Abstract
Background and Aims: Inflorescence morphology, flower formation and subsequent fruit development of grapevines are influenced by genetic, environmental and cultural practices. While the effect of temperature on inflorescence primordia number per bud is documented, its effect during dormancy and budburst (BB) on floral development is less clear. In our study, winter dormant buds were passively heated for different periods of time from mid-winter (July) to BB (October). Methods and Results: Individual canes were heated pre-BB for different periods in polyethylene tunnels. Heating during winter dormancy had no effect on the number or position of inflorescences on the shoot, or on the type of structure occurring at the outer arm position of the inflorescence. Heating buds for either July or August to BB advanced the date of BB and the start date of flowering by 12–14 and 14 days, respectively, compared with that of the unheated Control treatment. There was a significant (P < 0.05) negative correlation between the mean temperature 12 days pre-BB and flower number per shoot. The time between 50% flowering and the fruit TSS reaching 14°Brix was not influenced by winter heating or the date of flowering; the difference in this time interval, however, between the inner and outer arm components increased as shoot node number increased. Conclusions: Flower number per inflorescence had the greatest influence on the proportion of fruitset. The date of flowering of the outer arm was later at higher inflorescence positions on the shoot and later than that of the inner arm. Likewise, the outer arms of bunches higher up the shoot took longer from flowering to accumulate a fruit TSS of 14°Brix. Significance of the Study: Much of the within-vine variability in berry composition at harvest can be attributed to the position of bunches on the shoot and the presence of an outer arm. The outer arm on apical bunches took significantly longer to progress from flowering to a fruit TSS of 14°Brix, suggesting that removal would significantly reduce within-vine fruit variability.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Winter heating did not change the number or position of inflorescences on shoots.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc
Vitis viniferat0 - Treatment
- Heating during winter dormancye0
- Outcome
- number or position of inflorescencese0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Heating during winter dormancy had no effect on the number or position of inflorescences on the shoot”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
Winter heating did not change the structure type at the outer arm position.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- Heating during winter dormancye0
- Outcome
- type of structure occurring at the outer arm position of the inflorescencee0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Heating during winter dormancy had no effect on the number or position of inflorescences on the shoot, or on the type of structure occurring at the outer arm position of the inflorescence.”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
Heating from July or August to budburst advanced budburst by 12–14 days versus unheated control.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- Heating buds for either July or August to BBe0
- Outcome
- date of BBe0
- Direction
- advancede0
- Value
- 12–14e0
- Comparator
- unheated Control treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Heating buds for either July or August to BB advanced the date of BB and the start date of flowering by 12–14 and 14 days, respectively, compared with that of the unheated Control treatment.”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
Heating from July or August to budburst advanced flowering by 14 days versus unheated control.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- Heating buds for either July or August to BBe0
- Outcome
- start date of floweringe0
- Direction
- advancede0
- Value
- 14 dayse0
- Comparator
- unheated Control treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Heating buds for either July or August to BB advanced the date of BB and the start date of flowering by 12–14 and 14 days, respectively, compared with that of the unheated Control treatment.”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
Mean temperature 12 days before budburst correlated negatively with flower number per shoot.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- mean temperature 12 days pre-BBe0
- Outcome
- flower number per shoote0
- Direction
- negative correlatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was a significant (P < 0.05) negative correlation between the mean temperature 12 days pre-BB and flower number per shoot.”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
Winter heating did not influence the interval from half flowering to fruit TSS of 14°Brix.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- winter heatinge0
- Outcome
- time between 50% flowering and the fruit TSS reaching 14°Brixe0
- Direction
- not influencede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The time between 50% flowering and the fruit TSS reaching 14°Brix was not influenced by winter heating or the date of flowering”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
Flowering date did not influence the interval from half flowering to fruit TSS of 14°Brix.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- date of floweringe0
- Outcome
- time between 50% flowering and the fruit TSS reaching 14°Brixe0
- Direction
- not influencede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The time between 50% flowering and the fruit TSS reaching 14°Brix was not influenced by winter heating or the date of flowering”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
The difference in this interval between inner and outer arms increased with shoot node number.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Organ / stage
- inner and outer arm componentse0
- Outcome
- difference in this time intervale0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- shoot node number increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the difference in this time interval, however, between the inner and outer arm components increased as shoot node number increased.”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
Flower number per inflorescence had the greatest influence on fruitset proportion.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Organ / stage
- inflorescencee0
- Outcome
- proportion of fruitsete0
- Qualifier
- Flower number per inflorescencee0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Flower number per inflorescence had the greatest influence on the proportion of fruitset.”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
Outer-arm flowering was later at higher inflorescence positions.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Organ / stage
- outer arme0
- Outcome
- date of flowering of the outer arme0
- Direction
- latere0
- Qualifier
- higher inflorescence positions on the shoote0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The date of flowering of the outer arm was later at higher inflorescence positions on the shoot”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
The outer arm flowered later than the inner arm.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Outcome
- date of flowering of the outer arme0
- Direction
- latere0
- Comparator
- inner arme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The date of flowering of the outer arm was later at higher inflorescence positions on the shoot and later than that of the inner arm.”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
Outer arms of higher bunches took longer from flowering to fruit TSS of 14°Brix.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Organ / stage
- outer armse0
- Outcome
- longer from flowering to accumulate a fruit TSS of 14°Brixe0
- Direction
- longere0
- Qualifier
- bunches higher up the shoote0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the outer arms of bunches higher up the shoot took longer from flowering to accumulate a fruit TSS of 14°Brix.”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
Within-vine berry composition variability at harvest was attributed largely to bunch position.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Organ / stage
- bunchese0
- Outcome
- within-vine variability in berry composition at harveste0
- Qualifier
- position of bunches on the shoote0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Much of the within-vine variability in berry composition at harvest can be attributed to the position of bunches on the shoot and the presence of an outer arm.”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
Within-vine berry composition variability at harvest was attributed largely to an outer arm.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Organ / stage
- outer arme0
- Outcome
- within-vine variability in berry composition at harveste0
- Qualifier
- presence of an outer arme0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Much of the within-vine variability in berry composition at harvest can be attributed to the position of bunches on the shoot and the presence of an outer arm.”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
Claim · model-written summary
Removing outer arms from apical bunches was suggested to reduce within-vine fruit variability.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon BlancVitis viniferat0
- Organ / stage
- outer arm on apical bunchese0
- Outcome
- removal would significantly reduce within-vine fruit variabilitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The outer arm on apical bunches took significantly longer to progress from flowering to a fruit TSS of 14°Brix, suggesting that removal would significantly reduce within-vine fruit variability.”
t0“Vitis viniferaL. Sauvignon Blanc”
The same questions in other papers
heat · phenology · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- negative
heat · quality: sugar starch · 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
heat · soil: physics · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
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.