Effect of foliar treatment of methyl jasmonate and nanoparticles doped with methyl jasmonate on Monastrell grape skin cell wall

According to the different concern of the ‘traditional’ and the ‘new’ wine-producing Countries, a variable importance is recognized to the climate/soil and to grapevine cultivars as factors affecting the wine quality. However, the viticultural experience can state that, within each area, climate and soil plays an incontestable role in affecting grape quality, and consequently wine quality, as well as the genetic characteristics of the cultivar.

The climatic component is one of the elements of the zoning of viticultural potential, alongside the geological and pedological components (Morlat, 1989; Lebon et al , 1993). Many climatic indices have thus been defined to estimate the potential for wine production at the scale of a region or a country (Carbonneau et al ., 1992). The main climatic variables used are temperature and radiation. We note in particular the indices of Branas, Huglin and Ribereau-Gayon (Huglin, 1986). However, few studies have been undertaken on the spatial variability of microclimatic conditions at the scale of a vineyard, a valley, or even a municipality.

Copper (Cu) is known to substantially impact wine stability through oxidative, reductive or colloidal phenomena. Recent work has shown that Cu exists predominantly in a sulfide-bound form, which may act as a potential source of sulfidic off-odours in wine and hence contribute to reductive flavours

Fluorescence spectroscopy combined with chemometrics has shown advantages in wine analysis due to being rapid, sensitive, and selective to fluorescent molecules. Especially due to the abundant phenolic compounds [1], the molecular fingerprints afforded by fluorescence spectroscopy can potentially be used to discern and track the change of wine composition, with two innovative investigations having been implemented.

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.