Paper · 2013 · OENO One

Effects of postveraison water regime on the phenolic composition of grapes and wines of cv. Agiorgitiko (Vitis vinifera L.)

Stefanos Koundouras; Ioannis Kanakis; Efrosyni Drossou; et al.

12
claims
25
verbatim quotes
11
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Aims: Vine water deficit is widely accepted as a powerful means to control grape and wine attributes. However, quality improvement is often achieved at the expense of a reduction in yield, especially when water deficit conditions are applied during the preveraison period. The aim of the present work was to test an irrigation regime based on manipulating water availability from veraison to harvest, as a means to control berry and wine composition with minimum effect on reproductive growth parameters. Methods and results: A field trial was conducted during two consecutive years (2007-2008) in Nemea, Southern Greece. Three irrigation treatments were applied on seven-year-old, vertical shoot positioned and spur pruned Agiorgitiko vines (Vitis vinifera L.), from veraison through harvest : irrigation at 70 % of crop evapotranspiration (ETc) (I70), irrigation at 30 % of ETc (I30) and non irrigated (NI). Irrigation amount produced significant differences in postveraison midday stem water potential pattern, especially during the drier year 2008. Yield was increased by irrigation in 2008, whereas berry growth was unaffected in both seasons. Berries of NI vines achieved higher total skin anthocyanin content in 2007, although individual anthocyanin levels were not affected by water regime. Irrigation effect on skin tannins was inconsistent but seed tannins were higher in I70 vines, with increased levels of catechin and epicatechin monomers. Among wine attributes, tannin concentration, but not anthocyanin, was mostly responsive to water deficit-induced changes in berry phenolic composition. The wines made from I70 grapes had a higher tannin content than those made from NI grapes. Conclusions: The results presented show that postveraison water regime had a significant effect on skin anthocyanins and, more markedly, on seed tannins, without altering berry growth parameters. Especially for seed tannins, this effect appears to predominate over variations in climatic conditions between years. Significance and impact of the study: This trial suggests that Agiorgitiko vines grown on the loamy soils of Nemea perform better under non irrigated conditions during the postveraison period since rainfed vines had improved phenolic composition (higher colour with lower contribution of seed tannins) without significant loss in productivity.

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 12

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmixedsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation amount significantly changed postveraison stem water potential, especially in 2008.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
Treatment
Irrigation amounte0
Outcome
postveraison midday stem water potential patterne0
Qualifier
especially during the drier year 2008e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

“Irrigation amount produced significant differences in postveraison midday stem water potential pattern, especially during the drier year 2008”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 910–1051 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vitis vinifera L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–122 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation increased yield in 2008.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
Treatment
irrigatione0
Outcome
Yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
in 2008e0

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

“Yield was increased by irrigation in 2008”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1053–1094 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vitis vinifera L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–122 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation did not change berry growth in either season.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
Treatment
irrigatione1
Outcome
berry growthe0
Direction
unaffectede0
Qualifier
both seasonse0

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

“berry growth was unaffected in both seasons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1104–1147 · show in text ↑
e1

“Yield was increased by irrigation in 2008”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1053–1094 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vitis vinifera L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–122 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nonirrigated vines had higher total skin anthocyanin content in 2007.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
Treatment
NI vinese0
Outcome
total skin anthocyanin contente0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
in 2007e0

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

“Berries of NI vines achieved higher total skin anthocyanin content in 2007”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1149–1223 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vitis vinifera L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–122 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Individual anthocyanin levels were unaffected by water regime.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
Treatment
water regimee0
Outcome
individual anthocyanin levelse0
Direction
not affectede0

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

“individual anthocyanin levels were not affected by water regime”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1234–1297 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vitis vinifera L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–122 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmixedmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The irrigation effect on skin tannins was inconsistent.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
Treatment
Irrigatione0
Outcome
skin tanninse0
Direction
inconsistente0

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

“Irrigation effect on skin tannins was inconsistent”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1299–1349 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vitis vinifera L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–122 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seed tannins were higher in I70 vines.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
Treatment
I70 vinese0
Outcome
seed tanninse0
Direction
highere0

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

“seed tannins were higher in I70 vines”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1354–1391 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vitis vinifera L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–122 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Catechin and epicatechin monomers increased in I70 vines.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
Treatment
I70 vinese0
Outcome
levels of catechin and epicatechin monomerse0
Direction
increasede0

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

“seed tannins were higher in I70 vines, with increased levels of catechin and epicatechin monomers”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1354–1451 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vitis vinifera L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–122 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wine tannin concentration responded to water deficit changes in berry phenolics.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
Treatment
water deficit-induced changese0
Outcome
tannin concentratione0

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

“tannin concentration, but not anthocyanin, was mostly responsive to water deficit-induced changes in berry phenolic composition”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1476–1603 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vitis vinifera L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–122 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wine anthocyanin was less responsive to water deficit changes in berry phenolics.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
Treatment
water deficit-induced changese0
Outcome
anthocyanine0

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

“tannin concentration, but not anthocyanin, was mostly responsive to water deficit-induced changes in berry phenolic composition”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1476–1603 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vitis vinifera L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–122 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wines from I70 grapes had higher tannin content than wines from NI grapes.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
Treatment
I70 grapese0
Outcome
tannin contente0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
NI grapese0

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

“The wines made from I70 grapes had a higher tannin content than those made from NI grapes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1605–1694 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vitis vinifera L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–122 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors suggest nonirrigated postveraison conditions for Agiorgitiko vines on Nemea loamy soils.

Taxon
Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
Material
Agiorgitiko vinese0
Outcome
perform better under non irrigated conditions during the postveraison periode0
Setting
Nemeae0

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

“Agiorgitiko vines grown on the loamy soils of Nemea perform better under non irrigated conditions during the postveraison period”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2073–2201 · show in text ↑
t0

“Vitis vinifera L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–122 · show in text ↑

irrigation · growth · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results

13 papers: 8 positive, 5 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 papers →

irrigation · quality: phytochemicals · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results

26 papers: 16 positive, 10 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

22 papers more in this group

See all 26 papers →

irrigation · yield · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results

41 papers: 24 positive, 17 negative or no effect

23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. 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.