Differences among grapevine cultivars in their stomatal behavior and water use efficiency under progressive water stress

Agricultural Water Management

Volumn 164, Issue , 2016, Pages 91-99

  Bota, J ^a   Tomas M ^a   Flexas, J ^a   Medrano, H ^a   Escalona, J M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITAT DE LES ILLES BALEARS   (Spain)

Author keywords

Carbon isotope composition; Genetic variability; Vitis vinifera L.; Water deficit

Indexed keywords

DROUGHT; EFFICIENCY; FORESTRY; ISOTOPES; WATER CONSERVATION; WATER RESOURCES;

CARBON ISOTOPE COMPOSITION; GENETIC VARIABILITY; INTRINSIC WATER-USE EFFICIENCIES; LEAF CARBON ISOTOPES; PHOTOSYNTHETIC PARAMETERS; STOMATAL CONDUCTANCE; VITIS VINIFERA L; WATER DEFICITS;

PLANTS (BOTANY);

VITACEAE; VITIS; VITIS VINIFERA;

EID: 84952717450     PISSN: 03783774     EISSN: 18732283     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2015.07.016     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Begg J.E., Turner N.C. Water potential gradients in field tobacco. Plant Physiol. 1970, 46:343-346.
2. Bota J., Flexas J., Medrano H. Genetic variability of photosynthesis and water use in Balearic grapevine cultivars. Ann. Appl. Biol. 2001, 138:353-365.
3. Carbonneau A. Qualitative aspects, 258-276. Proc. XXVIIth World Congress of Vine and Wine 1998, 1011.
4. Chaves M.M., Santos T., Souza C.R., Ortuño M.F., Rodrigues M.L., Lopes C., Maroco J., Pereira J.S. Deficit irrigation in grapevine improves water-use efficiency while controlling vigour and production quality. Ann. Appl. Biol. 2007, 150:237-252.
5. Chaves M.M., Zarrouk O., Francisco R., Costa J.M., Santos T., Regalado A.P., Rodrigues M.L., Lopes C.M. Grapevine under déficit irrigation: hints from physiological and molecular data. Ann. Bot. 2010, 105:661-676.
6. Choné X., Dubourdieu D., Gaudillere J.P. Stem water potential is a sensitive indicator of grapevine water status. Ann. Bot. 2001, 87:477-483.
7. Cifre J., Bota J., Escalona J.M., Medrano H., Flexas J. Physiological tools for irrigation scheduling in grapevine (Vitis vinifera L). An open gate to improve water-use efficiency?. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2005, 106:159-170.
8. Costa J.M., Ortuño M.F., Lopes C.M., Chaves M.M. Grapevine varieties exhibiting differences in stomatal response to water deficit. Funct. Plant Biol. 2012, 39:179-189.
9. Escalona J.M., Flexas J., Medrano H. Stomatal and non-stomatal limitations of photosynthesis under water stress in field-grown grapevines. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 1999, 26:421-433.
10. Escalona J.M., Flexas J., Bota J., Medrano H. Distribution of leaf photo-synthesis and transpiration within grapevine canopies under different drought conditions. Vitis 2003, 42:57-64.
11. Flexas J., Galmés J., Gallé A., Gulias J., Pou A., Ribas-Carbo M., Tomás M., Medrano H. Improving water use efficiency in grapevines: potential physiologicaltargets for biotechnological improvement. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res 2010, 16:106-121.
12. Gaudillère J.P., Van L., eeuwen C., Ollat N. Carbon isotope composition of sugars in grapevine, and integrated indicator of vineyard water status. J. Exp. Bot. 2002, 53:757-763.
13. Ghaderi N., Talaie A.R., Ebadi A., Lessani H. The physiological response of three Iranian grape cultivars to progressive drought stress. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 2011, 13:601-610.
14. Gibberd M.R., Walker R.R., Blackmore D.H., Condon A.G. Transpiration efficiency and carbon-isotope discrimination of grapevines grown under well watered conditions in either glasshouse or vineyard. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 2001, 7:110-117.
15. Lovisolo C., Perrone I., Carra A., Ferrandino A., Flexas J., Medrano H., Schubert A. Drought-induced changes in development and function of grapevine (Vitis spp.) organs and in their hydraulic and non-hydraulic interactions at the whole-plant level: a physiological and molecular update. Funct. Plant Biol. 2010, 37:11-98.
16. Martorell S., Diaz-Espejo A., Tomás M., Pou A., El Aou-ouad H., Escalona J.M., Vadell J., Ribas-Carbó M., Flexas J., Medrano H. Differences in water use efficiency between two Vitis vinifera cultivars (Grenache and Tempranillo) explained by the combined response of stomata to hydraulic and chemical signals during water stress. Agric. Water Manage. 2015, 156:1-9.
17. Medrano H., Tomás M., Martorell S., Flexas J., Hernández E., Rosselló J., Pou J., Escalona J.M., Bota J. From leaf to whole-plant water use efficiency (WUE) in complex canopies: limitations of leaf WUE as a selection target. Crop J. 2015, 10.1016/j.cj.2015.04.002.
18. OIV, 2009. Description des cépages du monde. OIV 3d. París.
19. Poni S., Galbignani M., Magnanini E., Bernizzoni F., Vercesi A., Gatti M., Merli M.C. The isohydric cv. Montepulciano (Vitis vinifera L.) does not improve its whole-plant water use efficiency when subjected to pre-veraison water stress. Sci. Hortic. 2014, 179:103-111.
20. Poni S., Lakso A.N., Turner J.R., Melious R.E. The effects of pre- and post veraison water stress on growth and physiology of potted Pinot Noir grapevines at varying crop levels. Vitis 1993, 32:207-214.
21. Pou A., Medrano H., Flexas J., Tyerman S.D. A putative role for TIP and PIP aquaporins in dynamics of leaf hydraulic and stomatal conductances in grapevine under water stress and re-watering. Plant Cell Environ. 2013, 36:828-843.
22. Pou A., Medrano H., Tomás M., Martorell S., Ribas-Carbó M., Flexas J. An anisohydric grapevine variety performs better under moderate water stress and recovery than isohydric varieties. Plant Soil 2012, 359:335-349.
23. Prieto J.A., Lebon E., Ojeda H. Stomatal behavior of different grapevine cultivars in response to soil water status and air water vapor pressure deficit. J. Int. Sci. Vigne Vin 2010, 44:9-20.
24. Regner F., Hack R., Eisenheld C. Traditional and innovative grapevine breeding. Bull. l'OIV 2004, 77(885/886):811-819.
25. Rogiers S.Y., Greer D.H., Hatfield J.M., Hutton R.J., Clarke S.J., Hutchinson P.A., Somers A. Stomatal response of an anisohydric grapevine cultivar toevaporative demand, available soil moisture and abscisic acid. Tree Physiol. 2012, 32:249-261.
26. Rogiers S.Y., Greer D.H., Hutton R.J., Landsberg J.J. Does night-time transpiration contribute to anisohydric behaviour in a Vitis vinifera cultivar. J. Exp. Bot. 2009, 60:3751-3763.
27. Schultz H.R. Water relations and photosynthetic responses of two grapevine cultivars of different geographical origin during water stress. Acta Hortic. 1996, 427:251-566.
28. Schultz H.R. Differences in hydraulic architecture account for near-isohydric and anisohydric behaviour of two field-grown Vitis vinifera L. cultivars during drought. Plant Cell Environ. 2003, 26:1393-1405.
29. Sheffield J., Wood E.F. Global trends and variability in soil moisture and drought characteristics, 1950-2000, from observation-driven simulations of the terrestrial hydrologic cycle. J. Climate 2008, 21:432-458.
30. Soar C.J., Dry P.R., Loveys B.R. Scion photosynthesis and leaf gas exchange in Vitis vinifera L. cv. Shiraz: mediation of rootstock effect via xylem sap ABA. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 2006, 12:82-96.
31. 13C) of field-grown grapevines under Mediterranean climate. J. Exp. Bot. 2005, 56:2163-2172.
32. Tardieu F., Simonneau T. Variability among species of stomatal control under fluctuating soil water status and evaporative demand: modelling isohydric and anisohydric behaviours. J. Exp. Bot. 1998, 49:419-432.
33. This P., Lacombe T., Thomas M.R. Historical origins and genetic diversity of wine grapes. Trends Genet. 2006, 22:511-519.
34. Tomás M., Medrano H., Escalona J.M., Martorell S., Pou A., Ribas-Carbó M., Flexas J. Variability of water use efficiency in grapevines. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2014, 103:148-157.
35. Tomás M., Medrano H., Pou A., Escalona J.M., Martorell S., Ribas-Carbó M., Flexas J. Water use efficiency in grapevine cultivars grown under controlled conditions: effects of water stress at the leaf and whole plant level. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 2012, 18:164-172.
36. Tombesi S., Nardini A., Farinelli D., Palliotti A. Relationships between stomatal behavior, xylem vulnerability to cavitation and leaf water relations in two cultivars of Vitis vinifera. Physiol. Plant. 2014, 152:453-464.
37. Vandeleur R.K., Mayo G., Shelden M.C., Gilliham M., Kaiser B.N., Tyerman S.D. The role of plasma membrane intrinsic protein aquaporins in water transport through roots: diurnal and drought stress responses reveal different strategies between isohydric and anisohydric cultivars of grapevine. Plant Physiol. 2009, 149:445-460.
38. Williams L.E., Araujo F.J. Correlations among leaf, midday leaf and midday stem water potential and their correlations with other measures of soil and plant water status in Vitis vinifera. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 2002, 127:448-454.
39. Williams L.E., Trout T.J. Relationships among vine- and soil-based measures of water status in a 'Thompson Seedless' vineyard in response to high-frequency drip irrigation. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 2005, 56:357-366.
40. Zsófi Z., Gál L., Szilágy Z., Szücs E., Marschall M., Nagy Z., Bálo B. Use of stomatal conductance and pre-dawn water potential to classify terroir for the grape variety Kékfrankos. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 2009, 15:36-47.