The adaptation and resilience of scions and rootstocks to water constraint

Secondary (or specialised) metabolites such as terpenes and phenolic compounds are produced by plants for various roles which include defence against pathogens and herbivores, protection against abiotic stress, and plant signalling. Additionally, these metabolites influence grapevine quality traits such as colour, aroma, taste, and nutritional value. However, the biosynthesis of these metabolites is often complex and controlled by multiple genes which in grapevine are predominantly uncharacterised.

Glutathione is a tripeptide that is mainly found in reduced form in grapes. It generates during the maturation of the grape, increasing significantly after veraison [1].

Downy and powdery mildew are major issues in grapevine cultivation, requiring many phytosanitary treatments to ensure yield and quality. Climatic changes are also challenging grape cultivation

Among the Vitis vinifera L. cv. Moscato, Moscato Bianco is the oldest and most cultivated one in Europe (1). According to the OIV Focus 2015, Italy is the country with the largest cultivated area of Moscato Bianco with about 12500 hectares (2), that is used to produce well-known wines (i.e., Moscato Passito in Piedmont, Moscato di Trani in Puglia, and Moscatello di Montalcino in Tuscany), mainly obtained from partially dehydrated grapes (1). Different dehydration techniques can strongly modify the chemical compounds of oenological interest, among which Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) (1) that are the main responsible for the varietal sensory character of the final wine.

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.