Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1
Relationship between midday stem water potential (Ψs) and (A) whole plant hydraulic conductance (Kplant) during pre- and postveraison (Kplant = 0.88 + 0.55 Ψs) and (B) root to stem hydraulic conductance (Kroot-stem) (Kroot-stem = 0.23 + 0.14 Ψs) in 2006.
- Figure 2
Seasonal patterns during 2006 and 2007 of (A, B) midday stem water potential (Ψs) and leaf relative water content (RWC); (C, D) leaf photosynthesis rate (A); (E, F) stomatal conductance to water vapor (gs); and (G, H) transpiration rate (E). Vertical bars indicate the standard error of the mean. Each point is the average of eight measurements for Ψs and RWC and 12 measurements for gas exchange parameters.
- Figure 3
(A) Stomatal conductance (gs) and intrinsic water use efficiency (A/gs) measured midmorning (9:00–10:30): A/gs = 74.3 + 277.9gs − 1327.7gs2. (B, inset) gs and A/gs measured midday (12:30–14:00) during postveraison (most water-stressed period): A/gs = 102.9e(−0.5ln(gs/0.0634)/1.1535)2. (C) Midday stem water potential (Ψs) and midmorning A/gs: −122.3 − 308.6 Ψs − 111.3
. (D) gs and instantaneous water use efficiency (A/E) measured midmorning: A/E = 2.6 + 19.2gs − 66.9gs2. (E) Midday Ψs and A/E measured midmorning: A/E = −0.79 − 7.5 Ψs − 2.96 . (F) Relationship between midday Ψs and midmorning gs (gs = 0.43 + 0.22 Ψs) and (G) midmorning leaf photosynthesis rate (A) during postveraison period (A = 16.3/1 + e(−(Ψs − (−1.5))/0.25)). Horizontal and vertical dashed lines indicate different threshold values. Maximum values ranges of different indicators were calculated using the equations. Measurements were taken pre- and postveraison, June–Sept 2007. - Figure 4
Relationship between photosynthesis (A) and stomatal conductance (gs) (linear, A = 4.23 + 48.5gs, r = 0.94, p < 0.001; exponential, A = 19.4(1 − e(−6.29gs)), r = 0.95, p < 0.001). Each value is the mean per plot calculated before and after veraison (early June–end Sept) for each treatment in the two years.
- Figure 5
Development of total leaf area (A), main leaf area (B), and lateral leaf area (C) per vine at four representative times in 2007. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean. Each point is the average of 16 measurements.
- Figure 6
(A) Mean total leaf area and mean berry temperature in non-sun-exposed bunches, July–Sept 2007. Each point is a single measurement per vine. (B) Mean total leaf area and photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) in fruiting positions, July–Sept 2007. Each point is a single measurement per vine. (C) Evolution (morning) of PAR in fruiting positions for each treatment, postveraison Aug 2006–2007. Each point is the average of 12 measurements/treatment. (D) Evolution (morning) of berry temperature in non-sun-exposed bunches (inside canopy) for each treatment, preveraison July 2006–2007. Each point is the average of 20 measurements/treatment. In C and D, vertical bars represent standard error of the mean.
- Figure 7
(A) Midmorning leaf photosynthesis rate (A) at postveraison and total soluble solids (TSS) at harvest: TSS = 23.9(1 − e(−0.28A). (B) Midday stem water potential (Ψs) and TSS at pre- and postveraison: postveraison TSS = 20.5 + 2.7/(1 + e(−(Ψs−(−1.4))/0.0535)). (C) Midday Ψs and extractable polyphenols: polyext = −103.9 − 224.2 Ψs − 81.9
. (D) Ψs and total anthocyanins: anthtot = −555.4 − 1968.6 Ψs − 684.5 . (E) Preveraison midday Ψs and extractable polyphenols just after veraison: polyext = −68.9 − 126.9 Ψs. (F) Postveraison (Aug–early Sept) midday Ψs and % reduction of extractable polyphenols: %reducpolyext = −27.9 − 46.1 Ψs. In A–E, each point is the average of one plot for 2006 and 2007. Thresholds and maximum values calculated using the equations. Vertical and horizontal dashed lines represent different threshold values proposed.
Tables
- Table 1
Climate measures during different phenological stages, 2006 to 2007.
- Table 2
Mean volumetric soil water content (𝛉v) (%) in the highest fine root density zone (0–30 cm) for each treatment at four representative periods, 2006 and 2007.
- Table 3
Mean values of whole plant hydraulic conductance (Kplant: g MPa−1 s−1) and hydraulic conductance from root to stem(Kroot-stem: g MPa−1 m−2 s−1) for each treatment in different phenological stages, 2006.
- Table 4
Mean leaf chlorophyll and photosynthetic nitrogen use efficiency (NUEph) for different treatments, pre- and postveraison, 2006 to 2007.
- Table 5
Yield response for each treatment, 2006 and 2007.
- Table 6
Berry composition parameters at harvest, 2006 and 2007.
- Table 7
Threshold ranges for optimum and dangerous water stress proposed for pre- and postveraison in RDI Monastrell grapevines to avoid severe damage in root and leaf function and to improve berry quality under these edaphoclimatic conditions. Mean values of different physiological indicators maintained pre- (early June–end July) and postveraison (Aug–mid-Sept) in 2007.
Vol 61 Issue 3
