Claim · model-written summary
NDVI and soil EC poorly explained spatial variation in yield components.
- Taxon
- vineyardt0
- Outcome
- spatial variations in yield componentse0
- Direction
- did not satisfactorily explaine0
- Comparator
- NDVI and soil ECe0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentSettingValueQualifier
Verbatim
e0“The spatial distribution of NDVI and soil EC did not satisfactorily explain the spatial variations in yield components and berry chemistry.”
t0“vineyard soil and canopy vegetation”
Title
Runze Yu; Luca Brillante; Nazareth Torres; et al. OENO One 2021. doi:10.20870/oeno-one.2021.55.2.4598
Other claims from this paper (13)
- Observation NDVI and soil EC showed spatial patterns in the vineyard.
- Association Season-long stem water potential partly explained the NDVI spatial pattern.
- Observation Stem water potential was lowest in the CS block.
- Association Leaf photosynthesis did not follow the NDVI spatial pattern.
- Method / resource NDVI and soil EC poorly explained spatial variation in berry chemistry.
- Method / resource PCA clearly discriminated three cultivars.
- Association Soil EC had a significant relationship with Ψstem integrals.
- Association Soil EC had a significant relationship with total skin anthocyanins.
- Association Soil EC had a significant relationship with tri- to di-hydroxylated flavonoids.
- Method / resource Within cultivar blocks, soil EC had some ability to indicate plant water status.
- Association Within cultivar blocks, NDVI related to yield.
- Mechanism Cultivar effects and uniform crop level management may weaken proximal sensing relations to physiology and berry chemistry.
- Method / resource Temporal proximal sensing can assess plant water status, primary metabolism, yield and berry secondary metabolism.