terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Apoplastic pH influences Vitis vinifera Barbera recovery responses to short and prolonged drought 

Apoplastic pH influences Vitis vinifera Barbera recovery responses to short and prolonged drought 

Abstract

Alteration of sap pH is one of the first chemical changes that occurs within the xylem vessels of plants exposed to drought. Xylem sap acidification accompanied by the accumulation of soluble sugars has been recently documented in several species (Sharp and Davis, 2009; Secchi and Zwieniecki, 2016). Here, Vitis vinifera plants of the anysohydric cultivar Barbera were exposed to either short (no irrigation; SD) or to prolonged drought (continual reduction of 10% water; PD). When comparable severe stress was reached, the potted grapes were re-watered. SD was characterized by fast (2–3 days) stomatal closure and high abscisic acid (ABA) accumulation in xylem sap (>400 μg L−1) and in leaf. In PD plants, the rise in ABA levels was considerably diminished. We observed a pronounced acidification of the xylem sap pH, coupled with a rise in the concentration of soluble sugars, during the recovery phases following both types of water stress. Nevertheless, in plants subjected to PD, pH acidification initiated as early as the more severe stages of stress. The reduction in Non-Structural Carbohydrates (NSC) observed in both leaf and wood tissues during the recovery phase suggests that sugar reserves were likely utilized to facilitate recovery fulfilment. In plants exposed to SD, the intense and abrupt increase in ABA was likely the primary response strategy to stress. The plants favored a protective strategy aimed at minimizing damage caused by sudden stress. Conversely, under PD conditions, the plants exhibited greater acclimatization, implementing an alternative response strategy that encompassed osmoregulation mechanisms triggered by pH acidification.

DOI:

Publication date: June 13, 2024

Issue: Open GPB 2024

Type: Article

Authors

Cristina Morabito1*, Jessica Orozco2, Maciej Zwieniecki2, Francesca Secchi1

1 Department of Agriculture, Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin, Largo Paolo Braccini 2, 10095 Grugliasco (Italy)
2 Department of Plant Sciences, University of California Davis, One Shields Avenue, 95616 Davis (CA), USA3 Affliliation

Contact the author*

Keywords

pH, xylem sap, drought, recovery, soluble sugar

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Open GPB | Open GPB 2024

Citation

Related articles…

Caratterizzazione varietale della CV. Vranac del Montenegro: primi risultati

Questo studio ha permesso di raccogliere alcune informazioni sul profilo chimico della cultivar Vranac coltivata in Montenegro. L’uva ha mostrato di raggiungere un buon accumulo zuccherino

Chemical and sensory evolution of total and partial dealcoholized wine in a can

In recent years, wine consumption has been evolving towards new trends. On the one hand, awareness of health and responsible consumption has been growing, and with it, the demand for wines with lower or without alcohol content [1].

Contribution of seeds to red wine phenolic composition

Tannin composition is an important attribute in red wine quality, and it is therefore critical to understand the factors influencing tannin extraction during alcoholic fermentation. Tannins contribute to the mouthfeel of wines, but they also form pigmented polymers...

Does treatment of grape juice with aspergillopepsin-i influence wine aroma?

Acid aspergillopepsins-i (ap-i) have been suggested for use in winemaking due to their ability to degrade proteins, which reduces haze formation and the necessity for bentonite to achieve protein stability. These endopeptidases cleave non-terminal amino acid bonds of proteins, resulting in their degradation.

Can grapevine tolerance to bunch rot be directly induced by groundcover management?

Botrytis bunch rot occurrence is the most important limitation for the wine industry in humid environments. The effect of grapevine vegetative growth on bunch rot expression results from direct effects (cluster architecture, nitrogen status among others) and indirect ones (via microclimate). Previous studies of our group showed strong differences in bunch rot incidence between floor management treatments: cover crop (CC) vs weed-free strips under the trellis with herbicide (H). We observed that in some circumstances this reduction in bunch rot incidence occurred without major vine growth differences among treatments. The aim of the present study was to test the general hypothesis that other factors unrelated to grapevine vegetative expression could be more relevant to grapevine susceptibility to bunch rot.