Water status and must composition in grapevine cv. Chardonnay with different soils and topography and a mini meta‐analysis of the δ¹³C/water potentials correlation

Abstract

A mini-meta-analysis was performed, which showed that the slope of the relationships between minimum Ψ and δ C was stable across studies (a change of 1‰ in δ C corresponded to a change of -0.2 MPa in the minimum Ψ ), while the intercept of the comparison δ C/Ψ changed, probably because of genetic variations between varieties, or environmental differences. © 2017 Society of Chemical Industry.

Proximal Sensing of Soil Electrical Conductivity Provides a Link to Soil-Plant Water Relationships and Supports the Identification of Plant Water Status Zones in Vineyards

“…Recent precision viticulture studies had proposed that vineyard delineation can be a plausible approach to monitor and manage spatial variability present in the vineyard (Peralta and Costa, 2013;Tagarakis et al, 2013;González-Fernández et al, 2017). Being a critical physiological parameter, plant water status was able to successfully capture the spatial variability in the final berry chemistry in previous research (Brillante et al, , 2018, and it was further studied in this specific study. Study presented here in provided evidence that the spatial variability within the vineyard can be apparent in plant physiology and berry chemistry.…”

“…In a vineyard, under the same climate condition, the processes involved in the soil-plant continuum and the atmosphere system are strictly influenced by the soil spatial variability. These would unavoidably lead to a spatial variability in plant water status and berry composition (Brillante et al, 2014(Brillante et al, , 2018Tardaguila et al, 2018). Assessing soil has been investigated in previous precision viticulture studies (Gómez-Míguez et al, 2007;Costantini et al, 2010;Bonfante et al, 2011;Brillante et al, 2017).…”

“…The ability to assess soil properties and plant water status more rapidly by proximal sensing is beneficial in commercial vineyards because it can provide the possibility to monitor and manage the spatial variability in soil responsively, that may further minimize the variations in final berry composition and wine chemistry (Brillante et al, 2018). Additionally, due to the significance of plant water status on berry chemistry, it is possible to evaluate the berry chemical composition once the relationship between soil electromagnetic properties and plant water status is determined.…”

Carbon Isotope Discrimination (δ13 C) of Grape Musts Is a Reliable Tool for Zoning and the Physiological Ground-Truthing of Sensor Maps in Precision Viticulture

“…The use of this analysis on grape musts offers operational advantages for estimating overall water status during the ripening period (Bchir et al, 2016), as it can be performed on the same substratum used for monitoring ripening, although not offering an instantaneous evaluation useful to schedule water as for the Scholander pressure chamber. Analyses of berry must δ 13 C can be performed once at the end of the season to characterize the spatial pattern of the water status at the field scale (Herrero-Langreo et al, 2013), or to better understand the response of the grapevine in a given vintage (Brillante et al, 2018b), or for comparing the water use efficiency of accessions in breeding programs. Although the direct relationship between δ 13 C and classic reporting of plant water status by leaf or stem water potential ( ) was shown by previous studies across the world (see Brillante et al, 2018b, for a recent meta-analysis), the relationship with gas exchange was much less investigated and when considering the measurement of δ 13 C on leaves contrasting results were also reported (Poni et al, 2009;Bchir et al, 2016).…”

“…Analyses of berry must δ 13 C can be performed once at the end of the season to characterize the spatial pattern of the water status at the field scale (Herrero-Langreo et al, 2013), or to better understand the response of the grapevine in a given vintage (Brillante et al, 2018b), or for comparing the water use efficiency of accessions in breeding programs. Although the direct relationship between δ 13 C and classic reporting of plant water status by leaf or stem water potential ( ) was shown by previous studies across the world (see Brillante et al, 2018b, for a recent meta-analysis), the relationship with gas exchange was much less investigated and when considering the measurement of δ 13 C on leaves contrasting results were also reported (Poni et al, 2009;Bchir et al, 2016). The relationships between grapevine predawn water potential, pd and δ 13 C were shown to vary in the intercept across cultivars and locations, but not in the slope (Brillante et al, 2018b), offering a way to translate isotope composition values to grapevine in relative, but also rising the need for calibration in new conditions, as in California.…”