- Email: [email protected]
Influence of rootstock, irrigation level and recycled water on growth and yield of Soultanina grapevines
Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
Influence of rootstock, irrigation level and recycled water on growth and yield of Soultanina grapevines Nikos V. Paranychianakis a,∗ , Sotiris Aggelides b , Andreas N. Angelakis a b
a NAGREF, Institute of Iraklio, P.O. Box 2229, 71307 Iraklio, Greece Department of Natural Resources and Agricultural Engineering, Agricultural University of Athens, Votanikos, 11855 Athens, Greece
Accepted 24 March 2004
Abstract Recent studies have revealed complex interactions among grapevine rootstocks, soil water status, and water quality in terms of yield and growth. Understanding these interactions is essential to optimise yield and its quality, especially in regions with limited or degraded water resources. Thus, a study was conducted to investigate the effect of rootstock (41B, 1103P, and 110R), irrigation level (0.50, 0.75 and 1.00 of ET, evapotranspiration), and water quality (fresh and recycled water) on vegetative characteristics and on yield quantitative and qualitative components of potted Soultanina vines for a 3-year-period. Vine growth was inhibited by irrigation with recycled water and that inhibition became more severe by increasing the irrigation level and from one season to the next season. Furthermore, recycled water reduced yield by 50% and grape juice from these vines exhibited higher pH and titratable acidity values and lower total soluble solids. Rootstock significantly affected shoot growth, an effect which varied with age and within the growing season. Vines grafted on 41B developed more leaf area and produced higher yield than vines grafted on the other two rootstocks. Decreasing in the irrigation level dramatically reduced all vegetative parameters without affecting fruit quality and yield components. A significant interaction was detected between rootstock and irrigation level in terms of yield. Vines on 41B produced the highest yield of vines irrigated at 1.00 ET, and produced higher yields than vines grafted on 110R when irrigated at 0.75 ET, but the differences in yield among rootstocks disappeared at the 0.50 ET level. © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Grapevines; Growth; Irrigation; Nutrients; Treated effluent; Salinity
∗
Corresponding author. Tel.: +30 2810 242870; Mobile: +30 6977 396137; fax: +30 2810 245873. E-mail address: [email protected] (N.V. Paranychianakis). 0378-3774/$ – see front matter © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2004.03.012
14
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
1. Introduction In areas with arid or semiarid climates, water resources are limited quantitatively and qualitatively, a phenomenon expected to worsen in the future due to global warming, population growth, and the increasing demand for water. Therefore, water supply agencies are searching for alternative and reliable water resources. Reuse of treated wastewater for non-potable uses is a common practice in several countries (Angelakis et al., 1999). The use of recycled water for irrigation of agricultural crops has many advantages including reduction in treatment cost, provision of essential nutrients for plant growth and increased environmental protection. However, its potential disadvantages include serious health risks (Rose and Gerba, 1991) and salt and heavy metal accumulation (Ayers and Westcot, 1988). Irrigation of vineyards and other crops with recycled water is currently practiced in several parts of the world (Klein et al., 2000; Maurer et al., 1995). Grapevine rootstocks are known to affect growth (May, 1994), nutrient uptake (Grant and Matthews, 1996) and salt tolerance of the scion (Downton, 1985) and consequently may alleviate potential harmful effects from irrigation with recycled water. Moreover, the effects of rootstock on scion performance can be influenced by nutrient availability (Grant and Matthews, 1996). The high salt content often characterizing recycled water can also influence plant response. Plant response to salinity is heavily dependent on nutrient availability and salt type, (Marschner, 1995). Under such conditions of abiotic stress, rootstock choice may be an especially critical factor for vine performance. Water availability is not the only factor that should be considered, improving the efficiency of water use may be equally important. Vine response to water deficits has been extensively investigated and appears to be a function of timing and intensity of water stress (Bravdo et al., 1985; Matthews and Anderson, 1989; Williams et al., 1994). Rootstocks vary in root distribution (Morano and Kliewer, 1994) and affect vigor (May, 1994), yield (Ezzahuani and Williams, 1995) and other physiological parameters, which in turn can influence scion response to soil water availability. However, information regarding how the rootstocks and irrigation interact to affect growth and yield components is limited. In one study, Ruby seedless vines performed better when grafted on 41B and 110R than vines on Rupestris du Lot and 1103P rootstocks when developing under dry conditions (Ezzahuani and Williams, 1995). In other studies, drought resistance of rootstocks was found to vary in different areas (Dellas, 1992), and by applying a low irrigation rate resulted in a more pronounced rootstock effect on yield compared to non-irrigated vines (McCarthy et al., 1997). Therefore, to achieve the best balance between growth and yield of grapevines with the lowest possible water use, soil water availability and water use efficiency should be considered. In this work, the combined effect of rootstock, irrigation level and water quality on growth and yield were assessed.
2. Materials and methods 2.1. Growth conditions In May 1996, 1-year-old ‘Soultanina’ grapevines (Vitis viniferaL.) on three rootstocks, 41B (V. vinifera × V. berlandieri), 1103P (V. berlandieri × V. rupestris), and 110R (V.
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
15
berlandieri × V. rupestris), were planted in 30 L pots filled with sandy loam soil (pH 7.4 and ECe 0.46 dS/m). The pots were spaced 1.2 m within and 1.5 m between rows in an open field located at the National Foundation for Agricultural Research, Iraklio, Greece. All vines were pruned to one two-node spur in March 1997 and one shoot was allowed to grow vertically until late June. Shoots were then trained along a horizontal trellis wire, 40 cm from the pot surface, to develop the cordon. Vines were pruned to one eight-node cane in 1998 and three shoots were trained vertically and tied to wires located at 20, 40, 60 and 100 cm from the horizontal part of the trunk; all inflorescences were removed before bloom. Vines were trained in a similar manner in 1999, except that four shoots were retained and inflorescences were kept on two of the shoots. Water demand during these seasons was determined for the 1.00 ET treatment as follows: four vines of each rootstock were irrigated until tensiometer readings approached the zero or until drainage was evident, and the average water consumption was considered to be the 1.00 ET level. The other two irrigation levels 0.50 and 0.75 ET were proportional. Any drainage was collected and reapplied to the pots. After 1 August 1998, when vines irrigated with recycled water showed an increasing soil water content, likely due to inhibition of shoot growth, irrigation needs were determined separately for each water quality (six vines per water quality treatment were used for determining water demand). A similar differentiation of irrigation according to water quality was applied after 15 June the following season. Based on this estimate, vines irrigated with recycled water received 8% less water in 1998 and 33% less water in 1999 than vines irrigated with fresh water (Table 1). Table 1 Total water (L) applied in vines irrigated at 1.00 ET level during the 1998 and 1999 growing seasons Maya
June
1998 c FW d RW
41 41
68 68
1999 FW RW
49 49
86 70
August
Septemberb
Total
93 93
102 89
64 48
368 340
121 83
132 79
99 46
489 325
July
a
Water applied after 1 May. Water consumption until 19 September. c FW: fresh water. d RW: recycled water. b
Irrigation treatments were applied from 20 May to 20 September each year. Irrigation was applied to pots through a drip irrigation network. Drippers with different flow rates (4, 6 and 8 l/h), capable to maintain constant flow rate under variable pressure, were used to differentiate irrigation levels. During winter months, all treatments were irrigated in excess with fresh water to leach any accumulated salts and to prevent the build up of salts in pots from season to season. The chemical composition of the fresh and recycled water is shown in Table 2. Recycled water was obtained from an activated sludge wastewater treatment plant in Iraklio, Greece. Application of recycled water on grapevines began on 1 May every growing season. Vines irrigated with fresh water were fertilized periodically with full strength Hoagland solution; vines irrigated with recycled water were not fertilized. More
16
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
Table 2 Chemical composition of recycled and fresh water Characteristics
EC (dS/m) pH NH4 -N (mg/l) NO3 -N (mg/l) Total P (mg/l) K+ (mg/l) Ca2+ (mg/l) Mg2+ (mg/l) Na+ (mg/l) Cl− (mg/l) B3+ (mg/l) Cu2+ (mg/l) Fe2+ (mg/l) Mn2+ (mg/l)
Recycled water
Fresh water
1997
1998
1999
1997–1999
1.8 7.3 6.8 5.3 8.4 22 43.4 8.6 208 391 – – – –
1.9 7.5 5.7 4.6 10.7 37.4 39.1 9.3 247 401 0.48 0.013 0.21 0.03
1.9 7.3 4.2 4.1 9.4 34.6 51.2 12.4 264 436 0.67 – – –
0.6 7.1 – – – 2.6 – – 72 118 – – – –
details about the fertilization schedule applied in this study can be found in Paranychianakis et al. (2004). 2.2. Statistical analysis Eighteen treatments were laid out as a three-factor experiment involving three rootstocks, three irrigation levels, and two water quality levels arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replications. Each replication consisted of four vines in a row. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance and means were separated by Tukey’s significant difference test. 2.3. Growth measurements Shoot length and leaf number were measured every week for all vines. Leaf area (LA) was estimated at monthly intervals during 1997 and 1998 growing seasons, and in the 1999 it was estimated at fruit set, veraison and on 20 September, using the following equation: LA = 0.3119(VL + VR )2.0679 (R2 = 0.976, n = 60)
(1)
where VL and VR are the lengths (cm) of the left and right veins, respectively. On 5 August 1999 all clusters were harvested and weighed, and the berries were counted and weighed. Grape juice from a representative sample was used for the determination of pH and total soluble solids (TSS) concentration which were measured using a pH meter and a refractometer, respectively. Titratable acidity (TA) was measured using the method described by Amerine and Ough (1988).
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
17
3. Results 3.1. Recycled water An effect of water quality on shoot growth was not detected until the last time shoots were measured on 5 August 1997 when the shoots of vines irrigated with recycled water were 7% shorter. The following season, this effect was apparent from the first time shoot length was measured, which was on 12 May (Fig. 1a). From this date until 10 June 1998, the growth rate of shoots was not affected by water quality. Later, shoots of vines irrigated with recycled water showed a reduction in growth rate. A further reduction in shoot growth rate was detected on 7 July. After the end of July 1998, the difference in shoot growth rate in response to two water qualities continued to increase (Fig. 1a). On 20 September, shoots on vines irrigated with recycled water were 30% shorter than those of vines treated with fresh water (Fig. 1a). The adverse effect of recycled versus fresh water on vine growth was more apparent in 1999. Rate of shoot growth on vines receiving recycled water was lower until the beginning of June, when shoot growth nearly ceased, and these shoots were 58% shorter than those on vines receiving fresh water on 20 September (Fig. 1b).
Fig. 1. The effect of water quality on average shoot length during 1998 (a) and 1999 (b) growing seasons. Vertical bars represent ±S.E.
18
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
Fig. 2. The effect of water quality on average leaf area during 1999 growing season.
Irrigation with recycled water reduced leaf number per shoot and leaf area. Leaf number was reduced by 20% in 1998 and 43% in 1999. In 1998, the reduction in total leaf area was apparent from the first time measurements taken at the end of May, and was reduced by 35% compared to vines irrigated with fresh water at the end of the season. In 1999, the development of leaf area on vines irrigated with recycled water increased only slightly after fruit set whereas on vines irrigated with fresh water leaf area doubled from fruit set until the end of the season (Fig. 2). Water quality affected both yields and juice quality. Vines irrigated with recycled water produced half the yield of vines irrigated with fresh water due to reductions in berry weight (26%) and number (37%) (Table 3). Juice pH and TA were higher and TSS was lower. Increasing irrigation level increased LA/yield ratio, but did not affect yield and fruit quality (Table 3). 3.2. Irrigation level The level of irrigation had a dramatic effect on shoot growth during the course of the experiment. In 1997, shoots on vines irrigated at 1.00 ET level were 130% longer than those on vines irrigated at 0.50 ET. The following season, the growth rate of shoots after 10 June was highest for vines irrigated at 1.00 ET resulting in longer shoots on 17 June. Shoot growth rate during this season was highly correlated with soil water content for both water qualities but this relationship changed as the season progressed (Fig. 3a and b). Water quality interacted with irrigation level after 21 July 1998. The shoot growth response to irrigation for vines irrigated with recycled water was less than that for vines irrigated with fresh water (Fig. 4a). At the end of the season, irrigating with fresh water at 0.75 ET and 1.00 ET increased shoot length by 68% and 159%, respectively, compared with vines irrigated at 0.50 ET. The corresponding increase for vines irrigated with recycled water was only 38% and 84%, respectively.
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
19
Table 3 Yield, and fruit quality of Soultanina grapes harvested from vines on three rootstocks (41B, 1103P, 110R) irrigated at 1.00, 0.75, 0.50 evapotranspiration (ET) with fresh or recycled water. Main factors Rootstocks (R) 41B 1103P 110R Significancee Irrigation level (IR) 0.50 ET 0.75 ET 1.00 ET Significance Water quality Recycled water (WQ) Fresh water Significance Interactions R × IR R × WQ IR × WQ R × IR × WQ
Yield (g/vine)
Berry weight (g)
Berry number
pH
TSSa (Brix)
TAb (‰)
LA/Yc (cm2 /g)
252 ad 169 b 126 b
1.22 a 1.04 b 1.08 b
202 a 158 b 112 b
3.09 b 3.30 a 3.22 ab
6.81 a 5.73 b 6.20 b
42.4 b 85.5 a 84.2 a
h
h
h
f
22.8 22.1 22.7 ns
h
g
168 191 188 ns
1.09 1.10 1.13 ns
152 165 157 ns
3.20 3.20 3.21 ns
23.2 23.1 22.7 ns
6.3 6.1 6.3 ns
55.9b 62.7ab 93.4a
116 250
0.94 1.27
122 194
3.24 3.17
22.5 23.2
6.7 5.7
h
h
h
f
f
h
77.5 63.9 ns
f
ns ns ns ns
ns ns ns ns
ns ns ns ns
f
ns ns ns
ns ns ns ns
ns ns ns
f
ns ns ns ns
Data was collected in 1999. a Total soluble solids. b Tirtable acidity. c Leaf area to yield ratio estimated at veraison. d Any two means within a row not followed by the same letter are significantly different at P < 0.05 with Tukey’s significant difference. e ns = not significant. f P < 0.05. g P < 0.01. h P < 0.001.
In 1999, from budbreak, shoot growth rate on vines irrigated at 1.00 ET the previous season was higher than that on vines irrigated at the lower levels. On 20 May 1999, when the irrigation treatments were imposed, shoots on vines irrigated at 1.00 ET were 28% and 14% longer than those irrigated at 0.50 ET and 0.75 ET, respectively (Fig. 4b). Moreover, shoots responded to an interaction between irrigation level and water quality as in the previous season. Irrigating with fresh water at 0.75 ET and 1.00 ET levels increased shoot lengths by 42% and 140%, respectively, compared with those irrigated at 0.50 ET level. During the same season, irrigation with recycled water had the strongest effect on shoot growth compared to the previous seasons. Vines irrigated at 0.75 ET and 1.00 ET levels had only 32% and 61% higher shoot lengths, respectively, compared to vines irrigated at 0.50 ET (Fig. 4b). Decreasing the level of irrigation reduced both leaf number and leaf area. However, in both seasons, water quality interacted with irrigation level such that the response of
20
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
Fig. 3. Relationship between average shoot growth rate and soil water content for the period 9 to 16 July (a) and 11 to 18 August 1998 (b).
leaf number and leaf area to irrigation was less when recycled water was used (data not shown). 3.3. Rootstock Rootstock significantly affected shoot length and this effect changed within the growing season and over years. Shoots on vines grafted on 110R grew longest during 1997, but early in the next season, until 14 June they had the lowest growth rate. Later that season, shoots of vines grafted on 1103P grew at lower rates than did those grafted on 41B and 110R, and so were shorter by 20 September (Fig. 5). A similar rootstock effect was observed early in 1999 when shoots of vines grafted on 110R were shorter than those of vines grafted on 1103P (data not shown). Vines grafted on 41B had shorter shoots than those on other rootstocks, but growth rate increased after veraison (2 July). Towards the end of that growing season, response to an interaction between rootstock and water quality was apparent. Vines grafted on 1103P had longer shoots than did those grafted on 41B when irrigated with recycled water, but these rootstocks had no effect on shoot length when irrigated with fresh water (data not shown). In 1997, vines developed more leaf area when grafted on 41B and 110R (data not shown). The following season, vines grafted on 41B had more leaf area than did those grafted on 110R from the end of July, and those grafted on 1103P from the end August until last sampling
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
21
Fig. 4. The effect of water quality and irrigation level on average shoot length during 1998 (a) and 1999 (b) growing seasons. Vertical bars represent ±S.E.
Fig. 5. Effect of rootstock on shoot length during 1998 growing season. Sets of bars without letters imply non-significant differences.
22
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
Fig. 6. The effect of rootstock on leaf area on 20 September 1998 and during 1999 growing season. Sets of bars without letters imply non-significant differences.
which was on 20 September (Fig. 6). In 1999, vines grafted on 1103P had developed more leaf area by fruit set than did vines grafted on other rootstocks, but by 20 September vines grafted on 41B developed more leaf area than those on 1103P (Fig. 6). Vines grafted on 41B produced higher yields, berry weights and number of berries/bunch but the LA/yield ratio was half that of the other rootstocks. Juice pH was lower and TA was higher for vines grafted on 41B than the other rootstocks (Table 3). Vines on 41B produced
Fig. 7. Yield of grapevines as influenced by rootstock and irrigation level in 1999 growing season.
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
23
the highest yield of vines irrigated at 1.00 ET, and produced higher yields than vines grafted on 110R when irrigated at 0.75 ET. At the 0.50 ET level, there were no differences in yield among rootstocks (Fig. 7).
4. Discussion 4.1. Water quality Growth of vines irrigated with recycled water declined with age, possibly due to a decrease in vine C and N reserves (Paranychianakis, 2001), decline of N concentration in recycled water (Table 2), differences in rate of salt accumulation among seasons, and climatic conditions. The contribution of each of the above factors to the decrease in vine growth likely differed between seasons. The minimal effect of recycled water on vine growth in 1997 was likely due to lower salt accumulation in the growing medium because of lower irrigation needs and the greater N concentration in recycled water. Vines receiving recycled water had shorter shoots than those receiving fresh water early in 1998. An effect that may have resulted from the lower N-reserves (Oaks et al., 1991) since the N status of these vines was lower as indicated by the lamina N of the previous season (Paranychianakis, 2001). The reduction in shoot growth rate after 10 June 1998 for vines irrigated with recycled water coincided with a reduction in predawn leaf water potential (Ψ pd ) (Paranychianakis et al., 2004), indicating that an osmotic effect due to salt accumulation in the growing medium contributed to the growth depression. Vine nitrogen needs appeared to be satisfied during the same period. A similar N concentration in recycled water was reported to be sufficient to cover the N-needs and sustain the growth of mature grapefruits trees (Maurer et al., 1995). Vine growth from budbreak to flowering is mainly dependent on old wood N and C reserves (Schaller et al., 1989). The lower C and N reserves that assessed in vines irrigated with recycled water at the end of 1998 (Paranychianakis, 2001) probably resulted in lower growth rates early in 1999. Old wood reserves have been reported to reach their minimum levels around flowering (Schaller et al., 1989), which is consistent with the severe inhibition of growth observed for vines irrigated with recycled water (Fig. 4). Furthermore, in 1999 grapevine flowering occurred early (1 May) because of unusually high temperatures that prevailed during April. During flowering, vine N needs increase and are satisfied with increased N uptake from the soil (Lohnertz, 1988). However, soil N availability for vines irrigated with recycled water was negligible during that period because all nutrients were supplied via recycled water which was just applied on 1 May. Thus, the nearly depleted C and N resources and the low availability of N early in 1999 were the predominant factors of the inhibition and the early cessation of growth. Depletion of C and N reserves and low availability of N during fruit set are also considered as the major causes of the yield reduction. Bloom and fruit set are critical stages in vine reproductive growth and the prevalence of unfavorable conditions that impair photosynthesis may reduce the translocation of assimilates to inflorescences which are weak sinks that period (Keller and Koblet, 1994). The low availability of nitrogen during that period expected to have reduced new carbohydrate production both directly by reducing
24
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
assimilation and indirectly by reducing the number and area of leaves. Severe berry drop and berry weight reduction were reported for vines with low availability of carbohydrates due to defoliation treatment during bloom (Candofli-Vasconcelos and Koblet, 1990). Later in the season, salt accumulation may have also contributed to a further reduction in berry weight as found in other studies (Prior et al., 1992). Fruits of vines irrigated with recycled water had a lower TSS concentration despite the similar ratio of LA/yield which was higher than the reported minimum values adequate for berry development (Poni et al., 1993). However, from the beginning of June to grape harvest, a reduction in assimilation rate in response to recycled water was not detected (Paranychianakis et al., 2004). This result could indicate that single leaf measurements of photosynthesis may not adequately reflect whole vine photosynthesis (Miller et al., 1997) or that an increased carbohydrate demand is required by these vines to sustain basic physiological functions and to support other sinks. 4.2. Irrigation level Water availability severely affects vine growth and development (Williams et al., 1994). However, the final effect of irrigation on shoot length and leaf area varied from season to season due to differences in the degree and duration of water stress, climatic conditions, number of shoots, availability of reserves and crop level. Shoot growth rate (SGR) was highly correlated with soil moisture particularly in 1998, when no fruits were retained (Fig. 3). Significant correlations between SGR and SWC in unbeared grapevines have been also reported by Hardie and Martin (2000). The correlation obtained in the present study was differentiated within 1998 (Fig. 3a and b). Until mid-July, no further increase in SGR was observed for SWC values higher than 11% (Fig. 3a). However after that date, SGR continued to increase linearly above the value of 11% with increasing SWC (Fig. 3b). The greater leaf area which has been developed by 18 July and therefore the higher production of assimilates, may be the cause that differentiated the relationship between SGR and SWC. The lower response of growth to irrigation with recycled water is attributed to the osmotic effect resulting from the higher salt accumulation with increasing irrigation level which is consistent with greater Ψ pd reduction in response to these treatments (Paranychianakis et al., 2004). In 1999, the detrimental effect on growth of irrigating with recycled water was likely due to N starvation during May. The lack of an irrigation effect on vine yield may have had different causes for each water quality. In vines irrigated with recycled water, N starvation initially and later the higher salt accumulation at 1.00 ET level likely prevented an irrigation effect on yield. On the other hand, for fresh water irrigation the competition between growing tips and fruits may have stimulated the direction of assimilates to shoots (Bravdo et al., 1985) and inhibited berry growth at high rates of irrigation. Another factor that may have contributed to the lack of an effect on yield, is the timing of water deficit development. Berry growth is more sensitive to water stress during the Stage I of berry development (fruit set to 20 days before veraison) (Matthews and Anderson, 1989). However, the early fruit set observed in 1999 had as result a significant part of the Stage I of berry development to have been completed, before a severe water deficit development. Thus, the adverse effects of drought to berry growth were minimised.
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
25
4.3. Rootstock The results of this work support findings that rootstock affects shoot growth (Ezzahuani and Williams, 1995; Grant and Matthews, 1996) and leaf area (Sommer and Clingeleffer, 1997). Rootstocks of V. rupestris and its hybrids have been reported to increase vigor (May, 1994). However, an opposite effect was observed in this study, with vines grafted on 41B producing higher final shoot length and leaf area than vines grafted on 1103P. The higher yield produced by vines grafted on 41B likely prevented a similar response in 1999. In both growing seasons, vines grafted on 1103P showed lower growth rates late in the season compared to other two rootstocks while vines grafted on 110R had lower growth rates early in the season indicating differences in the vegetative cycle among rootstocks as found in a previous study (May, 1994). The longer shoots on vines grafted on 1103P compared with those on other rootstocks under irrigation with recycled water in 1999 may not be due to a tolerance of that rootstock to salt accumulation and/or nitrogen deficiency. More likely, it resulted from the early cessation of shoot growth for vines irrigated with recycled water which prevented the recovery of growth for vines grafted on the other rootstocks. Vines grafted on 41B produced higher yields at 1.00 ET level than did the other rootstocks. Similarly, McCarthy et al. (1997) reported that rootstock effect on yield of Shiraz vines changed by applying a small amount of irrigation. However, under dry conditions vines grafted on 41B and 110R have been reported to be more productive due to more clusters than are vines on 1103P (Ezzahuani and Williams, 1995). In this study, cluster number was adjusted to be the same for all rootstocks which may have resulted in different effect on vines grafted on 41B and 110R. A study in South Africa, showed that table grape varieties performed poorly when grafted on 110R, but when wine varieties were grafted on 110R it was one of the best performing rootstocks (Loubser et al., 1994). Table varieties require increased cultural inputs, such as irrigation and fertilization, which favor vigor that may be the reason for altered effects of rootstock on grape performance. This is also in agreement with the results observed in the present study. Morano and Kliewer (1994) suggest that vigorous rootstocks are unsuitable in fertile soils because they enhance vine vigor and reduce yield. In this study, vines grafted on 41B were as vigorous as vines grafted on 110R in the 1998 growing season. However, in the following season vines grafted on 41B appeared to direct assimilates more to clusters than did the other rootstocks, and this effect became more evident with increasing irrigation level. Growth regulators such as cytokinins and/or gibberilic acid may play an important role in the direction of assimilates (Mullins et al., 1992). Differences in of rootstock performance may reflect differences in production of these substances among various rootstocks. A significant influence of rootstock on juice qualitative parameters has been reported (Ezzahuani and Williams, 1995). Despite the higher yield at 1.00 ET irrigation level, vines grafted on 41B had higher TSS concentration compared to vines grafted on other rootstocks. These findings is in agreement to Bravdo et al. (1985), which reported a delayed harvest in vines that were cluster thinned and received high irrigation rates and these effects were attributed to a sink competition between growing tips and developing berries.
26
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
5. Conclusions Irrigating with recycled water suppressed grapevine growth and yield. These adverse effects were due to increased salts and low nitrogen content. However, recycled water can be used as an alternative water resource for grapevine irrigation in areas with deficient resources after appropriate salinity management. Applying higher quantities of irrigation to leach the accumulated salts, blending with fresh water and the application method (i.e. subsurface drip irrigation) are some suggested solutions to eliminate the detrimental effects of salt accumulation on growth and yield. Moreover, supplemental nitrogen fertilization is needed during the early stage of development to compensate for the low N supply. Rootstock affected grapevine growth, yield and juice qualitative components. However, these rootstock effects were not altered by water quality indicating minimal differences among rootstocks in terms of salinity tolerance. Rootstock can severely affect the quantitative and qualitative components of the yield depending on soil water availability.
Acknowledgements Financial support for this study was provided by Eu-Interreg II programme. The authors are grateful to Prof. K.A. Roubelakis-Angelakis for supervising the study and reviewing the manuscript. Thanks are due to V. Paranychianakis, E. Tzorakakis and M. Zachariakis for their technical assistance in field measurements.
References Amerine, M.A., Ough, C.S., 1988. Methods for Analysis of Musts and Wines. Wiley and Sons, New York. Angelakis, A.N., Marecos de Monte, M.H.F., Bontoux, L., Asano, T., 1999. The status of wastewater reuse practice in the Mediterranean basin. Water Res. 33, 2201–2217. Ayers, R.S., Westcot, D.W., 1988. Irrigation water quality. In: Pettygrove, G.S., Asano, T. (Eds.), Irrigation with Reclaimed Municipal Wastewater—a Guidance Manual. Lewis Publishers. Bravdo, B., Hepner, Y., Loinger, C., Cohen, S., Tabacman, H., 1985. Effect of irrigation and crop level on growth, yield and wine quality of Cabernet Sauvignon. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 36, 132–139. Candofli-Vasconcelos, M., Koblet, W., 1990. Yield, fruit quality, bud fertility and starch reserves of the wood as a function of leaf removal in Vitis vinifera. Evidence of compensation and stress recovering. Vitis 29, 199–221. Dellas, J., 1992. Criteria used for rootstock selection in France. In: Proceedings of the Rootstock Seminar: a worldwide perspective. Am. Soc. Enol. Vitic., Davis, CA 1–14. Downton, W.J.S., 1985. Growth and mineral composition of the Sultana grapevine as influenced by salinity and rootstock. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 36, 425–434. Ezzahuani, A., Williams, L.E., 1995. The influence of rootstock on leaf water potential, yield, and berry composition of Ruby seedless grapevines. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 46, 559–563. Grant, R.S., Matthews, M.A., 1996. The influence of phosphorous availability, scion, and rootstock on grapevine shoot growth, leaf area, and petiole phosphorous concentration. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 47, 217–224. Hardie, W.J., Martin, S.R., 2000. Shoot growth on de-fruited grapevines: a physiological indicator for irrigation scheduling. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 6, 52–58. Keller, M., Koblet, W., 1994. Is carbon starvation rather than excessive nitrogen supply the cause of inflorescence necrosis in Vitis vinifera L? Vitis 33, 81–86. Klein, I., Strime, M., Fanderstain, L., Mani, Y., 2000. Irrigation and fertigation effects on phosphorous and potassium nutrition of wine grapes. Vitis 39, 55–62.
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
27
Lohnertz, O., 1988. Untersuchungen zum zeitlichen Verlauf der Nahrstoffaufnahme bei Vitis vinifera (cv Riesling). Thesis, University of Giessen, Giessenheimer Berichte. Loubser, J.T., Avenant, J.H., Downton, W.J.S., 1994. Grapevine rootstock performance in South Africa. In: Proceedings of the Intern. Symp. Table Grape Production. Amer. Soc. Enol. Vitic. Davis, CA, pp. 127–129. Marschner, H., 1995. Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants. second ed. Academic Press, London. Matthews, M.A., Anderson, M.M., 1989. Reproductive development in grape (Vitis vinifera L.): responses to seasonal water deficits. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 40, 52–60. Maurer, M.A., Davies, F.S., Graetz, D.A., 1995. Reclaimed wastewater irrigation and fertilization of mature Redblush grapefruit trees on spodosols in Florida. J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 120, 394–402. May, P., 1994. Using Grapevine Rootstocks. The Australian Perspective. Winetitles. Adelaide. McCarthy, M.G., Cirami, R.M., Furkaliev, D.G., 1997. Rootstock response of Shiraz (Vitis vinifera) grapevines to dry and drip-irrigated conditions. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 3, 95–98. Miller, D.P., Howell, G.S., Flore, J.A., 1997. Influence of shoot number and crop load on potted Chambourcin grapevines. II: Whole-vine vs. single-leaf photosynthesis. Vitis 36, 109–114. Morano, L., Kliewer, W.M., 1994. Root distribution of three grapevines rootstocks grafted to Cabernet Sauvignon grown on a very gravelly clay loam soil in Oakville, California. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 45, 345–348. Mullins, M.G., Bouquet, A., Williams, L.E., 1992. Biology of Grapevine. Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, Cambridge. Oaks, A., Clark, C.J., Greenwood, J.S., 1991. Nitrogen assimilation in higher plants: strategies for annual and perennial plant species. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Nitrogen in Grapes and Wine. Am. Soc. Enol. Vitic., Davis, CA, pp. 43–51. Paranychianakis, N.V., 2001. Influence of rootstock, irrigation level and recycled water on the growth, nutrition and physiology of Soultanina grapevines. PhD Thesis. Agricultural University of Athens. Paranychianakis, N.V., Chartzoulakis, K.S., Angelakis, A.N., 2004. Influence of rootstock, irrigation level and recycled water on water relations and gas exchange of Soultanina grapevines. Environmental and Experimental Botany, in press. Poni, S., Lakso, A.N., Turner, A.J., Melious, R.E., 1993. The effects of pre- and post-veraison water stress on growth and physiology of potted Pinot Noir grapevines at varying crop levels. Vitis 32, 207–214. Prior, L.D., Grieve, A.M., Cullis, B.R., 1992. Sodium chloride and soil texture in irrigated field grown Sultana grapevines. I. Yield and fruit quality. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 43, 1051–1066. Rose, J.B., Gerba, C.P., 1991. Assessing the potential health risks of viruses and parasites in reclaimed water in Arizona and Florida. Water Sci. Tech. 23, 2091–2098. Schaller, K., Lohnertz, O., Geiben, R., Beit, N., 1989. N-Stoffwechsel von Reben: N-und Arginindynamik im Holzkorper der Sorte Muller-Thurgau im Verlaufe einer Vegetationsperiode. Wein-Wiss. 44, 91–101. Sommer, K.J., Clingeleffer, P.R., 1997. Vine canopy development and carbohydrate partitioning as influenced by pruning. Bull. O.I.V. 70, 155–158. Williams, L.E., Dokoozlian, N.K., Wample, R., 1994. Grape. In: Schaffer, B., Andersen, P.C. (Eds.), Handbook of Environmental Physiology of Fruit Crops, vol. I: Temperate Crops. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 85–133.
Influence of rootstock, irrigation level and recycled water on growth and yield of Soultanina grapevines Nikos V. Paranychianakis a,∗ , Sotiris Aggelides b , Andreas N. Angelakis a b
a NAGREF, Institute of Iraklio, P.O. Box 2229, 71307 Iraklio, Greece Department of Natural Resources and Agricultural Engineering, Agricultural University of Athens, Votanikos, 11855 Athens, Greece
Accepted 24 March 2004
Abstract Recent studies have revealed complex interactions among grapevine rootstocks, soil water status, and water quality in terms of yield and growth. Understanding these interactions is essential to optimise yield and its quality, especially in regions with limited or degraded water resources. Thus, a study was conducted to investigate the effect of rootstock (41B, 1103P, and 110R), irrigation level (0.50, 0.75 and 1.00 of ET, evapotranspiration), and water quality (fresh and recycled water) on vegetative characteristics and on yield quantitative and qualitative components of potted Soultanina vines for a 3-year-period. Vine growth was inhibited by irrigation with recycled water and that inhibition became more severe by increasing the irrigation level and from one season to the next season. Furthermore, recycled water reduced yield by 50% and grape juice from these vines exhibited higher pH and titratable acidity values and lower total soluble solids. Rootstock significantly affected shoot growth, an effect which varied with age and within the growing season. Vines grafted on 41B developed more leaf area and produced higher yield than vines grafted on the other two rootstocks. Decreasing in the irrigation level dramatically reduced all vegetative parameters without affecting fruit quality and yield components. A significant interaction was detected between rootstock and irrigation level in terms of yield. Vines on 41B produced the highest yield of vines irrigated at 1.00 ET, and produced higher yields than vines grafted on 110R when irrigated at 0.75 ET, but the differences in yield among rootstocks disappeared at the 0.50 ET level. © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Grapevines; Growth; Irrigation; Nutrients; Treated effluent; Salinity
∗
Corresponding author. Tel.: +30 2810 242870; Mobile: +30 6977 396137; fax: +30 2810 245873. E-mail address: [email protected] (N.V. Paranychianakis). 0378-3774/$ – see front matter © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2004.03.012
14
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
1. Introduction In areas with arid or semiarid climates, water resources are limited quantitatively and qualitatively, a phenomenon expected to worsen in the future due to global warming, population growth, and the increasing demand for water. Therefore, water supply agencies are searching for alternative and reliable water resources. Reuse of treated wastewater for non-potable uses is a common practice in several countries (Angelakis et al., 1999). The use of recycled water for irrigation of agricultural crops has many advantages including reduction in treatment cost, provision of essential nutrients for plant growth and increased environmental protection. However, its potential disadvantages include serious health risks (Rose and Gerba, 1991) and salt and heavy metal accumulation (Ayers and Westcot, 1988). Irrigation of vineyards and other crops with recycled water is currently practiced in several parts of the world (Klein et al., 2000; Maurer et al., 1995). Grapevine rootstocks are known to affect growth (May, 1994), nutrient uptake (Grant and Matthews, 1996) and salt tolerance of the scion (Downton, 1985) and consequently may alleviate potential harmful effects from irrigation with recycled water. Moreover, the effects of rootstock on scion performance can be influenced by nutrient availability (Grant and Matthews, 1996). The high salt content often characterizing recycled water can also influence plant response. Plant response to salinity is heavily dependent on nutrient availability and salt type, (Marschner, 1995). Under such conditions of abiotic stress, rootstock choice may be an especially critical factor for vine performance. Water availability is not the only factor that should be considered, improving the efficiency of water use may be equally important. Vine response to water deficits has been extensively investigated and appears to be a function of timing and intensity of water stress (Bravdo et al., 1985; Matthews and Anderson, 1989; Williams et al., 1994). Rootstocks vary in root distribution (Morano and Kliewer, 1994) and affect vigor (May, 1994), yield (Ezzahuani and Williams, 1995) and other physiological parameters, which in turn can influence scion response to soil water availability. However, information regarding how the rootstocks and irrigation interact to affect growth and yield components is limited. In one study, Ruby seedless vines performed better when grafted on 41B and 110R than vines on Rupestris du Lot and 1103P rootstocks when developing under dry conditions (Ezzahuani and Williams, 1995). In other studies, drought resistance of rootstocks was found to vary in different areas (Dellas, 1992), and by applying a low irrigation rate resulted in a more pronounced rootstock effect on yield compared to non-irrigated vines (McCarthy et al., 1997). Therefore, to achieve the best balance between growth and yield of grapevines with the lowest possible water use, soil water availability and water use efficiency should be considered. In this work, the combined effect of rootstock, irrigation level and water quality on growth and yield were assessed.
2. Materials and methods 2.1. Growth conditions In May 1996, 1-year-old ‘Soultanina’ grapevines (Vitis viniferaL.) on three rootstocks, 41B (V. vinifera × V. berlandieri), 1103P (V. berlandieri × V. rupestris), and 110R (V.
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
15
berlandieri × V. rupestris), were planted in 30 L pots filled with sandy loam soil (pH 7.4 and ECe 0.46 dS/m). The pots were spaced 1.2 m within and 1.5 m between rows in an open field located at the National Foundation for Agricultural Research, Iraklio, Greece. All vines were pruned to one two-node spur in March 1997 and one shoot was allowed to grow vertically until late June. Shoots were then trained along a horizontal trellis wire, 40 cm from the pot surface, to develop the cordon. Vines were pruned to one eight-node cane in 1998 and three shoots were trained vertically and tied to wires located at 20, 40, 60 and 100 cm from the horizontal part of the trunk; all inflorescences were removed before bloom. Vines were trained in a similar manner in 1999, except that four shoots were retained and inflorescences were kept on two of the shoots. Water demand during these seasons was determined for the 1.00 ET treatment as follows: four vines of each rootstock were irrigated until tensiometer readings approached the zero or until drainage was evident, and the average water consumption was considered to be the 1.00 ET level. The other two irrigation levels 0.50 and 0.75 ET were proportional. Any drainage was collected and reapplied to the pots. After 1 August 1998, when vines irrigated with recycled water showed an increasing soil water content, likely due to inhibition of shoot growth, irrigation needs were determined separately for each water quality (six vines per water quality treatment were used for determining water demand). A similar differentiation of irrigation according to water quality was applied after 15 June the following season. Based on this estimate, vines irrigated with recycled water received 8% less water in 1998 and 33% less water in 1999 than vines irrigated with fresh water (Table 1). Table 1 Total water (L) applied in vines irrigated at 1.00 ET level during the 1998 and 1999 growing seasons Maya
June
1998 c FW d RW
41 41
68 68
1999 FW RW
49 49
86 70
August
Septemberb
Total
93 93
102 89
64 48
368 340
121 83
132 79
99 46
489 325
July
a
Water applied after 1 May. Water consumption until 19 September. c FW: fresh water. d RW: recycled water. b
Irrigation treatments were applied from 20 May to 20 September each year. Irrigation was applied to pots through a drip irrigation network. Drippers with different flow rates (4, 6 and 8 l/h), capable to maintain constant flow rate under variable pressure, were used to differentiate irrigation levels. During winter months, all treatments were irrigated in excess with fresh water to leach any accumulated salts and to prevent the build up of salts in pots from season to season. The chemical composition of the fresh and recycled water is shown in Table 2. Recycled water was obtained from an activated sludge wastewater treatment plant in Iraklio, Greece. Application of recycled water on grapevines began on 1 May every growing season. Vines irrigated with fresh water were fertilized periodically with full strength Hoagland solution; vines irrigated with recycled water were not fertilized. More
16
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
Table 2 Chemical composition of recycled and fresh water Characteristics
EC (dS/m) pH NH4 -N (mg/l) NO3 -N (mg/l) Total P (mg/l) K+ (mg/l) Ca2+ (mg/l) Mg2+ (mg/l) Na+ (mg/l) Cl− (mg/l) B3+ (mg/l) Cu2+ (mg/l) Fe2+ (mg/l) Mn2+ (mg/l)
Recycled water
Fresh water
1997
1998
1999
1997–1999
1.8 7.3 6.8 5.3 8.4 22 43.4 8.6 208 391 – – – –
1.9 7.5 5.7 4.6 10.7 37.4 39.1 9.3 247 401 0.48 0.013 0.21 0.03
1.9 7.3 4.2 4.1 9.4 34.6 51.2 12.4 264 436 0.67 – – –
0.6 7.1 – – – 2.6 – – 72 118 – – – –
details about the fertilization schedule applied in this study can be found in Paranychianakis et al. (2004). 2.2. Statistical analysis Eighteen treatments were laid out as a three-factor experiment involving three rootstocks, three irrigation levels, and two water quality levels arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replications. Each replication consisted of four vines in a row. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance and means were separated by Tukey’s significant difference test. 2.3. Growth measurements Shoot length and leaf number were measured every week for all vines. Leaf area (LA) was estimated at monthly intervals during 1997 and 1998 growing seasons, and in the 1999 it was estimated at fruit set, veraison and on 20 September, using the following equation: LA = 0.3119(VL + VR )2.0679 (R2 = 0.976, n = 60)
(1)
where VL and VR are the lengths (cm) of the left and right veins, respectively. On 5 August 1999 all clusters were harvested and weighed, and the berries were counted and weighed. Grape juice from a representative sample was used for the determination of pH and total soluble solids (TSS) concentration which were measured using a pH meter and a refractometer, respectively. Titratable acidity (TA) was measured using the method described by Amerine and Ough (1988).
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
17
3. Results 3.1. Recycled water An effect of water quality on shoot growth was not detected until the last time shoots were measured on 5 August 1997 when the shoots of vines irrigated with recycled water were 7% shorter. The following season, this effect was apparent from the first time shoot length was measured, which was on 12 May (Fig. 1a). From this date until 10 June 1998, the growth rate of shoots was not affected by water quality. Later, shoots of vines irrigated with recycled water showed a reduction in growth rate. A further reduction in shoot growth rate was detected on 7 July. After the end of July 1998, the difference in shoot growth rate in response to two water qualities continued to increase (Fig. 1a). On 20 September, shoots on vines irrigated with recycled water were 30% shorter than those of vines treated with fresh water (Fig. 1a). The adverse effect of recycled versus fresh water on vine growth was more apparent in 1999. Rate of shoot growth on vines receiving recycled water was lower until the beginning of June, when shoot growth nearly ceased, and these shoots were 58% shorter than those on vines receiving fresh water on 20 September (Fig. 1b).
Fig. 1. The effect of water quality on average shoot length during 1998 (a) and 1999 (b) growing seasons. Vertical bars represent ±S.E.
18
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
Fig. 2. The effect of water quality on average leaf area during 1999 growing season.
Irrigation with recycled water reduced leaf number per shoot and leaf area. Leaf number was reduced by 20% in 1998 and 43% in 1999. In 1998, the reduction in total leaf area was apparent from the first time measurements taken at the end of May, and was reduced by 35% compared to vines irrigated with fresh water at the end of the season. In 1999, the development of leaf area on vines irrigated with recycled water increased only slightly after fruit set whereas on vines irrigated with fresh water leaf area doubled from fruit set until the end of the season (Fig. 2). Water quality affected both yields and juice quality. Vines irrigated with recycled water produced half the yield of vines irrigated with fresh water due to reductions in berry weight (26%) and number (37%) (Table 3). Juice pH and TA were higher and TSS was lower. Increasing irrigation level increased LA/yield ratio, but did not affect yield and fruit quality (Table 3). 3.2. Irrigation level The level of irrigation had a dramatic effect on shoot growth during the course of the experiment. In 1997, shoots on vines irrigated at 1.00 ET level were 130% longer than those on vines irrigated at 0.50 ET. The following season, the growth rate of shoots after 10 June was highest for vines irrigated at 1.00 ET resulting in longer shoots on 17 June. Shoot growth rate during this season was highly correlated with soil water content for both water qualities but this relationship changed as the season progressed (Fig. 3a and b). Water quality interacted with irrigation level after 21 July 1998. The shoot growth response to irrigation for vines irrigated with recycled water was less than that for vines irrigated with fresh water (Fig. 4a). At the end of the season, irrigating with fresh water at 0.75 ET and 1.00 ET increased shoot length by 68% and 159%, respectively, compared with vines irrigated at 0.50 ET. The corresponding increase for vines irrigated with recycled water was only 38% and 84%, respectively.
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
19
Table 3 Yield, and fruit quality of Soultanina grapes harvested from vines on three rootstocks (41B, 1103P, 110R) irrigated at 1.00, 0.75, 0.50 evapotranspiration (ET) with fresh or recycled water. Main factors Rootstocks (R) 41B 1103P 110R Significancee Irrigation level (IR) 0.50 ET 0.75 ET 1.00 ET Significance Water quality Recycled water (WQ) Fresh water Significance Interactions R × IR R × WQ IR × WQ R × IR × WQ
Yield (g/vine)
Berry weight (g)
Berry number
pH
TSSa (Brix)
TAb (‰)
LA/Yc (cm2 /g)
252 ad 169 b 126 b
1.22 a 1.04 b 1.08 b
202 a 158 b 112 b
3.09 b 3.30 a 3.22 ab
6.81 a 5.73 b 6.20 b
42.4 b 85.5 a 84.2 a
h
h
h
f
22.8 22.1 22.7 ns
h
g
168 191 188 ns
1.09 1.10 1.13 ns
152 165 157 ns
3.20 3.20 3.21 ns
23.2 23.1 22.7 ns
6.3 6.1 6.3 ns
55.9b 62.7ab 93.4a
116 250
0.94 1.27
122 194
3.24 3.17
22.5 23.2
6.7 5.7
h
h
h
f
f
h
77.5 63.9 ns
f
ns ns ns ns
ns ns ns ns
ns ns ns ns
f
ns ns ns
ns ns ns ns
ns ns ns
f
ns ns ns ns
Data was collected in 1999. a Total soluble solids. b Tirtable acidity. c Leaf area to yield ratio estimated at veraison. d Any two means within a row not followed by the same letter are significantly different at P < 0.05 with Tukey’s significant difference. e ns = not significant. f P < 0.05. g P < 0.01. h P < 0.001.
In 1999, from budbreak, shoot growth rate on vines irrigated at 1.00 ET the previous season was higher than that on vines irrigated at the lower levels. On 20 May 1999, when the irrigation treatments were imposed, shoots on vines irrigated at 1.00 ET were 28% and 14% longer than those irrigated at 0.50 ET and 0.75 ET, respectively (Fig. 4b). Moreover, shoots responded to an interaction between irrigation level and water quality as in the previous season. Irrigating with fresh water at 0.75 ET and 1.00 ET levels increased shoot lengths by 42% and 140%, respectively, compared with those irrigated at 0.50 ET level. During the same season, irrigation with recycled water had the strongest effect on shoot growth compared to the previous seasons. Vines irrigated at 0.75 ET and 1.00 ET levels had only 32% and 61% higher shoot lengths, respectively, compared to vines irrigated at 0.50 ET (Fig. 4b). Decreasing the level of irrigation reduced both leaf number and leaf area. However, in both seasons, water quality interacted with irrigation level such that the response of
20
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
Fig. 3. Relationship between average shoot growth rate and soil water content for the period 9 to 16 July (a) and 11 to 18 August 1998 (b).
leaf number and leaf area to irrigation was less when recycled water was used (data not shown). 3.3. Rootstock Rootstock significantly affected shoot length and this effect changed within the growing season and over years. Shoots on vines grafted on 110R grew longest during 1997, but early in the next season, until 14 June they had the lowest growth rate. Later that season, shoots of vines grafted on 1103P grew at lower rates than did those grafted on 41B and 110R, and so were shorter by 20 September (Fig. 5). A similar rootstock effect was observed early in 1999 when shoots of vines grafted on 110R were shorter than those of vines grafted on 1103P (data not shown). Vines grafted on 41B had shorter shoots than those on other rootstocks, but growth rate increased after veraison (2 July). Towards the end of that growing season, response to an interaction between rootstock and water quality was apparent. Vines grafted on 1103P had longer shoots than did those grafted on 41B when irrigated with recycled water, but these rootstocks had no effect on shoot length when irrigated with fresh water (data not shown). In 1997, vines developed more leaf area when grafted on 41B and 110R (data not shown). The following season, vines grafted on 41B had more leaf area than did those grafted on 110R from the end of July, and those grafted on 1103P from the end August until last sampling
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
21
Fig. 4. The effect of water quality and irrigation level on average shoot length during 1998 (a) and 1999 (b) growing seasons. Vertical bars represent ±S.E.
Fig. 5. Effect of rootstock on shoot length during 1998 growing season. Sets of bars without letters imply non-significant differences.
22
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
Fig. 6. The effect of rootstock on leaf area on 20 September 1998 and during 1999 growing season. Sets of bars without letters imply non-significant differences.
which was on 20 September (Fig. 6). In 1999, vines grafted on 1103P had developed more leaf area by fruit set than did vines grafted on other rootstocks, but by 20 September vines grafted on 41B developed more leaf area than those on 1103P (Fig. 6). Vines grafted on 41B produced higher yields, berry weights and number of berries/bunch but the LA/yield ratio was half that of the other rootstocks. Juice pH was lower and TA was higher for vines grafted on 41B than the other rootstocks (Table 3). Vines on 41B produced
Fig. 7. Yield of grapevines as influenced by rootstock and irrigation level in 1999 growing season.
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
23
the highest yield of vines irrigated at 1.00 ET, and produced higher yields than vines grafted on 110R when irrigated at 0.75 ET. At the 0.50 ET level, there were no differences in yield among rootstocks (Fig. 7).
4. Discussion 4.1. Water quality Growth of vines irrigated with recycled water declined with age, possibly due to a decrease in vine C and N reserves (Paranychianakis, 2001), decline of N concentration in recycled water (Table 2), differences in rate of salt accumulation among seasons, and climatic conditions. The contribution of each of the above factors to the decrease in vine growth likely differed between seasons. The minimal effect of recycled water on vine growth in 1997 was likely due to lower salt accumulation in the growing medium because of lower irrigation needs and the greater N concentration in recycled water. Vines receiving recycled water had shorter shoots than those receiving fresh water early in 1998. An effect that may have resulted from the lower N-reserves (Oaks et al., 1991) since the N status of these vines was lower as indicated by the lamina N of the previous season (Paranychianakis, 2001). The reduction in shoot growth rate after 10 June 1998 for vines irrigated with recycled water coincided with a reduction in predawn leaf water potential (Ψ pd ) (Paranychianakis et al., 2004), indicating that an osmotic effect due to salt accumulation in the growing medium contributed to the growth depression. Vine nitrogen needs appeared to be satisfied during the same period. A similar N concentration in recycled water was reported to be sufficient to cover the N-needs and sustain the growth of mature grapefruits trees (Maurer et al., 1995). Vine growth from budbreak to flowering is mainly dependent on old wood N and C reserves (Schaller et al., 1989). The lower C and N reserves that assessed in vines irrigated with recycled water at the end of 1998 (Paranychianakis, 2001) probably resulted in lower growth rates early in 1999. Old wood reserves have been reported to reach their minimum levels around flowering (Schaller et al., 1989), which is consistent with the severe inhibition of growth observed for vines irrigated with recycled water (Fig. 4). Furthermore, in 1999 grapevine flowering occurred early (1 May) because of unusually high temperatures that prevailed during April. During flowering, vine N needs increase and are satisfied with increased N uptake from the soil (Lohnertz, 1988). However, soil N availability for vines irrigated with recycled water was negligible during that period because all nutrients were supplied via recycled water which was just applied on 1 May. Thus, the nearly depleted C and N resources and the low availability of N early in 1999 were the predominant factors of the inhibition and the early cessation of growth. Depletion of C and N reserves and low availability of N during fruit set are also considered as the major causes of the yield reduction. Bloom and fruit set are critical stages in vine reproductive growth and the prevalence of unfavorable conditions that impair photosynthesis may reduce the translocation of assimilates to inflorescences which are weak sinks that period (Keller and Koblet, 1994). The low availability of nitrogen during that period expected to have reduced new carbohydrate production both directly by reducing
24
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
assimilation and indirectly by reducing the number and area of leaves. Severe berry drop and berry weight reduction were reported for vines with low availability of carbohydrates due to defoliation treatment during bloom (Candofli-Vasconcelos and Koblet, 1990). Later in the season, salt accumulation may have also contributed to a further reduction in berry weight as found in other studies (Prior et al., 1992). Fruits of vines irrigated with recycled water had a lower TSS concentration despite the similar ratio of LA/yield which was higher than the reported minimum values adequate for berry development (Poni et al., 1993). However, from the beginning of June to grape harvest, a reduction in assimilation rate in response to recycled water was not detected (Paranychianakis et al., 2004). This result could indicate that single leaf measurements of photosynthesis may not adequately reflect whole vine photosynthesis (Miller et al., 1997) or that an increased carbohydrate demand is required by these vines to sustain basic physiological functions and to support other sinks. 4.2. Irrigation level Water availability severely affects vine growth and development (Williams et al., 1994). However, the final effect of irrigation on shoot length and leaf area varied from season to season due to differences in the degree and duration of water stress, climatic conditions, number of shoots, availability of reserves and crop level. Shoot growth rate (SGR) was highly correlated with soil moisture particularly in 1998, when no fruits were retained (Fig. 3). Significant correlations between SGR and SWC in unbeared grapevines have been also reported by Hardie and Martin (2000). The correlation obtained in the present study was differentiated within 1998 (Fig. 3a and b). Until mid-July, no further increase in SGR was observed for SWC values higher than 11% (Fig. 3a). However after that date, SGR continued to increase linearly above the value of 11% with increasing SWC (Fig. 3b). The greater leaf area which has been developed by 18 July and therefore the higher production of assimilates, may be the cause that differentiated the relationship between SGR and SWC. The lower response of growth to irrigation with recycled water is attributed to the osmotic effect resulting from the higher salt accumulation with increasing irrigation level which is consistent with greater Ψ pd reduction in response to these treatments (Paranychianakis et al., 2004). In 1999, the detrimental effect on growth of irrigating with recycled water was likely due to N starvation during May. The lack of an irrigation effect on vine yield may have had different causes for each water quality. In vines irrigated with recycled water, N starvation initially and later the higher salt accumulation at 1.00 ET level likely prevented an irrigation effect on yield. On the other hand, for fresh water irrigation the competition between growing tips and fruits may have stimulated the direction of assimilates to shoots (Bravdo et al., 1985) and inhibited berry growth at high rates of irrigation. Another factor that may have contributed to the lack of an effect on yield, is the timing of water deficit development. Berry growth is more sensitive to water stress during the Stage I of berry development (fruit set to 20 days before veraison) (Matthews and Anderson, 1989). However, the early fruit set observed in 1999 had as result a significant part of the Stage I of berry development to have been completed, before a severe water deficit development. Thus, the adverse effects of drought to berry growth were minimised.
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
25
4.3. Rootstock The results of this work support findings that rootstock affects shoot growth (Ezzahuani and Williams, 1995; Grant and Matthews, 1996) and leaf area (Sommer and Clingeleffer, 1997). Rootstocks of V. rupestris and its hybrids have been reported to increase vigor (May, 1994). However, an opposite effect was observed in this study, with vines grafted on 41B producing higher final shoot length and leaf area than vines grafted on 1103P. The higher yield produced by vines grafted on 41B likely prevented a similar response in 1999. In both growing seasons, vines grafted on 1103P showed lower growth rates late in the season compared to other two rootstocks while vines grafted on 110R had lower growth rates early in the season indicating differences in the vegetative cycle among rootstocks as found in a previous study (May, 1994). The longer shoots on vines grafted on 1103P compared with those on other rootstocks under irrigation with recycled water in 1999 may not be due to a tolerance of that rootstock to salt accumulation and/or nitrogen deficiency. More likely, it resulted from the early cessation of shoot growth for vines irrigated with recycled water which prevented the recovery of growth for vines grafted on the other rootstocks. Vines grafted on 41B produced higher yields at 1.00 ET level than did the other rootstocks. Similarly, McCarthy et al. (1997) reported that rootstock effect on yield of Shiraz vines changed by applying a small amount of irrigation. However, under dry conditions vines grafted on 41B and 110R have been reported to be more productive due to more clusters than are vines on 1103P (Ezzahuani and Williams, 1995). In this study, cluster number was adjusted to be the same for all rootstocks which may have resulted in different effect on vines grafted on 41B and 110R. A study in South Africa, showed that table grape varieties performed poorly when grafted on 110R, but when wine varieties were grafted on 110R it was one of the best performing rootstocks (Loubser et al., 1994). Table varieties require increased cultural inputs, such as irrigation and fertilization, which favor vigor that may be the reason for altered effects of rootstock on grape performance. This is also in agreement with the results observed in the present study. Morano and Kliewer (1994) suggest that vigorous rootstocks are unsuitable in fertile soils because they enhance vine vigor and reduce yield. In this study, vines grafted on 41B were as vigorous as vines grafted on 110R in the 1998 growing season. However, in the following season vines grafted on 41B appeared to direct assimilates more to clusters than did the other rootstocks, and this effect became more evident with increasing irrigation level. Growth regulators such as cytokinins and/or gibberilic acid may play an important role in the direction of assimilates (Mullins et al., 1992). Differences in of rootstock performance may reflect differences in production of these substances among various rootstocks. A significant influence of rootstock on juice qualitative parameters has been reported (Ezzahuani and Williams, 1995). Despite the higher yield at 1.00 ET irrigation level, vines grafted on 41B had higher TSS concentration compared to vines grafted on other rootstocks. These findings is in agreement to Bravdo et al. (1985), which reported a delayed harvest in vines that were cluster thinned and received high irrigation rates and these effects were attributed to a sink competition between growing tips and developing berries.
26
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
5. Conclusions Irrigating with recycled water suppressed grapevine growth and yield. These adverse effects were due to increased salts and low nitrogen content. However, recycled water can be used as an alternative water resource for grapevine irrigation in areas with deficient resources after appropriate salinity management. Applying higher quantities of irrigation to leach the accumulated salts, blending with fresh water and the application method (i.e. subsurface drip irrigation) are some suggested solutions to eliminate the detrimental effects of salt accumulation on growth and yield. Moreover, supplemental nitrogen fertilization is needed during the early stage of development to compensate for the low N supply. Rootstock affected grapevine growth, yield and juice qualitative components. However, these rootstock effects were not altered by water quality indicating minimal differences among rootstocks in terms of salinity tolerance. Rootstock can severely affect the quantitative and qualitative components of the yield depending on soil water availability.
Acknowledgements Financial support for this study was provided by Eu-Interreg II programme. The authors are grateful to Prof. K.A. Roubelakis-Angelakis for supervising the study and reviewing the manuscript. Thanks are due to V. Paranychianakis, E. Tzorakakis and M. Zachariakis for their technical assistance in field measurements.
References Amerine, M.A., Ough, C.S., 1988. Methods for Analysis of Musts and Wines. Wiley and Sons, New York. Angelakis, A.N., Marecos de Monte, M.H.F., Bontoux, L., Asano, T., 1999. The status of wastewater reuse practice in the Mediterranean basin. Water Res. 33, 2201–2217. Ayers, R.S., Westcot, D.W., 1988. Irrigation water quality. In: Pettygrove, G.S., Asano, T. (Eds.), Irrigation with Reclaimed Municipal Wastewater—a Guidance Manual. Lewis Publishers. Bravdo, B., Hepner, Y., Loinger, C., Cohen, S., Tabacman, H., 1985. Effect of irrigation and crop level on growth, yield and wine quality of Cabernet Sauvignon. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 36, 132–139. Candofli-Vasconcelos, M., Koblet, W., 1990. Yield, fruit quality, bud fertility and starch reserves of the wood as a function of leaf removal in Vitis vinifera. Evidence of compensation and stress recovering. Vitis 29, 199–221. Dellas, J., 1992. Criteria used for rootstock selection in France. In: Proceedings of the Rootstock Seminar: a worldwide perspective. Am. Soc. Enol. Vitic., Davis, CA 1–14. Downton, W.J.S., 1985. Growth and mineral composition of the Sultana grapevine as influenced by salinity and rootstock. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 36, 425–434. Ezzahuani, A., Williams, L.E., 1995. The influence of rootstock on leaf water potential, yield, and berry composition of Ruby seedless grapevines. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 46, 559–563. Grant, R.S., Matthews, M.A., 1996. The influence of phosphorous availability, scion, and rootstock on grapevine shoot growth, leaf area, and petiole phosphorous concentration. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 47, 217–224. Hardie, W.J., Martin, S.R., 2000. Shoot growth on de-fruited grapevines: a physiological indicator for irrigation scheduling. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 6, 52–58. Keller, M., Koblet, W., 1994. Is carbon starvation rather than excessive nitrogen supply the cause of inflorescence necrosis in Vitis vinifera L? Vitis 33, 81–86. Klein, I., Strime, M., Fanderstain, L., Mani, Y., 2000. Irrigation and fertigation effects on phosphorous and potassium nutrition of wine grapes. Vitis 39, 55–62.
N.V. Paranychianakis et al. / Agricultural Water Management 69 (2004) 13–27
27
Lohnertz, O., 1988. Untersuchungen zum zeitlichen Verlauf der Nahrstoffaufnahme bei Vitis vinifera (cv Riesling). Thesis, University of Giessen, Giessenheimer Berichte. Loubser, J.T., Avenant, J.H., Downton, W.J.S., 1994. Grapevine rootstock performance in South Africa. In: Proceedings of the Intern. Symp. Table Grape Production. Amer. Soc. Enol. Vitic. Davis, CA, pp. 127–129. Marschner, H., 1995. Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants. second ed. Academic Press, London. Matthews, M.A., Anderson, M.M., 1989. Reproductive development in grape (Vitis vinifera L.): responses to seasonal water deficits. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 40, 52–60. Maurer, M.A., Davies, F.S., Graetz, D.A., 1995. Reclaimed wastewater irrigation and fertilization of mature Redblush grapefruit trees on spodosols in Florida. J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 120, 394–402. May, P., 1994. Using Grapevine Rootstocks. The Australian Perspective. Winetitles. Adelaide. McCarthy, M.G., Cirami, R.M., Furkaliev, D.G., 1997. Rootstock response of Shiraz (Vitis vinifera) grapevines to dry and drip-irrigated conditions. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 3, 95–98. Miller, D.P., Howell, G.S., Flore, J.A., 1997. Influence of shoot number and crop load on potted Chambourcin grapevines. II: Whole-vine vs. single-leaf photosynthesis. Vitis 36, 109–114. Morano, L., Kliewer, W.M., 1994. Root distribution of three grapevines rootstocks grafted to Cabernet Sauvignon grown on a very gravelly clay loam soil in Oakville, California. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 45, 345–348. Mullins, M.G., Bouquet, A., Williams, L.E., 1992. Biology of Grapevine. Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, Cambridge. Oaks, A., Clark, C.J., Greenwood, J.S., 1991. Nitrogen assimilation in higher plants: strategies for annual and perennial plant species. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Nitrogen in Grapes and Wine. Am. Soc. Enol. Vitic., Davis, CA, pp. 43–51. Paranychianakis, N.V., 2001. Influence of rootstock, irrigation level and recycled water on the growth, nutrition and physiology of Soultanina grapevines. PhD Thesis. Agricultural University of Athens. Paranychianakis, N.V., Chartzoulakis, K.S., Angelakis, A.N., 2004. Influence of rootstock, irrigation level and recycled water on water relations and gas exchange of Soultanina grapevines. Environmental and Experimental Botany, in press. Poni, S., Lakso, A.N., Turner, A.J., Melious, R.E., 1993. The effects of pre- and post-veraison water stress on growth and physiology of potted Pinot Noir grapevines at varying crop levels. Vitis 32, 207–214. Prior, L.D., Grieve, A.M., Cullis, B.R., 1992. Sodium chloride and soil texture in irrigated field grown Sultana grapevines. I. Yield and fruit quality. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 43, 1051–1066. Rose, J.B., Gerba, C.P., 1991. Assessing the potential health risks of viruses and parasites in reclaimed water in Arizona and Florida. Water Sci. Tech. 23, 2091–2098. Schaller, K., Lohnertz, O., Geiben, R., Beit, N., 1989. N-Stoffwechsel von Reben: N-und Arginindynamik im Holzkorper der Sorte Muller-Thurgau im Verlaufe einer Vegetationsperiode. Wein-Wiss. 44, 91–101. Sommer, K.J., Clingeleffer, P.R., 1997. Vine canopy development and carbohydrate partitioning as influenced by pruning. Bull. O.I.V. 70, 155–158. Williams, L.E., Dokoozlian, N.K., Wample, R., 1994. Grape. In: Schaffer, B., Andersen, P.C. (Eds.), Handbook of Environmental Physiology of Fruit Crops, vol. I: Temperate Crops. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 85–133.