Physiological Responses of Some Iranian Grape Cultivars to Iron Chelate Application in Calcareous Soil

علوم باغبانی

Article 6, Volume 29, Issue 4, November 2015, Pages 572-581   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jhorts4.v29i4.30543

Authors

H. Doulati Baneh^* ; E. Montazeri

Research and Education Center of West Azarbaijan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center

Abstract

Introduction: Iron chlorosis is considered to be one of the most important nutritional disorders in grapevines, particularly in calcareous soils that under these conditions fruit yield and quality is depressed in the current year and fruit buds poorly develop for following year. Symptoms of iron chlorosis in orchards and vineyards are usually more frequent in spring when shoot growth is rapid and bicarbonate concentration in the soil solution buffers soil pH in the rhizosphere and root apoplast. Several native grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) genotypes, highly appreciated for their organoleptic characteristics and commercial potential, are widely cultivated in Iran. Cultivated plants differ as to their susceptibility to Fe deficiency in calcareous soils, some being poorly affected while others showing severe leaf chlorotic symptoms. Selection and the use of Fe-efficient genotypes is one of the important approaches to prevent this nutritional problem. In this research the response of three local grapevine cultivars was evaluated to iron chelate consumption in a calcareous soil (26% T.N.V).
Materials and Methods: Well rooted woody cuttings of three autochthonous varieties (Rasha, Qezel uzum, Keshmeshi Qermez) were cultivated in pots filled with a calcareous soil with iron chelate consumption at three rates (0, 7.5 and 15 mg Fe/ Kg soil). The study was conducted with two factors (cultivar and iron chelate) and 3 replicates in a factorial arrangement based on randomized complete block design. Plant parameters including vegetative growth, chlorophyll index and leaf area were monitored during the growth period. At the end of the treatment, fresh and dry weight of shoots and roots were determined. The concentrations of macro and micro elements in the leaves were assayed using an atomic absorption and spectrophotometer. One-way-ANOVA was applied comparing the behavior of the cultivars growing.
Results and Discussion: Analysis of variance showed that chlorophyll index and leaf area differs significantly among tested cultivars. The highest and the lowest chlorophyll index were observed in Rasha and Keshmeshi Qermez cultivars, respectively. Fe chelate consumption up to 7.5 mg/kg significantly increased chlorophyll, leaf area, shoots growth and fresh weight of shoot and root compared to the control. The highest leaf area was related to Rasha cultivar in 7.5 mg/kg treatment. In all tested cultivars by increasing Fe concentration to 15 mg/kg, leaf area was decreased. According to the laboratory results, there was a significant difference in the concentrations of some macro and micro nutrient of leaves among tested cultivars. The highest amount of K, Fe, Mn and Zn was recorded in leaves of Rasha cultivar. Qezel uzum has also the highest P, N, Ca, Mg and Cu in its leaves. Application of 7.5 Fe mg /Kg soil increased calcium, magnesium and copper concentrations in leaves of Rasha cultivar and nitrogen concentration in Qezel uzum cultivar. In Keshmeshi Qermez cultivar, the sensitive cultivar to iron chlorosis, iron chelate consumption up to 7.5 Fe mg /Kg soil increased nitrogen, zinc and copper concentrations. Increase in iron consumption up to 15 mg/Kg soil caused significant increase in copper concentration. Among the study cultivars, Rasha significantly absorbed the highest iron, zinc, manganese and potassium from the soil and did not show iron chlorosis, so it can be as a suitable rootstock with respect to iron chlorosis.
Conclusion: In this study we have studied the influence Fe-chelate on some features of three Iranian grapevine cultivars (Vitis vinifera L) grown in calcareous soils. Our findings confirm the variable response of native grapevines to bicarbonate-induced iron deficiency. The most susceptible cultivar, Keshmeshi Qermez, have been very impaired by the calcareous soil; it produced less shoot growth and dry matter since these factors of the tolerant cultivars was decreased very little. The different behavior of potted cultivars with respect to iron chlorosis is related to modifications of some physiological parameters at the root level. A parameter which emphasizes the differential response of the genotypes to stress conditions was the capability of the genotypes to take up elements from the soil. Rasha cultivar showed a high degree of tolerance by taking up more iron when growing on calcareous soil, while keshmeshi cultivar took less iron. It will be recommended use of Rasha cultivar in calcareous soil as on rooted vine or rootstock. These findings suggest that biochemical parameters may constitute reliable criteria for the selection of tolerant grapevine genotypes to iron chlorosis.

Keywords

Chlorophyll index; Iron Chlorosis; Grapevine; Leaf area

References

Abadia J., Eugenio A., Tsipouridis C., Bruggemann W., Neguerole J. and Marangoni B. 1998. Novel approaches for the control of iron cholorosis in fruit tree crops, Final Report, 144 p.

2- Abadia J., Lopez- Milan A. F., Rombola A.D. and Abadia A. 2001. Organic acids and Fe deficiency: a review, Plant and Soil, 241: 43-49.

3- Alcantara E., Romera F.J., Canete M. and de la Guardia M.D. 2000. Effects of bicarbonate and iron supply on Fe (III) reducing capacity of roots and leaf chlorosis of Fe susceptible peach rootstock "Nemaguard", Journal of Plant Nutrition,23 (11&12): 1607-1617.

4- Barron D.V., Campillo M.C. and Torrent J. 2010. Testing the ability of vivianite to prevent iron deficiency in pot- grown grapevine, Scientia Horticulture, 123: 464-468.

5- Bavaresco L., Fregoni M. and Frachini P. 1991. Investigations on iron uptake and reduction by excised roots of different grapevine rootstocks and a V.vinifera cultivar, Plant and Soil,130: 109-113.

6- Bavaresco L., Fraschini P. and Perino A. 1993. Effect of rootstock on the occurrence of lime- induced chlorosis of potted Vitis vinifera L. cv. ‘Pinot blanc ’.Plant and Soil, 157 (2): 305-311.

7- Bavaresco L., Giachino E. and Colla R. 1999. Iron chlorosis paradox in grapevine, Journal of Plant Nutrition, 22:1689-1597.

8- Bavaresco L. and Poni S. 2003. Effect of calcareous soil on photosynthesis rate, mineral nutrition, and source- sink ratio of table grape, Journal of Plant Nutrition, 5: 747-753.

9- Bavaresco L., Presutto P. and Civardi S. 2005. Research note, 43: A lime susceptible rootstock, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 56:2.

10- Bertamini M. and Nadunchezhian N. 2005.Grapevine growth and physiological response to iron deficiency, Journal of Plant Nutrition, 28, pp. 737-749.

11- Boxma R. 1972. Bicarbonate as the most important soil factor in lime-induced chlorosis in the Netherlands, Plant Soil, 37:233-243.

12- Brancardoro L., Rabotti G., Scienza A. and Zocchi G. 1995. Mechanisms of Fe- efficiency in roots of Vitis spp. In response to iron deficiency, Plant Soil, 171: 229-234.

13- Chen L., Smith B.R. and Cheng L. 2004. CO2 assimilation, photosynthetic enzymes and carbohydrates of "Concord'' Grape leaves to iron supply, Journal of the American Society of Horticulture Science, 129(5): 738-744.

14- Crowley D.E., Wang Y.C., Reid C.P.P. and Szaniszlo P.J. 1991.Siderophore-iron uptake mechanisms by microorganisms and plants, Plant Soil, 130: 179-198.

15- Emami A. 1997. Plant Analysis Methods. Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization Publication, Iran. 128 pp. (in Persian).

16- Ghasemi- Faaei R., Ronagi A., Maftoun M., Karimian N. and Soltanpour P. 2003. Influence of FeEDDHA on iron- manganese interaction in soybean genotypes in a calcareous soil, Journal of Plant Nutrition, 26: 1815-1823.

17- Gil- Ortiz R, and Carracosa B. 2005. Response of leaf parameter to soil applications of iron- EDDHA chelates in a peach orchard affected by iron chlorosis. Journal: Communications in soil science and plant analysis. 36. Issue 13& 14: 1839-1849.

18- Gruber B. and Kosegarten H. 2001. Depressed growth of non – chlorotic vine grown in calcareous soil is an iron deficiency symptom prior to leaf chlorosis, Journal of Plant Nutrition, 165: 111-117.

19- Korcak R. 1987. Iron deficiency chlorosis, Horticulture Review, 9: 133-186.

20- Kosegarten H. and Koyro H.W. 2001. Apoplastic accumulation of iron in the epidermis of maize (Zea mais) roots grown in calcareous soil, Physiol Plant, 2001. in press.

21- Linday W.L. 1974. Role of chelation in micronutrient availability. In: Carson, E W.(Ed).The plant root and its environment, University Press of Virginia. Charlottesville, pp.507-524.

22- Loeppert R. H., Wei L.C. and Ocumpaugh W.R. 1994. Soil factors influencing the mobilization of iron in calcareous soils, Lewis Publishers. Boca Raton. pp. 343-360.

23- Lopez- Millan A.F., Morales F. and Abadia J. 2001. Iron deficency- associated changes in the composition of the leaf apoplastic fluid from field- grown pear (Pyrus commonis L.) trees, Journal of Experimental Botany, 52: 1489-1498.

24- Mengel K. 1994. Iron availability in plant tissues- iron chlorosis on calcareous soils, Plant Soil, 165: 275-283.

25- Mengel K. and Malissovas N. 1982. Light depended proton excretion by roots of entire vine plant (Vitis Vinifera L.), 145, 261-267.

26- Nijjar G. S. 1990. Nutrition of fruit trees, Kalyani Pub. New Dehli. 259-270.

27- Pestana M., Varennes A., Abadia J., and Faria E. 2005.Differential tolerance to iron deficiency of citrus rootstock grown in nutrient solutions, Scientia Horticulturae, 104: 25-36.

28- Romera F.J., Alcantara E. and de la Guardia M.D. 1991.Characterization of the tolerance to iron chlorosis in different peach root stocks grown in nutrient solution. Effect of bicarbonate and phosphate, Plant Soil, 130: 115-119.

29- Romheld V. 2000.The chlorosis paradox: Fe inactivation a secondary event in chlorotic leaves of grapevines, Journal of Plant Nutrition, 23 (11&12): 1629-1643.

30- Russo M.A., Sambuco F. and Belligno A. 2010. The response to iron deficiency of two sensitive grapevine cultivars grafted on a tolerant rootstock, African Journal of Biochemistry Research, 4(1): 33-42.

31- Samar S.M. and Samavat S. 1997. Causes of lime-induced iron chlorosis and methods of control, Technical Report No: 27. Soil and Water Research Institute. Agricultural Education Publishing Co. Tehran. Iran. (In Persian)

32- Smith B R. and Cheng L.2006. Fe-EDDHA alleviates chlorosis in' concord' grapevines grown at high pH, Hort Science, 41(6): 1498-1501.

33- Sociasi Company R., Gomez J. and Felipe A.J. 1995. A genetic approach to iron chlorosis in deciduous fruit trees, In: Abadia, J. (Ed). Iron nutrition in soil and plants. Kluwer Academic publishers, Dordrecht. The Netherlands. pp: 167-174.

34- Tagliavini M. and Rombola A.D. 2001. Iron deficiency and chlorosis in orchard and vineyard ecosystems, European Journal of Agronomy, 15: 71-92.Zeither, H.Z.

35- Tagliavini M., Rombola A.D. and Marangoni B. 1995. Response to iron deficency stress of pear and quince genotypes, Journal of Plant Nutrition, 18(11): 2465-2482.