Abstract
One of the biggest environmental challenges that most of the traditional and modern grape-growing areas are facing is the frequency, severity, and unpredictability of extreme weather events as a result of climate change. Sustainable tools such as chemically inert mineral particles could be a valid alternative for the promotion of environmentally-friendly viticultural techniques to enhance yield, improve physiological processes, and increase tolerance to biotic/abiotic stressors and grape quality. In regard to this concept, the effects of kaolin (KL) and zeolite (ZL) application was tested in the rosé grapevine cultivar Roditis, field-and rainfed, under the Mediterranean conditions of central Greece. In a two-year trial, the whole vine canopy was sprayed with kaolin and zeolite until runoff at a dose of 3% (w/v) twice throughout the growing season; the first at the beginning of veraison and the second one week later; treatment of the untreated control plants was also performed (C). The assimilation rate in morning and midday, the stomatal conductance, and the WUEi of the leaves of the treated and untreated plants were monitored one day after each application and at harvest. During the same time period of the day (i.e., morning and midday) in July, August, and September, the leaf temperature near the fruit zone was also recorded. At harvest, the yield parameters, cluster characteristics, grape composition, and incidence (%) of sunburned and dehydrated berries as well as berries infected by Plasmopara viticola and Lobesia botrana were recorded. The results showed that KL and ZL application decreased leaf temperature during the growing season until harvest compared to the control treatment, which resulted in an improvement in physiological parameters such as net photosynthesis and intrinsic water use efficiency. At harvest, the KL- and ZL-treated vines showed increased yield due to an increasing cluster and berry fresh weight. On the other hand, the KL and ZL application did not affect the sugar concentration and pH of the must and increased the total acidity and decreased the total phenolic compound content, but only in the first year of the experiments. Furthermore, the incidence of sunburn necrosis, dehydrated berries, and infected berries was significantly lower in the treated vines compared to the control vines. These results confirm the promising potential of kaolin and zeolite applications as a stress mitigation strategy during the summer period, with the ability to protect grapevine plants, enhance yield, and maintain or improve fruit quality in rainfed Mediterranean vineyards.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Kaolin decreased leaf temperature relative to control.
- Material
- Roditise1
- Treatment
- kaoline1
- Outcome
- leaf temperaturee0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Comparator
- control treatmente0
VitisOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“KL and ZL application decreased leaf temperature during the growing season until harvest compared to the control treatment”
e1“effects of kaolin (KL) and zeolite (ZL) application was tested in the rosé grapevine cultivar Roditis”
Claim · model-written summary
Zeolite decreased leaf temperature relative to control.
- Material
- Roditise1
- Treatment
- zeolitee1
- Outcome
- leaf temperaturee0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Comparator
- control treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“KL and ZL application decreased leaf temperature during the growing season until harvest compared to the control treatment”
e1“effects of kaolin (KL) and zeolite (ZL) application was tested in the rosé grapevine cultivar Roditis”
Claim · model-written summary
Kaolin improved net photosynthesis and intrinsic water use efficiency.
- Treatment
- kaoline2
- Outcome
- net photosynthesis and intrinsic water use efficiencye0
- Direction
- improvemente0
- Comparator
- control treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“improvement in physiological parameters such as net photosynthesis and intrinsic water use efficiency”
e1“KL and ZL application decreased leaf temperature during the growing season until harvest compared to the control treatment”
e2“effects of kaolin (KL) and zeolite (ZL) application was tested in the rosé grapevine cultivar Roditis”
Claim · model-written summary
Zeolite improved net photosynthesis and intrinsic water use efficiency.
- Treatment
- zeolitee2
- Outcome
- net photosynthesis and intrinsic water use efficiencye0
- Direction
- improvemente0
- Comparator
- control treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“improvement in physiological parameters such as net photosynthesis and intrinsic water use efficiency”
e1“KL and ZL application decreased leaf temperature during the growing season until harvest compared to the control treatment”
e2“effects of kaolin (KL) and zeolite (ZL) application was tested in the rosé grapevine cultivar Roditis”
Claim · model-written summary
Kaolin increased yield with increased cluster and berry fresh weight.
- Treatment
- kaoline1
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- increasing cluster and berry fresh weighte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“KL- and ZL-treated vines showed increased yield due to an increasing cluster and berry fresh weight”
e1“effects of kaolin (KL) and zeolite (ZL) application was tested in the rosé grapevine cultivar Roditis”
Claim · model-written summary
Zeolite increased yield with increased cluster and berry fresh weight.
- Treatment
- zeolitee1
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- increasing cluster and berry fresh weighte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“KL- and ZL-treated vines showed increased yield due to an increasing cluster and berry fresh weight”
e1“effects of kaolin (KL) and zeolite (ZL) application was tested in the rosé grapevine cultivar Roditis”
Claim · model-written summary
Kaolin and zeolite did not affect must sugar concentration or pH.
- Treatment
- KL and ZL applicatione0
- Outcome
- sugar concentration and pH of the muste0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“KL and ZL application did not affect the sugar concentration and pH of the must”
e1“rosé grapevine cultivar Roditis”
Claim · model-written summary
Kaolin and zeolite increased total acidity in the first year.
- Treatment
- KL and ZL applicatione0
- Outcome
- total aciditye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- first year of the experimentse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“KL and ZL application did not affect the sugar concentration and pH of the must and increased the total acidity and decreased the total phenolic compound content, but only in the first year of the experiments”
e1“rosé grapevine cultivar Roditis”
Claim · model-written summary
Kaolin and zeolite decreased total phenolic compound content in the first year.
- Treatment
- KL and ZL applicatione0
- Outcome
- total phenolic compound contente0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- first year of the experimentse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“KL and ZL application did not affect the sugar concentration and pH of the must and increased the total acidity and decreased the total phenolic compound content, but only in the first year of the experiments”
e1“rosé grapevine cultivar Roditis”
Claim · model-written summary
Treated vines had significantly lower sunburn necrosis incidence.
- Treatment
- treated vinese0
- Outcome
- incidence of sunburn necrosise0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- control vinese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“incidence of sunburn necrosis, dehydrated berries, and infected berries was significantly lower in the treated vines compared to the control vines”
e1“rosé grapevine cultivar Roditis”
Claim · model-written summary
Treated vines had significantly lower incidence of dehydrated berries.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“incidence of sunburn necrosis, dehydrated berries, and infected berries was significantly lower in the treated vines compared to the control vines”
e1“rosé grapevine cultivar Roditis”
Claim · model-written summary
Treated vines had significantly lower incidence of infected berries.
- Treatment
- treated vinese0
- Interactor
- Plasmopara viticola
Plasmopara viticolae2pathogen - Second interactor
- Lobesia botrana
Lobesia botranae2pest - Outcome
- infected berriese0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- control vinese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“incidence of sunburn necrosis, dehydrated berries, and infected berries was significantly lower in the treated vines compared to the control vines”
e1“rosé grapevine cultivar Roditis”
e2“berries infected by Plasmopara viticola and Lobesia botrana”
The same questions in other papers
kaolin · quality: sugar starch · VitisResults differ
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
kaolin · yield · VitisResults differ
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 →kaolin · physiology: photosynthesis · VitisResults differ
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →kaolin · soil: physics · VitisResults agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →other · quality: sugar starch · VitisPositive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →other · yield · VitisPositive and negative results
21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
19 papers more in this group
See all 23 papers →other · soil: physics · VitisResults agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
other · physiology: photosynthesis · VitisResults 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.