Abstract
The application of biostimulants appears to be an environmentally friendly, innovative, and sustainable agronomical tool to mitigate the negative effects induced by adverse climatology in traditional grape-growing regions such as La Rioja (Spain). However, their mechanism of action in grapevines is still unclear. We evaluated how commercial substances (two from Ascophyllum nodosum extraction and one amino acids-based biostimulant) and the non-proteinogenic amino acid β-aminobutyric acid (BABA) affect the quality and quantity of musts and grapes in Vitis vinifera L. cv. Tempranillo from a semi-arid region of La Rioja during two seasons. We hypothesized an enhancement in organic metabolites in berries and leaves in response to these treatments, changing the organoleptic characteristics of the final products. The treatments altered the primary metabolites such as carbohydrates, organic acids (AcOrg), and free amino acids, first in the leaves as the effect of the foliar application and second in grapes and musts. As the main result, the biostimulant efficiency depended on the climatology and vineyard location to improve the final yield. Whereas biostimulant application enhanced the yield in 2018 (less dry year), it did not help production in 2019 (dry year). BABA was the most efficient biostimulant, enhancing plant production. Regarding yield quality, the biostimulant application improved the musts mainly by enhancing the fumaric acid content and by reducing carbohydrates, except in BABA-treated plants, where they were accumulated. These results corroborate biostimulants as an exciting approach in wine production, especially for improving wine quality.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Biostimulants altered carbohydrates, organic acids and free amino acids in leaves, grapes and musts.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L. cv. Tempranillo
Vitis viniferae1 - Organ / stage
- leavese0
- Treatment
- The treatmentse0
- Outcome
- carbohydrates, organic acids (AcOrg), and free amino acidse0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The treatments altered the primary metabolites such as carbohydrates, organic acids (AcOrg), and free amino acids, first in the leaves as the effect of the foliar application and second in grapes and musts.”
e1“Vitis vinifera L. cv. Tempranillo”
Claim · model-written summary
Biostimulant application enhanced grape yield in 2018.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L. cv. TempranilloVitis viniferae1
- Treatment
- biostimulant applicatione0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- enhancede0
- Qualifier
- 2018 (less dry year)e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“biostimulant application enhanced the yield in 2018 (less dry year)”
e1“Vitis vinifera L. cv. Tempranillo”
Claim · model-written summary
Biostimulants did not help grape production in dry 2019.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L. cv. TempranilloVitis viniferae2
- Treatment
- biostimulant applicatione1
- Outcome
- productione0
- Direction
- did not helpe0
- Qualifier
- 2019 (dry year)e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“it did not help production in 2019 (dry year)”
e1“biostimulant application enhanced the yield in 2018”
e2“Vitis vinifera L. cv. Tempranillo”
Claim · model-written summary
BABA was the most efficient biostimulant for plant production.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L. cv. TempranilloVitis viniferae1
- Treatment
- BABAe0
- Outcome
- plant productione0
- Direction
- enhancinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“BABA was the most efficient biostimulant, enhancing plant production.”
e1“Vitis vinifera L. cv. Tempranillo”
Claim · model-written summary
Biostimulants increased fumaric acid content in musts.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L. cv. TempranilloVitis viniferae1
- Organ / stage
- mustse0
- Treatment
- biostimulant applicatione0
- Outcome
- fumaric acid contente0
- Direction
- enhancinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“biostimulant application improved the musts mainly by enhancing the fumaric acid content”
e1“Vitis vinifera L. cv. Tempranillo”
Claim · model-written summary
Biostimulants reduced carbohydrates in musts except with BABA.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L. cv. TempranilloVitis viniferae2
- Treatment
- biostimulant applicatione1
- Outcome
- carbohydratese0
- Direction
- reducinge0
- Qualifier
- except in BABA-treated plantse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“by reducing carbohydrates, except in BABA-treated plants, where they were accumulated”
e1“biostimulant application improved the musts”
e2“Vitis vinifera L. cv. Tempranillo”
Claim · model-written summary
BABA treated plants accumulated carbohydrates in musts.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L. cv. TempranilloVitis viniferae2
- Treatment
- BABA-treated plantse0
- Outcome
- carbohydratese1
- Direction
- accumulatede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“except in BABA-treated plants, where they were accumulated”
e1“by reducing carbohydrates”
e2“Vitis vinifera L. cv. Tempranillo”
The same questions in other papers
other · quality: sugar starch · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
other · molecular: metabolites · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →other · yield · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Results agree
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.