Abstract
In response to a warming and drying climate, viticulture at higher elevations could be a viable adaptation strategy for the wine industry. Nevertheless, our knowledge about the optimal water management in mountain vineyards remains limited. This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions. The research took place in the mountainous region of South Tyrol in northern Italy. Soil‐water status, several plant‐based physiological stress indicators, yield components, berry quality, and wine sensory attributes were monitored across two growing seasons. Drought stress varied in timing and intensity. In 2021, a 10‐day drought occurred during berry set, while in 2022, a more severe drought coincided with veraison and was combined with a 9‐day heatwave. Reduced soil‐water availability caused growth inhibition and impaired photosynthetic activity, particularly in 2022. Conversely, the mild to moderate water deficit during berry set caused a greater reduction in berry size and weight, and consequently in yield, than the more severe water deficit at veraison. As for berry quality traits, drought stress affected berry soluble solids accumulation, but not pH or titratable acidity. Furthermore, sensory analysis revealed distinct differences across vintages and cultivars. Wines from rainfed vines displayed enhanced hedonistic attributes (e.g., complexity, fullness, and length), particularly when the stress occurred early during the season. Generally, despite comparable stress exposure, Sauvignon Blanc vines were more drought‐sensitive, showing greater growth inhibition, decreased photosynthetic activity, substantial yield loss, and altered wine sensory profiles. Chardonnay, conversely, seemed more resilient to drought conditions, showing no discernible differences between rainfed and irrigated wines. In conclusion, this study reveals varying levels of drought tolerance between the two cultivars across two seasons. These findings may help develop cultivar‐specific irrigation schedules for mountain vineyards, enhancing water conservation, preserving yields, and ultimately achieving the desired 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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Drought stress caused growth inhibition in grapevine, particularly in 2022.
- Treatment
- drought stresse0
- Outcome
- growthe1
- Direction
- inhibitione1
- Qualifier
- particularly in 2022e1
- Comparator
- irrigatede0
VitisOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e1“caused growth inhibition and impaired photosynthetic activity, particularly in 2022”
Claim · model-written summary
Drought stress impaired photosynthetic activity in grapevine, particularly in 2022.
- Treatment
- drought stresse0
- Outcome
- photosynthetic activitye1
- Direction
- impairede1
- Qualifier
- particularly in 2022e1
- Comparator
- irrigatede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e1“caused growth inhibition and impaired photosynthetic activity, particularly in 2022”
Claim · model-written summary
The mild to moderate water deficit during berry set caused a greater reduction in berry size and weight than the more severe water deficit at veraison.
- Treatment
- the mild to moderate water deficit during berry sete2
- Outcome
- berry size and weighte2
- Direction
- greater reductione2
- Comparator
- the more severe water deficit at veraisone2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e2“the mild to moderate water deficit during berry set caused a greater reduction in berry size and weight, and consequently in yield, than the more severe water deficit at veraison”
Claim · model-written summary
The mild to moderate water deficit during berry set caused a greater reduction in yield than the more severe water deficit at veraison.
- Treatment
- the mild to moderate water deficit during berry sete2
- Outcome
- yielde2
- Direction
- greater reductione2
- Comparator
- the more severe water deficit at veraisone2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e2“the mild to moderate water deficit during berry set caused a greater reduction in berry size and weight, and consequently in yield, than the more severe water deficit at veraison”
Claim · model-written summary
Drought stress affected berry soluble solids accumulation in grapevine.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e3“drought stress affected berry soluble solids accumulation, but not pH or titratable acidity”
Claim · model-written summary
Drought stress did not change berry pH or titratable acidity in grapevine.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e3“drought stress affected berry soluble solids accumulation, but not pH or titratable acidity”
Claim · model-written summary
Sensory analysis revealed distinct wine differences across vintages and cultivars.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e4“sensory analysis revealed distinct differences across vintages and cultivars”
Claim · model-written summary
Wines from rainfed grapevines showed enhanced hedonistic attributes, such as complexity, fullness and length.
- Treatment
- rainfed vinese5
- Outcome
- hedonistic attributese5
- Direction
- enhancede5
- Qualifier
- complexity, fullness, and lengthe5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e5“Wines from rainfed vines displayed enhanced hedonistic attributes (e.g., complexity, fullness, and length), particularly when the stress occurred early during the season”
Claim · model-written summary
Sauvignon Blanc showed greater growth inhibition than Chardonnay under drought stress.
- Material
- Sauvignon Blance0
- Treatment
- drought stresse0
- Outcome
- growth inhibitione6
- Direction
- greatere6
- Comparator
- Chardonnaye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e6“showing greater growth inhibition, decreased photosynthetic activity, substantial yield loss, and altered wine sensory profiles”
Claim · model-written summary
Sauvignon Blanc showed decreased photosynthetic activity under drought stress compared with Chardonnay.
- Material
- Sauvignon Blance0
- Treatment
- drought stresse0
- Outcome
- photosynthetic activitye6
- Direction
- decreasede6
- Comparator
- Chardonnaye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e6“showing greater growth inhibition, decreased photosynthetic activity, substantial yield loss, and altered wine sensory profiles”
Claim · model-written summary
Sauvignon Blanc showed substantial yield loss under drought stress compared with Chardonnay.
- Material
- Sauvignon Blance0
- Treatment
- drought stresse0
- Outcome
- yielde6
- Direction
- losse6
- Qualifier
- substantiale6
- Comparator
- Chardonnaye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e6“showing greater growth inhibition, decreased photosynthetic activity, substantial yield loss, and altered wine sensory profiles”
Claim · model-written summary
Sauvignon Blanc wine sensory profiles were altered under drought stress compared with Chardonnay.
- Material
- Sauvignon Blance0
- Treatment
- drought stresse0
- Outcome
- wine sensory profilese6
- Direction
- alterede6
- Comparator
- Chardonnaye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e6“showing greater growth inhibition, decreased photosynthetic activity, substantial yield loss, and altered wine sensory profiles”
Claim · model-written summary
Chardonnay seemed more resilient to drought conditions than Sauvignon Blanc.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e7“Chardonnay, conversely, seemed more resilient to drought conditions, showing no discernible differences between rainfed and irrigated wines”
Claim · model-written summary
Chardonnay wines showed no discernible differences between rainfed and irrigated treatments.
- Material
- Chardonnaye7
- Treatment
- rainfede7
- Outcome
- differences between rainfed and irrigated winese7
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede7
- Comparator
- irrigated winese7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e7“Chardonnay, conversely, seemed more resilient to drought conditions, showing no discernible differences between rainfed and irrigated wines”
Claim · model-written summary
Cultivar-specific irrigation schedules may help conserve water and preserve yields in mountain vineyards.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the effect of drought stress on two grapevine cultivars (Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) under irrigated and rainfed conditions”
e1“irrigation schedules for mountain vineyards, enhancing water conservation, preserving yields, and ultimately achieving the desired wine quality”
The same questions in other papers
drought · yield · VitisResults differ
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
15 papers more in this group
See all 19 papers →drought · quality: sugar starch · VitisResults differ
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- positive
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 papers →drought · growth · VitisResults differ
25 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
28 papers more in this group
See all 32 papers →drought · physiology: photosynthesis · VitisResults differ
28 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
32 papers more in this group
See all 36 papers →drought · disease · VitisPositive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 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.