Abstract
The use of microbial biostimulants in agriculture is recognized as a sustainable approach to promoting crop productivity and quality due to improved nutrient uptake, enhanced stress tolerance, and improved ability to cope with non-optimal environments. The present paper aimed to comparatively investigate the effect of seven different commercial mycorrhizal-based treatments in terms of yield, phytochemical components, and technological traits of Malvasia di Candia Aromatica grape ( Vitis vinifera L.) plants. Metabolomic analysis and photosynthetic performance were first investigated in leaves to point out biochemical differences related to plant growth. Higher photosynthetic efficiency and better PSII functioning were found in biostimulant-treated vines, reflecting an overall decrease in photoinhibition compared to untreated plants. Untargeted metabolomics followed by multivariate statistics highlighted a robust reprogramming of primary (lipids) and secondary (alkaloids and terpenoids) metabolites in treated plants. The analysis of berry yield and chemical components exhibited significant differences depending on the biostimulant product. Generally, berries obtained from treated plants displayed improved contents of polyphenols and sugars, while yield remained unchanged. These results elucidated the significant role of microbial biostimulants in determining the quality of grape berries and eliciting biochemical changes in vines.
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 6
Claim · model-written summary
Biostimulant-treated grapevines showed higher photosynthetic efficiency and better PSII functioning than untreated plants.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.
Vitis viniferat0 - Treatment
- biostimulant-treatede0
- Outcome
- photosynthetic efficiency and better PSII functioninge0
- Direction
- Highere0
- Comparator
- untreated plantse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“grapes (Vitis vinifera L.)”
e0“Higher photosynthetic efficiency and better PSII functioning were found in biostimulant-treated vines”
e1“compared to untreated plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Biostimulant treatment reduced photoinhibition overall compared with untreated plants.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- biostimulant-treatede0
- Outcome
- photoinhibitione1
- Direction
- decreasee1
- Comparator
- untreated plantse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“grapes (Vitis vinifera L.)”
e0“biostimulant-treated vines”
e1“reflecting an overall decrease in photoinhibition compared to untreated plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Untargeted metabolomics showed a robust reprogramming of primary (lipids) and secondary (alkaloids and terpenoids) metabolites in treated plants.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- treated plantse0
- Outcome
- primary (lipids) and secondary (alkaloids and terpenoids) metabolitese0
- Direction
- reprogramminge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“grapes (Vitis vinifera L.)”
e0“Untargeted metabolomics followed by multivariate statistics highlighted a robust reprogramming of primary (lipids) and secondary (alkaloids and terpenoids) metabolites in treated plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Berry yield and chemical components differed significantly depending on the biostimulant product.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- biostimulant producte0
- Outcome
- berry yield and chemical componentse0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“grapes (Vitis vinifera L.)”
e0“The analysis of berry yield and chemical components exhibited significant differences depending on the biostimulant product”
Claim · model-written summary
Berries from treated plants had improved contents of polyphenols and sugars.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- treated plantse0
- Outcome
- contents of polyphenols and sugarse0
- Direction
- improvede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“grapes (Vitis vinifera L.)”
e0“berries obtained from treated plants displayed improved contents of polyphenols and sugars, while yield remained unchanged”
Claim · model-written summary
Berry yield remained unchanged in treated plants.
- Taxon
- Vitis vinifera L.Vitis viniferat0
- Treatment
- treated plantse0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- remained unchangede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“grapes (Vitis vinifera L.)”
e0“berries obtained from treated plants displayed improved contents of polyphenols and sugars, while yield remained unchanged”
The same questions in other papers
other · physiology: photosynthesis · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
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.