Abstract
In Mediterranean vineyards, high temperatures and scarce water resources affect the quantity and quality of harvests. Crop forcing (F) is a novel approach that consists of inducing the bud burst of buds developed during the current season in order to modify the phenology of the vine and shift berry ripening to a period of moderate temperatures. The aim of this work is to evaluate the effect of F on cv. Tempranillo grapes in the semi-arid conditions of Extremadura (Spain) under different water regimes. A field experiment was carried out from 2017 to 2019 in a vineyard of cv. Tempranillo with three pruning treatments: winter pruning only (NF) and two F treatments, in which, in addition to winter pruning, forced pruning was carried out at two different phenological stages, after flowering (F1) and after fruit set (F2). These treatments were subjected to two watering regimes: irrigation covering the vines' water requirements (I) and deficit irrigation (DI) with moderate water stress during the pre-harvest period. The average delay in harvest of the F treatments compared to NF was 32 and 56 days in F1 and F2, respectively, with a decrease in the average temperature during ripening (veraison to harvest). Yield was lower in F1 and F2 than in NF regardless of water regime, although yield levels were more stable between seasons in these treatments. Titratable acidity, malic acid content, total polyphenol content and total anthocyanin content increased in the F treatments, and the combined application of F and DI improved grape composition but also resulted in a higher yield penalty.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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
F1 delayed harvest by 32 days relative to NF.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.
Vitis viniferat0 - Material
- cv. Tempranillot0
- Treatment
- F1e0
- Outcome
- delay in harveste0
- Direction
- delaye0
- Value
- 32e0
- Comparator
- NFe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average delay in harvest of the F treatments compared to NF was 32 and 56 days in F1 and F2, respectively”
t0“cv. Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
F2 delayed harvest by 56 days relative to NF.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- F2e0
- Outcome
- delay in harveste0
- Direction
- delaye0
- Value
- 56 dayse0
- Comparator
- NFe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average delay in harvest of the F treatments compared to NF was 32 and 56 days in F1 and F2, respectively”
t0“cv. Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Crop forcing decreased average ripening temperature.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- F treatmentse1
- Outcome
- average temperature during ripeninge0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Comparator
- NFe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“with a decrease in the average temperature during ripening (veraison to harvest).”
e1“The average delay in harvest of the F treatments compared to NF was 32 and 56 days in F1 and F2, respectively”
t0“cv. Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
F1 lowered yield relative to NF regardless of irrigation.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- F1e0
- Outcome
- Yielde0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Qualifier
- regardless of water regimee0
- Comparator
- NFe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield was lower in F1 and F2 than in NF regardless of water regime”
t0“cv. Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
F2 lowered yield relative to NF regardless of irrigation.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield was lower in F1 and F2 than in NF regardless of water regime”
t0“cv. Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Forcing treatments stabilized yield across seasons relative to NF.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- F1 and F2e1
- Outcome
- yield levelse0
- Direction
- more stablee0
- Comparator
- NFe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“although yield levels were more stable between seasons in these treatments.”
e1“Yield was lower in F1 and F2 than in NF regardless of water regime”
t0“cv. Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Forcing increased titratable acidity, malic acid, total polyphenols and total anthocyanins.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- F treatmentse0
- Outcome
- Titratable acidity, malic acid content, total polyphenol content and total anthocyanin contente0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- NFe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Titratable acidity, malic acid content, total polyphenol content and total anthocyanin content increased in the F treatments”
e1“The average delay in harvest of the F treatments compared to NF was 32 and 56 days in F1 and F2, respectively”
t0“cv. Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined forcing and deficit irrigation improved grape composition.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- combined application of F and DIe0
- Outcome
- grape compositione0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Comparator
- NFe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the combined application of F and DI improved grape composition but also resulted in a higher yield penalty.”
e1“The average delay in harvest of the F treatments compared to NF was 32 and 56 days in F1 and F2, respectively”
t0“cv. Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined forcing and deficit irrigation caused a higher yield penalty.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- combined application of F and DIe0
- Outcome
- yield penaltye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- NFe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the combined application of F and DI improved grape composition but also resulted in a higher yield penalty.”
e1“The average delay in harvest of the F treatments compared to NF was 32 and 56 days in F1 and F2, respectively”
t0“cv. Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L.)”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · quality: general · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- no effect
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 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
- positive
- 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.