The species and origin used for red wine oak aging determines the physiological composition of the wood and thus the finished wines. In America, oak is grown primarily

Over the next 25 years, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2013) predicts a ~20% increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration compared to the current level. Concurrently, temperatures are steadily rising. Grapevines, known for their climate sensitivity, will show changes in phenology, physiological processes and grape compositions in response. Investigating eco-physiological processes provides insights into the response of field-grown grapevines to elevated CO2 conditions. A Free Air Carbon Dioxide Enrichment (FACE) facility was established in the Rheingau region of Germany. Two grapevine varieties (Vitis vinifera L., cvs. Riesling and Cabernet Sauvignon) were planted, with the VineyardFACE comprising three rings with ambient atmospheric CO2 (approx. 400 – 420 ppm from 2014 to 2023, aCO2) and three rings with elevated CO2 concentration (+20% to ambient; eCO2).

Polysaccharides (PS) are one of the main compounds found in wines, and they come mainly from the grape cell walls or from the yeasts, and they play an important role in the technological and sensory characteristics of wines. Polysaccharides obtained from yeasts have been more studied, especially mannoproteins, since there are commercial products.

The presence of undesirable compounds in wines, such as OTA, biogenic amines and pesticides residues, affects wine quality and can cause health problems for the consumer. The main tool that a winemaker has to reduce their content in the wine is fining. However, some of the fining agents commonly used in the winery can cause allergies or even increase the protein content in the wine, increasing the turbidity. To avoid these problems, the use of plant fibers may be an alternative, such as those from grape pomace[1] or other plant origins.

The use of rootstocks tolerant to soil water deficit is an interesting strategy to cope with limited water availability. Currently, several nurseries are breeding new genotypes, but the physiological basis of its responses under water stress are largely unknown. To this end, an ecophysiological assessment of the conventional 110-Richter (110R) and SO4, and the new M1 and M4 rootstocks was carried out in potted ungrafted plants. During one season, these Vitis genotypes were grown under greenhouse conditions and subjected to two water regimes, well-watered and water deficit. Water potentials of plants under water deficit down to < -1.4 MPa, and net photosynthesis (AN) <5 μmol m-2 s-1 did not cause leaf oxidative stress damage compared to well-watered conditions in any of the genotypes. The antioxidant capacity was sufficient to neutralize the mild oxidative stress suffered. Under both treatments, gravimetric differences in daily water use were observed among genotypes, leading to differences in the biomass of root, shoot and leaf. Under well-watered conditions, SO4 and 110R were the most vigorous and M1 and M4 the least. However, under water stress, SO4 exhibited the greatest reduction in biomass while M4 showed the lowest. Remarkably, under these conditions, SO4 reached the least negative stem water potential (Ψstem), while M1 reduced stomatal conductance (gs) and AN the most. In addition, SO4 and M1 genotypes also showed the highest and lowest hydraulic conductance values, respectively. Our results suggest that there are differences in water use regulation among genotypes, not only attributed to differences in stomatal regulation or intrinsic water use efficiency at the leaf level. Therefore, because no differences in canopy-to-root ratio were achieved, it is hypothesized that xylem vessel anatomical differences may be driving the reported differences among rootstocks performance. Results demonstrate that each Vitis rootstock differs in its ecophysiological responses under water stress.