AJEV AJEV Best Papers - Free Access
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 55:3:269-275 (2004)
Copyright © 2004 by the American Society for Enology and Viticulture.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dami, I. E.
Right arrow Articles by Beam, B. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Dami, I. E.
Right arrow Articles by Beam, B. A.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Dami, I. E.
Right arrow Articles by Beam, B. A.

Response of Grapevines to Soybean Oil Application

Imed E. Dami 1 and Bradley A. Beam 2

1 Department of Horticulture and Crop Science, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, The Ohio State University, 1680 Madison Avenue, Wooster, OH 44691
2 Department of Horticultural Science, University of Minnesota, 600 Arboretum Blvd, Excelsior, MN 55331

Email: dami.1{at}osu.edu

Chancellor, Chambourcin, and Chardonel grapevines were treated with soybean oil-based adjuvants and then compared to untreated (control) vines for phytotoxicity, date of budbreak, yield components, and fruit composition. The purpose of dormant oil application was to delay budbreak without affecting date of fruit ripening, yield, or fruit composition. In the first year, Prime Oil and Amigo were applied at a 10% concentration (v/v) to runoff with a backpack sprayer on three different dates during the dormant season. Prime Oil but not Amigo was phytotoxic to dormant buds in all three cultivars. Both oil treatments led to a significant budbreak delay in all cultivars ranging from 1 to 20 days as compared to control vines. A reduced carbon dioxide exchange from oil-treated buds was associated with a delay in bud development. At harvest, cultivars that sustained bud injury from Prime Oil treatment had reduced yields and delayed fruit maturity; conversely, Amigo did not affect yield components or fruit composition. In the second year, six rates (0%, 2%, 4%, 6%, 8%, and 10%) of Amigo oil were applied to Chambourcin and Chardonel grapevines and none was phytotoxic to either cultivar. Rates of 8% and 10% (v/v) delayed budbreak in Chardonel, but not in Chambourcin. None of the rates resulted in any deleterious effects on fruit set, yield components, or fruit composition in either cultivar. Grapegrowers may consider soybean oil application as an efficient and affordable practice that may protect early cultivars against spring frost injury by delaying the date of budbreak.

Note:
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the following agencies for assistance in funding this research: Illinois Council for Food and Agriculture Research and Illinois Grape and Wine Resources Council. The authors also thank Kaan Kurtural for his assistance with the gas exchange experiment and statistical analyses.

Key words: delayed budbreak, phytotoxic, spring frost






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 by the American Society for Enology and Viticulture.