Ecophysiological responses of grapevine rootstocks to water deficit
The use of rootstocks tolerant to soil water deficit is an interesting strategy to face the challenges posed by limited water availability. Currently, several nurseries are breeding new genotypes aiming to improve the water stress tolerance of grapevine, but the physiological basis of its responses under water stress are largely unknown. For this purpose, an ecophysiological assessment of the conventional 110-Rich-ter (110R) and SO4, and the new M1 and M4 rootstocks was carried out in ungrafted potted plants. During one season, these Vitis genotypes were grown under greenhouse conditions and subjected to two water regimes, well-watered (WW) and deficit irrigation (DI). Water potentials of plants under DI down to <-1.4 MPa, and net photosynthesis (A) <5 μmol COms did not cause leaf oxidative stress damage compared to WW conditions in all genotypes. The antioxidant capacity was sufficient to neutralize the mild oxidative stress suffered. Under both water regimes, gravimetric differences in daily water use were observed among genotypes, leading to differences in the biomass of roots and shoots. Under WW conditions, SO4 and 110R were the most vigorous and M1 and M4 the least. However, under DI, SO4 exhibited the greatest reduction in biomass, while 110R showed the lowest. Remarkably, under these conditions, SO4 reached the least negative stem water potential and showed the highest hydraulic conductance values. Conversely, M1 reduced the most stomatal conductance, transpiration and A. Overall, 110R achieved the highest biomass water use efficiency in response to DI, and SO4 the lowest, while M-rootstocks showed intermediate values. Our results suggest that there are differences in water use regulation among genotypes attributed not only to differences in stomatal regulation but also to plant hydraulic conductance. Therefore, it is hypothesized that differences in genotype performance may be due to root anatomical-morphological differences and to several physiological processes such as growth inhibition, osmotic adjustment, antioxidant production, nutrient translocation capacity, etc. Further studies are needed to confirm these differential ecophysiological responses of Vitis species under water stress, particularly under field and grafted conditions.
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Other Authors: | |
Format: | artículo biblioteca |
Published: |
Institute of Grapevine Breeding Geilweilerhof
2023-04-21
|
Subjects: | Antioxidant metabolism, Biomass, Chlorophyll fluorescence, Leaf gas exchange, Hydraulic conductance, Water use efficiency, |
Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/10261/337032 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
id |
dig-icvv-es-10261-337032 |
---|---|
record_format |
koha |
institution |
ICVV ES |
collection |
DSpace |
country |
España |
countrycode |
ES |
component |
Bibliográfico |
access |
En linea |
databasecode |
dig-icvv-es |
tag |
biblioteca |
region |
Europa del Sur |
libraryname |
Biblioteca del ICVV España |
topic |
Antioxidant metabolism Biomass Chlorophyll fluorescence Leaf gas exchange Hydraulic conductance Water use efficiency Antioxidant metabolism Biomass Chlorophyll fluorescence Leaf gas exchange Hydraulic conductance Water use efficiency |
spellingShingle |
Antioxidant metabolism Biomass Chlorophyll fluorescence Leaf gas exchange Hydraulic conductance Water use efficiency Antioxidant metabolism Biomass Chlorophyll fluorescence Leaf gas exchange Hydraulic conductance Water use efficiency Pérez-Álvarez, Eva Pilar Intrigliolo, Diego S. Martínez-Moreno, Alejandro García-Sánchez, Francisco Parra Gómez, Margarita Alfosea-Simón, Marina Buesa, Ignacio Ecophysiological responses of grapevine rootstocks to water deficit |
description |
The use of rootstocks tolerant to soil water deficit is an interesting strategy to face the challenges posed by limited water availability. Currently, several nurseries are breeding new genotypes aiming to improve the water stress tolerance of grapevine, but the physiological basis of its responses under water stress are largely unknown. For this purpose, an ecophysiological assessment of the conventional 110-Rich-ter (110R) and SO4, and the new M1 and M4 rootstocks was carried out in ungrafted potted plants. During one season, these Vitis genotypes were grown under greenhouse conditions and subjected to two water regimes, well-watered (WW) and deficit irrigation (DI). Water potentials of plants under DI down to <-1.4 MPa, and net photosynthesis (A) <5 μmol COms did not cause leaf oxidative stress damage compared to WW conditions in all genotypes. The antioxidant capacity was sufficient to neutralize the mild oxidative stress suffered. Under both water regimes, gravimetric differences in daily water use were observed among genotypes, leading to differences in the biomass of roots and shoots. Under WW conditions, SO4 and 110R were the most vigorous and M1 and M4 the least. However, under DI, SO4 exhibited the greatest reduction in biomass, while 110R showed the lowest. Remarkably, under these conditions, SO4 reached the least negative stem water potential and showed the highest hydraulic conductance values. Conversely, M1 reduced the most stomatal conductance, transpiration and A. Overall, 110R achieved the highest biomass water use efficiency in response to DI, and SO4 the lowest, while M-rootstocks showed intermediate values. Our results suggest that there are differences in water use regulation among genotypes attributed not only to differences in stomatal regulation but also to plant hydraulic conductance. Therefore, it is hypothesized that differences in genotype performance may be due to root anatomical-morphological differences and to several physiological processes such as growth inhibition, osmotic adjustment, antioxidant production, nutrient translocation capacity, etc. Further studies are needed to confirm these differential ecophysiological responses of Vitis species under water stress, particularly under field and grafted conditions. |
author2 |
Agencia Estatal de Investigación (España) |
author_facet |
Agencia Estatal de Investigación (España) Pérez-Álvarez, Eva Pilar Intrigliolo, Diego S. Martínez-Moreno, Alejandro García-Sánchez, Francisco Parra Gómez, Margarita Alfosea-Simón, Marina Buesa, Ignacio |
format |
artículo |
topic_facet |
Antioxidant metabolism Biomass Chlorophyll fluorescence Leaf gas exchange Hydraulic conductance Water use efficiency |
author |
Pérez-Álvarez, Eva Pilar Intrigliolo, Diego S. Martínez-Moreno, Alejandro García-Sánchez, Francisco Parra Gómez, Margarita Alfosea-Simón, Marina Buesa, Ignacio |
author_sort |
Pérez-Álvarez, Eva Pilar |
title |
Ecophysiological responses of grapevine rootstocks to water deficit |
title_short |
Ecophysiological responses of grapevine rootstocks to water deficit |
title_full |
Ecophysiological responses of grapevine rootstocks to water deficit |
title_fullStr |
Ecophysiological responses of grapevine rootstocks to water deficit |
title_full_unstemmed |
Ecophysiological responses of grapevine rootstocks to water deficit |
title_sort |
ecophysiological responses of grapevine rootstocks to water deficit |
publisher |
Institute of Grapevine Breeding Geilweilerhof |
publishDate |
2023-04-21 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10261/337032 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT perezalvarezevapilar ecophysiologicalresponsesofgrapevinerootstockstowaterdeficit AT intrigliolodiegos ecophysiologicalresponsesofgrapevinerootstockstowaterdeficit AT martinezmorenoalejandro ecophysiologicalresponsesofgrapevinerootstockstowaterdeficit AT garciasanchezfrancisco ecophysiologicalresponsesofgrapevinerootstockstowaterdeficit AT parragomezmargarita ecophysiologicalresponsesofgrapevinerootstockstowaterdeficit AT alfoseasimonmarina ecophysiologicalresponsesofgrapevinerootstockstowaterdeficit AT buesaignacio ecophysiologicalresponsesofgrapevinerootstockstowaterdeficit |
_version_ |
1781881426364334080 |
spelling |
dig-icvv-es-10261-3370322023-10-11T11:04:32Z Ecophysiological responses of grapevine rootstocks to water deficit Pérez-Álvarez, Eva Pilar Intrigliolo, Diego S. Martínez-Moreno, Alejandro García-Sánchez, Francisco Parra Gómez, Margarita Alfosea-Simón, Marina Buesa, Ignacio Agencia Estatal de Investigación (España) European Commission Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades (España) Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (España) Antioxidant metabolism Biomass Chlorophyll fluorescence Leaf gas exchange Hydraulic conductance Water use efficiency The use of rootstocks tolerant to soil water deficit is an interesting strategy to face the challenges posed by limited water availability. Currently, several nurseries are breeding new genotypes aiming to improve the water stress tolerance of grapevine, but the physiological basis of its responses under water stress are largely unknown. For this purpose, an ecophysiological assessment of the conventional 110-Rich-ter (110R) and SO4, and the new M1 and M4 rootstocks was carried out in ungrafted potted plants. During one season, these Vitis genotypes were grown under greenhouse conditions and subjected to two water regimes, well-watered (WW) and deficit irrigation (DI). Water potentials of plants under DI down to <-1.4 MPa, and net photosynthesis (A) <5 μmol COms did not cause leaf oxidative stress damage compared to WW conditions in all genotypes. The antioxidant capacity was sufficient to neutralize the mild oxidative stress suffered. Under both water regimes, gravimetric differences in daily water use were observed among genotypes, leading to differences in the biomass of roots and shoots. Under WW conditions, SO4 and 110R were the most vigorous and M1 and M4 the least. However, under DI, SO4 exhibited the greatest reduction in biomass, while 110R showed the lowest. Remarkably, under these conditions, SO4 reached the least negative stem water potential and showed the highest hydraulic conductance values. Conversely, M1 reduced the most stomatal conductance, transpiration and A. Overall, 110R achieved the highest biomass water use efficiency in response to DI, and SO4 the lowest, while M-rootstocks showed intermediate values. Our results suggest that there are differences in water use regulation among genotypes attributed not only to differences in stomatal regulation but also to plant hydraulic conductance. Therefore, it is hypothesized that differences in genotype performance may be due to root anatomical-morphological differences and to several physiological processes such as growth inhibition, osmotic adjustment, antioxidant production, nutrient translocation capacity, etc. Further studies are needed to confirm these differential ecophysiological responses of Vitis species under water stress, particularly under field and grafted conditions. This work received the financial support from the AEI with FEDER co-funding (WANUGRAPE (AGL2017-83738-C3-1R) and WANUGRAPE4.0 (PDC2021-121210-C21). E.P. Pérez-Álvarez and I. Buesa acknowledges the postdoctoral financial support received from “Juan de la Cierva” Spanish Program (IJC2019-040502-I and FJC2019-042122-I, respectively). Thanks are also due to J.S. Rubio, V. Graffato and A. Castellana for their help in the greenhouse works. 2023-10-11T11:00:12Z 2023-10-11T11:00:12Z 2023-04-21 2023-10-11T11:00:12Z artículo doi: 10.5073/vitis.2023.62.59-74 issn: 2367-4156 VITIS - Journal of Grapevine Research 62: 59-74 (2023) http://hdl.handle.net/10261/337032 #PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE# #PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE# #PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE# #PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE# info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/AEI/Plan Estatal de Investigación Científica y Técnica y de Innovación 2013-2016/AGL2017-83738-C3-1-R/ES/OPTIMIZACION DE LA EFICIENCIA EN EL USO DE AGUA Y DEL NITROGENO POR LA VID Y DE LA CALIDAD DE LA UVA Y EL VINO, COMBINANDO MATERIAL GENETICO Y FERTIRRIGACION SOSTENIBLE/ info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/AEI//PDC2021-121210-C21 info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/MINECO//IJC2019-040502-I info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/MINECO//FJC2019-042122-I Publisher's version The underlying dataset has been published as supplementary material of the article in the publisher platform at http://dx.doi.org/10.5073/vitis.2023.62.59-74 http://dx.doi.org/10.5073/vitis.2023.62.59-74 Sí open application/pdf Institute of Grapevine Breeding Geilweilerhof |