EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Effect of shading on vine morphology and productivity and leaf gas exchange characteristics in grapevines in the field



Effect of shading on vine morphology and productivity and leaf gas exchange characteristics in grapevines in the field



American Journal of Enology & Viticulture 46(2): 227-234



The photosynthetic activity of grapevine leaves (Sangiovese/Kober 5BB) was evaluated under field conditions on mature vines grown under three different levels of photosynthetically active radiation (PAR, 100%, 60%, and 30% sunlight) by measuring the response of net photosynthesis (Pn) to PAR at flowering and veraison. The diurnal trends of PAR, Pn, leaf transpiration rate (E), stomatal conductance to H-2O vapor (g-s), substomatal CO-2 concentration (C-i), and leaf water potential (psi) were determined. Responses of Pn to PAR were analyzed using asymptotic exponential curves, which provided estimates of the radiation saturated rate of Pn (Pn-sat), dark respiration (R-d), light compensation, and saturation points (PAR-c and PAR-sat, respectively) and the apparent quantum yield of CO-2 assimilation (phi-i). At flowering and veraison, the leaves of shade-grown vines (60% and 30% sunlight) showed significantly lower Pn-sat, R-d, PAR-c and PAR-sat values, whereas the phi-i was significantly higher. In comparison to unshaded vines, the Pn-sat in the vines grown at 60% and 30% sunlight measured between 0900 and 1100 hours was about 62% and 54% at flowering and 81% and 65% at veraison, respectively. At both phenological stages, the diurnal pattern of Pn, g-s, and psi were positively correlated with PAR. Leaf transpiration rate was significantly reduced by shading in the early morning during flowering and in the early afternoon during veraison, whereas the calculated C-i was unaffected. All of these modifications that occurred under shading are associated with a decrease in specific leaf dry weight, leaf soluble carbohydrates and starch content, vine yield, total soluble solids in the berries, total leaf area per vine, number of axillary shoots per cane, and winter pruning weight. The increase of phi-i leaf chlorophyll content, and the change in the growth habit to a more open canopy increased the PAR trapping efficiency, which indicates an adaptability of the grapevine to low light intensity. Vine yield and berry quality decreased linearly with increasing shade intensity. A profitable management strategy is, therefore, necessary in order to assure that most of the leaves receive approximately 700 to 900 mu-mol m-2 s-1 of PAR for the greater part of the day during the entire crop cycle. All the factors that could modify the light availability at the canopy level during the growing season, such as different vineyard exposure, cloudiness, windbreak and horizontal hail netting presence, tall trellis system, and excessive shoot vigor, must be correctly evaluated in order to reduce the risks of low photosynthetic activity, low vine yield, and poorer grape quality.

(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 002604438

Download citation: RISBibTeXText



Related references

Shading affects leaf anatomy, morphology, and whole-vine net carbon exchange rate of greenhouse-grown Chardonnay grapevines. Hortscience 36(3): 507, June, 2001

Shading responses of cherimoya leaf chlorophyll content, leaf morphology, shoot growth, leaf gas exchange and fruit production under plastic house conditions. Environment Control in Biology 39(4): 255-265, 2001

Effect of canopy manipulation and ecophysiological conditions on leaf nutrient status, gas exchange and leaf vitality in grapevines. Acta Horticulturae ( 383): 281-288, 1995

Effect of canopy manipulation and ecophysiological conditions on leaf nutritional status, gas exchange and leaf vitality in grapevines. Acta Horticulturae 383: 281-288, 1995

Effects of shading on gas exchange, specific leaf weight and chlorophyll content in four kiwifruit cultivars under field conditions. Journal of Horticultural Science 68(4): 605-611, 1993

Effect of shoot positioning, leaf removal, cluster shading, and curtain orientation on fruit composition and primary bud cold hardiness in Norton/Cynthiana grapevines. Hortscience 34(3): 546, June, 1999

Effect of shading on the leaf apparatus and plant productivity in rice. Fiziologiya i Biokhimiya Kul'turnykh Rastenii 23(1): 23-29, 1991

Fruit load and canopy shading affect leaf characteristics and net gas exchange of 'Spring' navel orange trees. Tree Physiology 23(13): 899-906, 2003

Effect of chromium, molybdenum and tungsten on water exchange and productivity of grapevines. Sadovodstvo vinogradarstvo i vinodelie Moldavii: (9) 39-40, 1980

Effect of titanium on the leaf pigment composition and productivity of grapevines. Uvelichenie Proizvodstva Vinograda i Produktov Pererabotki: 37-39, 1982

Effect of drought on leaf gas exchange, carbon isotope discrimination, transpiration efficiency and productivity in field-grown durum wheat genotypes. Plant Science 170(4): 867-872, 2006

Influence of leaf area adjustment leaf position in relation to a basal cluster and lower leaf shading on grapevine productivity. Hortscience 21(3 SECT 2): 775, 1986

The influence of leaf, cluster, and berry thinning, and leaf position and shading on yield, juice composition and vine vigor of hybrid grapes. 1985

Effect of irrigation amount and preharvest irrigation cutoff date on vine water status and productivity of Danlas grapevines. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 58(3): 333-340, 2007