| Literature DB >> 35684279 |
Nicola Damiano1, Carmen Arena2, Antonello Bonfante3, Rosanna Caputo1, Arturo Erbaggio3, Chiara Cirillo1, Veronica De Micco1.
Abstract
The increase in severe drought events due to climate change in the areas traditionally suitable for viticulture is enhancing the need to understand how grapevines regulate their photosynthetic metabolism in order to forecast specific cultivar adaptive responses to the changing environment. This study aims at evaluating the association between leaf anatomical traits and eco-physiological adjustments of the 'Falanghina' grapevine under different microclimatic conditions at four sites in southern Italy. Sites were characterized by different pedoclimatic conditions but, as much as possible, were similar for plant material and cultivation management. Microscopy analyses on leaves were performed to quantify stomata and vein traits, while eco-physiological analyses were conducted on vines to assess plant physiological adaptation capability. At the two sites with relatively low moisture, photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, photosystem electron transfer rate, and quantum yield of PSII, linear electron transport was lower compared to the other two sites. Stomata size was higher at the site characterized by the highest precipitation. However, stomatal density and most vein traits tended to be relatively stable among sites. The number of free vein endings per unit leaf area was lower in the two vineyards with low precipitation. We suggest that site-specific stomata and vein traits modulation in Falanghina grapevine are an acclimation strategy that may influence photosynthetic performance. Overall in-depth knowledge of the structure/function relations in Falanghina vines might be useful to evaluate the plasticity of this cultivar towards site-specific management of vineyards in the direction of precision viticulture.Entities:
Keywords: Vitis vinifera; climate changes; leaf traits; photosynthesis; vein and stomata traits
Year: 2022 PMID: 35684279 PMCID: PMC9182941 DOI: 10.3390/plants11111507
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Effects of field (F), year (Y), and their interaction (F x Y) on total shoot leaf area, single leaf area, shoot diameter, bunch weight, and bunch number per shoot of V. vinifera subsp. vinifera ‘Falanghina’ vines at the four study sites: SL-Santa Lucia, CA-Calvese, GR-Grottole, AC-Acquafredde. Mean values and standard errors are shown.
| Total Shoot Leaf Area | Single Leaf | Shoot Basal | Average Bunch Weight | Bunch | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (cm2 shoot−1) | (cm2) | (mm) | (g bunch−1) | (n° shoot−1) | |
| Field (F) | |||||
| SL | 4142 ± 250 a | 192 ± 10.4 a | 8.79 ± 0.16 ab | 360 ± 11.7 a | 1.3 ± 0.04 b |
| CA | 3416 ± 171 b | 135 ± 3.24 c | 7.89 ± 0.13 c | 208 ± 9.27 c | 1.2 ± 0.03 c |
| GR | 4194 ± 228 a | 151 ± 4.22 b | 9.02 ± 0.16 a | 175 ± 10.7 d | 1.3 ± 0.03 b |
| AC | 3320 ± 156 b | 156 ± 5.21 b | 8.49 ± 0.17 b | 304 ± 11.6 b | 1.4 ± 0.05 a |
| Year (Y) | |||||
| 2019 | 4308 ± 169 a | 168 ± 5.75 a | 9.13 ± 0.10 a | 270 ± 10.8 a | 1.5 ± 0.02 a |
| 2020 | 3228 ± 107 b | 149 ± 3.42 b | 7.97 ± 0.11 b | 253 ± 11.7 a | 1.2 ± 0.02 b |
| Significance | |||||
| Field (F) | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** |
| Year (Y) | *** | ** | *** | NS | *** |
| F x Y | NS | NS | NS | *** | *** |
NS, **, and ***, Not significant or significant at p < 0.01, and 0.001, respectively. Different letters within each column indicate significant differences according to Duncan's multiple comparison tests (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 1Combined effect of field and year (F x Y) on bunch weight (a) and bunch number (b) of V. vinifera subsp. vinifera ‘Falanghina’ vines at the four study sites: SL-Santa Lucia, CA-Calvese, GR-Grottole, AC-Acquafredde. Mean values and standard errors are shown. Different letters indicate significant differences according to Duncan’s multiple range test (p ≤ 0.05).
Effects of field (F), year (Y) and their interaction (F x Y) on net photosynthetic rate (Pn), stomatal conductance (gs), substomatal CO2 concentration (Ci), leaf transpiration rate (E), instantaneous water use efficiency (inWUE), electron transport rate (ETR), quantum yield of PSII linear electron transport (ΦPSII), and maximum quantum efficiency of PSII photochemistry (Fv/Fm) of V. vinifera subsp. vinifera ‘Falanghina’ vines at the four study sites: SL-Santa Lucia, CA-Calvese, GR-Grottole, AC-Acquafredde. Mean values and standard errors are shown.
| Pn | gs | Ci | E | inWUE | ETR | ΦPSII | Fv/Fm | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (µmol CO2 m−2s−1) | (mmol H2O m−2 s−1) | (µmol CO2 mol−1) | (mol H2O m−2 s−1) | (µmol CO2/ mol H2O) | ||||
| Field (F) | ||||||||
| SL | 10.9 ± 0.66 a | 183.5 ± 19.1 a | 267.6 ± 12.5 a | 5.00 ± 0.31 a | 2.55 ± 0.26 a | 172.1 ± 5.30 a | 0.309 ± 0.007 a | 0.784 ± 0.003 a |
| CA | 6.20 ± 0.49 c | 103.6 ± 12.1 b | 228.3 ± 16.0 a | 3.37 ± 0.34 b | 1.97 ± 0.20 a | 137.3 ± 3.40 b | 0.250 ± 0.006 b | 0.752 ± 0.003 b |
| GR | 5.15 ± 0.78 c | 66.7 ± 10.9 b | 237.9 ± 17.8 a | 3.33 ± 0.37 b | 1.83 ± 0.32 a | 135.1 ± 6.19 b | 0.242 ± 0.010 b | 0.754 ± 0.004 b |
| AC | 9.31 ± 0.61 b | 159.4 ± 15.5 a | 225.2 ± 15.3 a | 5.31 ± 0.24 a | 1.98 ± 0.17 a | 181.2 ± 4.81 a | 0.325 ± 0.008 a | 0.788 ± 0.003 a |
| Year (Y) | ||||||||
| 2019 | 8.77 ± 0.58 a | 131.5 ± 14.0 a | 214.6 ± 13.6 b | 4.60 ± 0.27 a | 2.26 ± 0.21 a | 153.8 ± 5.14 a | 0.279 ± 0.008 a | 0.772 ± 0.004 a |
| 2020 | 6.78 ± 0.45 b | 120.4 ± 8.8 a | 267.4 ± 4.10 a | 4.00 ± 0.22 a | 1.74 ± 0.09 b | 159.3 ± 3.98 a | 0.284 ± 0.008 a | 0.766 ± 0.002 a |
| Significance | ||||||||
| Field (F) | *** | *** | NS | *** | NS | *** | *** | *** |
| Year (Y) | ** | NS | *** | NS | * | NS | NS | NS |
| F x Y | * | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
NS, *, **, and ***, Not significant or significant at p < 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001, respectively. Different letters within each column indicate significant differences according to Duncan’s multiple comparison tests (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 2Combined effect of field and year (F x Y) on net photosynthetic rate (Pn) of V. vinifera subsp. vinifera ‘Falanghina’ vines at the four study sites: SL-Santa Lucia, CA-Calvese, GR-Grottole, AC-Acquafredde. Mean values and standard errors are shown. Different letters indicate significant differences according to Duncan’s multiple range test (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 3Epi-fluorescence microscopy views of abaxial leaf epidermis of V. vinifera ‘Falanghina’ vines at the four study sites: SL-Santa Lucia (a), CA-Calvese (b), GR-Grottole (c), AC-Acquafredde (d). Images are all at the same magnification. Bar = 50 µm.
Effects of field (F), year (Y), and their interaction (F x Y) on stomata traits of V. vinifera subsp. vinifera ‘Falanghina’ vines at the four study sites: SL-Santa Lucia, CA-Calvese, GR-Grottole, AC-Acquafredde. Mean values and standard errors are shown.
| Stomata Length | Stomata Width | Stomata Frequency | |
|---|---|---|---|
| (µm) | (µm) | (n/mm2) | |
| Field (F) | |||
| SL | 33.2 ± 0.43 a | 19.2 ± 0.31 a | 140.3 ± 3.74 a |
| CA | 29.6 ± 0.34 b | 16.9 ± 0.23 b | 149.2 ± 3.54 a |
| GR | 27.2 ± 0.55 c | 15.5 ± 0.36 c | 138.6 ± 4.04 a |
| AC | 24.8 ± 0.38 d | 14.3 ± 0.21 d | 139.9 ± 2.50 a |
| Year (Y) | |||
| 2019 | 28.8 ± 0.37 a | 16.1 ± 0.22 b | 151.4 ± 2.56 a |
| 2020 | 28.6 ± 0.36 a | 16.8 ± 0.24 a | 132.6 ± 1.88 b |
| Significance | |||
| Field (F) | *** | *** | NS |
| Year (Y) | NS | * | *** |
| F x Y | NS | NS | * |
NS, * and ***, Not significant or significant at p < 0.05 and 0.001, respectively. Different letters within each column indicate significant differences according to Duncan’s multiple comparison tests (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 4Combined effect of field and year (F x Y) on stomatal frequency of V. vinifera subsp. vinifera ‘Falanghina’ vines at the four study sites: SL-Santa Lucia, CA-Calvese, GR-Grottole, AC-Acquafredde. Mean values and standard errors are shown. Different letters indicate significant differences according to Duncan’s multiple range test (p ≤ 0.05).
Effects of field (F), year (Y), and their interaction (F x Y) on vein traits in leaves of V. vinifera ‘Falanghina’ vines at the four study sites: SL-Santa Lucia, CA-Calvese, GR-Grottole, AC-Acquafredde. Mean values and standard errors are shown.
| Minor VLA | Major VLA | Total VLA | Minor VAA | Major VAA | Total VAA | FVEA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (mm/mm2) | (mm/mm2) | (mm/mm2) | (mm2/mm2) | (mm2/mm2) | (mm2/mm2) | (n/mm2) | |
| Field (F) | |||||||
| SL | 2.31 ± 0.06 a | 0.729 ± 0.036 a | 2.89 ± 0.06 c | 0.118 ± 0.004 c | 0.065 ± 0.004 a | 0.175 ± 0.005 b | 2.93 ± 0.11 a |
| CA | 2.59 ± 0.01 a | 0.865 ± 0.049 a | 3.27 ± 0.08 a | 0.132 ± 0.004 b | 0.072 ± 0.004 a | 0.194 ± 0.005 a | 2.47 ± 0.05 c |
| GR | 2.47 ± 0.09 a | 0.751 ± 0.054 a | 3.04 ± 0.07 bc | 0.134 ± 0.006 b | 0.072 ± 0.004 a | 0.197 ± 0.005 a | 2.37 ± 0.10 c |
| AC | 2.58 ± 0.14 a | 0.817 ± 0.042 a | 3.22 ± 0.12 ab | 0.145 ± 0.004 a | 0.069 ± 0.003 a | 0.194 ± 0.007 a | 2.68 ± 0.03 b |
| Year (Y) | |||||||
| 2019 | 2.45 ± 0.06 a | 0.799 ± 0.028 a | 3.07 ± 0.05 a | 0.137 ± 0.003 a | 0.075 ± 0.002 a | 0.202 ± 0.003 a | 2.48 ± 0.04 b |
| 2020 | 2.52 ± 0.09 a | 0.781 ± 0.039 a | 3.14 ± 0.07 a | 0.127 ± 0.004 b | 0.064 ± 0.003 b | 0.178 ± 0.004 b | 2.74 ± 0.06 a |
| Significance | |||||||
| Field (F) | NS | NS | * | ** | NS | ** | *** |
| Year (Y) | NS | NS | NS | * | * | *** | ** |
| F x Y | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | ** | ** |
NS, *, **, and ***, Not significant or significant at p < 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001, respectively. Different letters within each column indicate significant differences according to Duncan’s multiple comparison tests (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 5Combined effect of field and year (F x Y) on Total VAA (a) and FVEA (b) of V. vinifera subsp. vinifera ‘Falanghina’ vines at the four study sites: SL-Santa Lucia, CA-Calvese, GR-Grottole, AC-Acquafredde. Mean values and standard errors are shown. Different letters indicate significant differences according to Duncan’s multiple range test (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 6The four experimental sites Santa Lucia (a), Calvese (b), Grottole (c), Acquefredde (d) vineyards.
Figure 7Light microscopy views of V. vinifera ‘Falanghina’ leaf lamina sample with arrows pointing to the FVEA (2, second-order vein). Bar = 300 µm.