
- Both vine typese0
- Treatment
- as salinity increasede0
- Outcome
- total leaf area and pruning wood weightse0
- Direction
- reducede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“Both vine types had reduced total leaf area and pruning wood weights as salinity increased, but they were greater in SR at all salinity levels”
Claim · model-written summary
Sultana on Ramsey rootstock had greater total leaf area and pruning wood weights than own-rooted Sultana at all salinity levels.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Material
- SRe0
- Outcome
- total leaf area and pruning wood weightse0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- at all salinity levelse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“Both vine types had reduced total leaf area and pruning wood weights as salinity increased, but they were greater in SR at all salinity levels”
Claim · model-written summary
Sultana on Ramsey rootstock at 3.4 dS/m matured crops with berry weights, sugar contents and fruit yield similar to own-rooted Sultana at 0.43 dS/m.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferat0
- Material
- SR vinese0
- Treatment
- 3.4 dS/me0
- Outcome
- berry weights, sugar contents and fruit yielde0
- Direction
- similare0
- Comparator
- SO vines at 0.43 dS/me0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“drip-irrigated, field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana)”
e0“photosynthesis rates of SR vines at 3.4 dS/m enabled these vines to mature crops with similar berry weights, sugar contents and fruit yield compared with those of SO vines at 0.43 dS/m”
Claim · model-written summary
Using Ramsey rootstock for Sultana under saline field conditions was demonstrated to be beneficial.
Verbatim
e0“The research demonstrated the benefit of using Ramsey rootstock for Sultana under saline field conditions and provided a physiological explanation for their higher salt tolerance”
Claim · model-written summary
A physiological explanation is provided for the higher salt tolerance of Sultana on Ramsey rootstock.
Verbatim
e0“The research demonstrated the benefit of using Ramsey rootstock for Sultana under saline field conditions and provided a physiological explanation for their higher salt tolerance”
The same questions in other papers
salinity · physiology: photosynthesis · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
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.