Abstract
Background and Aims The effect of the timing of the initiation of irrigation during the growing season on Vitis vinifera L. Cabernet Sauvignon vines was investigated during 5 successive years. Methods and Results Five irrigation initiation thresholds based on measurement of midday stem water potential (Ψ s) were examined: at Budburst, −0.6 MPa, −0.8 MPa, −1.0 MPa and − 1.2 MPa. Midday Ψ s, gas exchange parameters [stomatal conductance (g s) and net assimilation rate (A n)] and leaf area index (LAI) were measured weekly. At harvest, 12 vines per replicate (48 per treatment) were separately harvested, the yield was determined and the number of bunches per vine recorded. During the winter period, the number of shoots per vine and the pruning mass of 12 vines per replicate were recorded separately. Vines in the early irrigation treatments (Budburst, −0.6 MPa) displayed improved Ψ s, g s and A n, accompanied by vigorous vegetative growth and high yield. The increased yield was derived from enlarged berry size and an increased number of bunches. In contrast, vines in the late irrigation treatments (−1.0 MPa, −1.2 MPa) exhibited low Ψ s, g s and A n values combined with depressed vegetative growth and reduced yield. The depression effect on late irrigation vines was cumulative and became more pronounced as trial years advanced. Our results emphasise the crucial role of water availability during springtime (vegetative growth period) on vine development, physiological performance and yield parameters. Conclusions Early irrigation initiation during spring, in which most vegetative growth processes occur, resulted in the enhancement of all vegetative and physiological parameters. Postponing irrigation initiation, however, until advanced stages of the growing season was followed by diminished vegetative growth, reduced physiological performance and decreased yield. Significance of the Study Our results provide insights into the effect of the timing of irrigation initiation on vegetative growth, physiological parameters and yield components in field-grown Cabernet Sauvignon grapevines.
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
Early irrigation initiation improved midday stem water potential, stomatal conductance and net assimilation rate relative to late irrigation in Cabernet Sauvignon grapevines.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera
Vitis viniferae0 - Material
- Cabernet Sauvignone0
- Treatment
- early irrigation treatments (Budburst, −0.6 MPa)e1
- Outcome
- Ψ s, g s and A ne1
- Direction
- improvede1
- Comparator
- late irrigation treatmentse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vitis vinifera L. Cabernet Sauvignon vines”
e1“Vines in the early irrigation treatments (Budburst, −0.6 MPa) displayed improved Ψ s, g s and A n, accompanied by vigorous vegetative growth and high yield”
e2“In contrast, vines in the late irrigation treatments (−1.0 MPa, −1.2 MPa) exhibited low Ψ s, g s and A n values combined with depressed vegetative growth and reduced yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Early irrigation vines had vigorous vegetative growth.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferae0
- Treatment
- early irrigation treatments (Budburst, −0.6 MPa)e1
- Outcome
- vigorous vegetative growthe1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vitis vinifera L. Cabernet Sauvignon vines”
e1“Vines in the early irrigation treatments (Budburst, −0.6 MPa) displayed improved Ψ s, g s and A n, accompanied by vigorous vegetative growth and high yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Early irrigation vines had high yield.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferae0
- Treatment
- early irrigation treatments (Budburst, −0.6 MPa)e1
- Outcome
- yielde1
- Direction
- highe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vitis vinifera L. Cabernet Sauvignon vines”
e1“Vines in the early irrigation treatments (Budburst, −0.6 MPa) displayed improved Ψ s, g s and A n, accompanied by vigorous vegetative growth and high yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Late irrigation vines had low midday stem water potential, stomatal conductance and net assimilation rate.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferae0
- Treatment
- late irrigation treatments (−1.0 MPa, −1.2 MPa)e2
- Outcome
- Ψ s, g s and A n valuese2
- Direction
- lowe2
- Comparator
- early irrigation treatments (Budburst, −0.6 MPa)e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vitis vinifera L. Cabernet Sauvignon vines”
e1“Vines in the early irrigation treatments (Budburst, −0.6 MPa) displayed improved Ψ s, g s and A n, accompanied by vigorous vegetative growth and high yield”
e2“In contrast, vines in the late irrigation treatments (−1.0 MPa, −1.2 MPa) exhibited low Ψ s, g s and A n values combined with depressed vegetative growth and reduced yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Late irrigation vines had depressed vegetative growth.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferae0
- Treatment
- late irrigation treatments (−1.0 MPa, −1.2 MPa)e2
- Outcome
- vegetative growthe2
- Direction
- depressede2
- Comparator
- early irrigation treatments (Budburst, −0.6 MPa)e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vitis vinifera L. Cabernet Sauvignon vines”
e1“Vines in the early irrigation treatments (Budburst, −0.6 MPa) displayed improved Ψ s, g s and A n, accompanied by vigorous vegetative growth and high yield”
e2“In contrast, vines in the late irrigation treatments (−1.0 MPa, −1.2 MPa) exhibited low Ψ s, g s and A n values combined with depressed vegetative growth and reduced yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Late irrigation vines had reduced yield.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferae0
- Treatment
- late irrigation treatments (−1.0 MPa, −1.2 MPa)e2
- Outcome
- yielde2
- Direction
- reducede2
- Comparator
- early irrigation treatments (Budburst, −0.6 MPa)e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vitis vinifera L. Cabernet Sauvignon vines”
e1“Vines in the early irrigation treatments (Budburst, −0.6 MPa) displayed improved Ψ s, g s and A n, accompanied by vigorous vegetative growth and high yield”
e2“In contrast, vines in the late irrigation treatments (−1.0 MPa, −1.2 MPa) exhibited low Ψ s, g s and A n values combined with depressed vegetative growth and reduced yield”
Claim · model-written summary
The depression effect of late irrigation was cumulative and became more pronounced as trial years advanced.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferae0
- Treatment
- late irrigation vinese3
- Outcome
- depression effecte3
- Qualifier
- became more pronounced as trial years advancede3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vitis vinifera L. Cabernet Sauvignon vines”
e3“The depression effect on late irrigation vines was cumulative and became more pronounced as trial years advanced”
Claim · model-written summary
The increased yield of early irrigation vines involved enlarged berry size.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferae0
- Outcome
- berry sizee4
- Direction
- enlargede4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vitis vinifera L. Cabernet Sauvignon vines”
e4“The increased yield was derived from enlarged berry size and an increased number of bunches”
Claim · model-written summary
The increased yield of early irrigation vines involved an increased number of bunches.
- Taxon
- Vitis viniferaVitis viniferae0
- Outcome
- number of bunchese4
- Direction
- increasede4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vitis vinifera L. Cabernet Sauvignon vines”
e4“The increased yield was derived from enlarged berry size and an increased number of bunches”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · physiology: photosynthesis · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →irrigation · growth · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →irrigation · yield · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
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.