The Effect of Irrigation Regime and Green Pruning on Some Qualitative, Physiological Traits and Yield of Yaghooti Grape

علوم باغبانی

Article 14, Volume 34, Issue 1 - Serial Number 45, June 2020, Pages 185-196   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jhorts4.v34i1.83688

Author

Mansour Fazeli Rostampour^*

Horticultural Crops Research Department, Sistan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Zabol, Iran

Abstract

Introduction: Yaghooti grape (Vitis vinifera L.) is an important variety in Iran and also it is the most important horticultural product of Sistan region. This variety is of interest for economical aspect. Because continuous drought in Sistan region has been a serious threat to the grape production, local farmers have to manage the problem by reducing the volume and irrigation intervals. The canopy plays a key role in radiation energy capture via photosynthesis apparatus, water use as regulated by transpiration, and microclimate of ripening grapes and also grape yield, quality, vigor, and the prevention of grape diseases. Since vines has high vegetative growth makes them compete with the reproductive growth, therefore vines be pruned every year.
Materials and Methods: In order to evaluate the effects of irrigation regime and green pruning on some physiological traits and fruit yield of Yaghooti grape, the present research was conducted in the research and extensional garden of Zahak city during 2017-2018. An experiment was carried out in the form of a split plot based on randomized complete block design with three replications. Three irrigation regimes of 100, 75 and 50 percent of the grape water requirement based on the potential evapotranspiration of grape and green pruning with three levels including the control plot or the local practice of not green pruning (P1), pruning the green branches starting from the sixth leaf above the last grape bunch (P2) and pruning the green branches starting from the sixth leaf above the last grape bunch along with green pruning of the green branches without fruit and pruning the unproductive brunches (P3) were allocated to main and sub-plots, respectively. ‘Yaghooti vines were 8 years old and trained as a traditional system. The vines were spaced 3 × 3 m. Water requirement of grape was determined according to the FAO method using data from a Class A evaporation pan. The analysis of variance for each variable was performed with the PROC GLM procedure in SAS 9.4. Multiple linear regression was used to determine the relationships of leaf relative water content, proline, soluble sugars, relative membrane permeability, chlorophyll index, and leaf area to fruit yield.
Results and Discussion: By reducing water consumption from 100 to 75% of grape water requirement, leaf relative water content, fruit juice acidity, chlorophyll index, leaf area and fruit yield decreased 10.1, 6.5, 8.6, 11 and 18.8%, respectively and also proline, soluble sugars and relative membrane permeability increased 67.3, 8.75 and 44.84%, respectively. The P3 treatment compared to control induced an increase in relative leaf water content, chlorophyll index, and fruit yield by 14.7, 12.2 and 25%, respectively as well as a reduction in proline, soluble sugars, relative membrane permeability, fruit juice acidity and leaf area index by 18.34%, 12.1%, 6.8%, 8.3% and 21.3%, respectively. Also the results indicated that providing the 100% of the water requirement combined with pruning the green branches starting from the sixth leaf above the last grape bunch in combination with green pruning of the green branches without fruit and pruning the unproductive brunches (P3) caused the highest grape fruit yield (7797 kg ha-1). Also the interaction effect of meeting 75% of the water requirement and the green pruning had the same result as that of meeting 100%of water requirement under no green pruning conditions. In other words, the green pruning could result in saving 25% of water used by the grape cv. Yaghooti without reducing fruit yield. The multiple linear regression analysis indicated that proline and leaf area were the most important traits impacting fruit yield in Yaghooti cultivar.
Conclusion: Reducing the water potential of vine causes different responses. The most important are a decrease in number cells of fruit, vegetative growth, leaf area, relative leaf water content, chlorophyll content, fruit yield, and increase in the compatible osmolytes. The growing shoots are a strong sink for the consumption of photosynthetic materials. The above mentioned effect causes an increase in the branch overgrowth and its overshadowing. All this factors compete with vine fruit production. So, green pruning and removal of apical dominance eliminates a strong place of nutrient absorption. In other words, green pruning results in a greater accumulation being used by flowers and fruits, causing sufficient light penetration into the crown and reducing evapotranspiration, leading to an increased water consumption and fruit yield.

Keywords

Acidity of grape juice; Chlorophyll index; Leaf area; Relative water content

References

1- Ahmadizadeh M.H., Shahbazi M., Valizadeh M., and Zaefizadeh M. 2011. Genetic diversity of durum wheat landraces using multivariate analysis under normal irrigation and drought stress conditions. African Journal of Agricultural Research 6: 2294-2302. (In Persian)

2- Aran M., Abedi B., Tehranifar A., and Parsa M. 2017. Effects of drought stress on some morphological andphysiological properties of three grapevine cultivars (Vitis vinifera L.). Journal of Horticultural Science 31(2): 315-326. (In Persian)

3- Asadi W., Rasouli M., Gholami M., and Maleki M. 2018. Study of some morphological and physiological traits of four varieties grapes (Vitis vinifera L.) under water stress. Iranian Journal of Horticultural Science 48(4): 977-990. (In Persian)

4- Bajji M., Kinet J.M., and Lutts S. 2001. The use of electrolyte leakage method for assessing cell membrane stability as a water stress tolerance in durum wheat. Plant Growth Regulation 1: 1-10.

5- Ben-Asher J., Tsuyuki I., Bravdo B.A. and Sagih M. 2006. Irrigation of grapevines with saline water, I. leaf area index, stomatal conductance, transpiration and photosynthesis. Agricultural Water Managment 83: 13–21.

6- Bertamini M., Zulini L., Muthuchelian K. and Nedunchezhian, N. 2006. Effect of water deficit on photosynthetic and other physiological responses in grapevine (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Riesling) plants. Photosynthetica 44: 151-154.

7- Bybordi A. 2012. Study effect of salinity on some physiologic and morphologic properties of two grape cultivars. Life Science Journal, 9(4): 1092-1101.

8- Chaves M.M., Santos T.P., Souza C.R., Ortun M.F., Rodrigues M.L., Lopes C.M., Maroco J.P., and Pereira J.S. 2007. Deficit irrigation in grapevine improves water-use efficiency while controlling vigour and production quality. Annual Applied Biology 150: 237–252.

9- Dardeniz A., and Kismali I. 2002. Investigations on the effect of diffetent crop load of Amasya and Cardinal grape cultivars on the yields and qualities of grape and cuttings. Ege Universitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergis 39(1): 9-16.

10- Dolati Baneh H., and Noorjo A. 2009. Effect of different levels of irrigation and quantitative traits on three grape cultivar Information. Journal of Pajouhesh-va-Sazandegi 21: 43-51.

11- Du T.S., Kang S.Z., Zhang J.H., Li F.S., and Yan B.U. 2008. Water use efficiency and fruit quality of table grape under alternate partial root-zone drip irrigation. Agricultural Water Management 95: 659-668.

12- Esmaeilizadeh M., Lotfi Mirdehghan A., S.H., and Shamshiri M.H. 2018. Effects of irrigation intervals on some physiological and biochemical characteristics in four Iranian grapevine cultivars. Journal of Agricultural Crops Production 20(1): 1-14. (In Persian)

13- Fazeli Rostampour M., Yarnia M., Farokhzadeh Khoee R., Seghatoleslami M.J., and Moosavi G.R. 2013. Physiological response of forage sorghum to polymer under water deficit conditions. Agronomy Journal 105(4): 1-9.

14- Ghaderi N., Siosemardeh A., and Shahoei S. 2006. The effect of water stress on some physiological characterstics in Rashe and Khoshnove grape cultivars. Acta Horticulturae 754: 317-322.

15- Gomez Del Campo M., Baeza P., Ruuiz C., and Lissarrague R. 2004. Water stress induced physiological changes in leaves of four container grown grapevine cultivars. Vitis 43(2): 99-105.

16- Hoshmand A.R. 2006. Design of experiments for agriculture and the natural sciences. 2nd ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

17- Hura T., Hura K., Grzesiak M., and Rezepka A. 2007. Effect of Long-term Drought Stress on Leaf Gas Exchange and Fluorescence Parameters in C3 and C4 Plants. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 29: 103- 113.

18- Irigoyen J.J., Emerich D.W., and Sanchez D.M. 1992. Water stress induced changes in concentrations of proline and total soluble sugars in nodulated alfalfa (Medicago sativa) plants. Physiogia Plantarum, 84: 55-60.

19- Jalili Marandi R., Hassani A., Dolati baneh H., Azizi H., and Haji Taghiloo R. 2011. Effect of different levels of soil Moisture on the morphological and physiological characteristics of three grape cultivars (Vitis vinifera L.). Iranian Journal of Horticultural Science 42: 31-40. (In Persian)

20- Jimenez S., Dridi J., Gutierrez D., Moret D., Irigoyen J.J., Moreno M.A., and Gogorcena Y. 2013. Physiological, biochemical and molecular responses in four Prunus rootstocks submitted to drought stress. Tree Physiology 33: 1061–1075.

21- Kantar M., Lucas S.J. and Budak H. 2011. Drought Stress: molecular genetics and genomics approaches. Advances in Botanical Research 57: 445-493.

22- Karami M.J. 2010. Effect of pruning severity and bud number per bearing unit on yield and yield components of rainfed grape cv. Shirazi. Seed and Plant Production Journal, 26(1-2): 57 – 67. (In Persian)

23- Kavoosi B., Eshghi S., and Tafazoli A. 2009. Effects of cluster thinning and cane topping on balanced yield and fruit quality of table grape (Vitis vinifera L.) cv. Askari. 13(48): 15-27. (In Persian)

24- Kavoosi B., and Hasanpur B. 2017. Effects of topping date and preharvest irrigation cut-off on some qualitative and quantitative characteristics of table grapes (Vitis vinifera L.) Cv. Askari. Journal of Plant Productions (Scientific Journal of Agriculture) 41(1): 83-97. (In Persian)

25- Kohkan S.A., Ghanbari A., Asgharipour M.R., and Fakheri B.A. 2017. Emergy evaluation of Yaghuti grape of Sistan. Arid Biome Scientific and Research Journal 7(2): 73-84. (In Persian)

26- Koundouras S., Tsialtas I.T., Zioziou E., and Nikolaou N. 2008. Rootstock effect on the adaptive strategies of grapevine (Vitis vinifera cv. Cabernet–Sauvignon) under contrasting water status, Leaf physiological and structural responses. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 128: 86-96.

27- Littell, R.C., Milliken G.A., Stroup W.W., Wolfinger R.D., and Schabenberger O. 2006. SAS for mixed models. 2d ed. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.

28- Lovisolo C., Perrone I., Carra A., Ferrandino A., Flexas J., Medrano H., and Schubert A. 2010. Drought-induced changes in development and function of grapevine (Vitis spp.) organs and in their hydraulic and non-hydraulic interactions at the whole-plant level: A physiological and molecular update. Functional Plant Biology, 37: 98–116.

29- Lovisolo C., Tramontini S., Flexas J., and Schubert A. 2008. Mercurial inhibition of root hydraulic conductance in Vitis spp. rootstocks under water stress. Environmental and Experimental Botany 63: 178-182.

30- Nejatian M.A., and Rasouli V. 2017. Pruning of green grapes. Agricultural Education Publication. 1-18. (In Persian)

31- OIV (International Organisation of Vine and Wine). 2017. Global economic vitiviniculture data. In: http://www.oiv.int/public/medias/6371/oiv-statistical-report-on-world-vitiviniculture-2018.pdf.

32- Oliviera-Neto C.F., Silva-Lobato A.K., Goncalves-Vidigal M.C., Costa R.C.L., Santos Filho B.G., Alves G.A.R., Silva Maia W.J.M., Cruz F.J.R., Neres H.K.B., and Santos Lopes M.J. 2009. Carbon compounds and chlorophyll contents in sorghum submitted to water deficit during three growth stages. Science and Technology 7: 588-593.

33- Piccinni G., Ko J., Marek T., and Howell T. 2009. Determination of growth-stage- specific crop coefficients (KC) of maize and sorghum. Agricultural Water Management 96: 1698–1704.

34- Poni S. Lakso A.N. Tvrener J.R. and Melrous 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.

35- Sadeghian F., Seifi E., Dadar A., Alizadeh M., and Sharifani M. 2015. Effect of green pruning on fruit yield and quality in cultivated grape boots of cultivar raisin in climatic conditions of Shirvan. Journal of Horticultural Science, 29(2): 232-239. (In Persian)

36- Salem A., Kilani A., and Shaker G. 1996. Growth and quality of two grapevine cultivars as affected by pruning severity. V Temperate Zone Fruit in the Tropics and Subtropics 441: 309-316.

37- Schlemmer M.R., Francis D.D., Shanahan J.F., and Schepers J.S. 2005. Remotely measuring chlorophyll content in corn leaves with differing nitrogen levels and relative water content. Agronomy Journal 97: 106–112.

38- Shahrokhnia M.A., and Karami M.J. 2017. Effect of different amounts of irrigation water on the yield of Yaghuti grape. Iranian of Irrigation & Water Engineering 7(28): 108-122. (In Persian)

39- Sofo A., Dichio B., Xiloyannis C. and Masia A. 2005. Antioxidant defenses in olive trees during drought stress: changes in activity of some antioxidant enzymes. Functional Plant Biology 2(1): 45-53.

40- Taherkhani A., and Golchin A. 2012. The effect of drought stress on yield and quantitative and qualitative traits of seedless white grape cultivar in Takestan region. Journal of Horticultural Science 26(2): 215-222. (In Persian)

41- Villagra P., de Cortazar V.G., Ferreyra R., Aspillaga C., Zuniga C., Ortega-Farias S., and Chilean G.S. 2014. Estimation of water requirements and Kc values of ‘Thompson Seedless’ table grapes grown in the overhead trellis system, using the Eddy covariance method. Journal of Agricultural Research 74(2): 213-218.