Abstract
Abstract The experiment considered Vitis vinifera L. cv. “Pinot blanc” clone VCR5 grafted on a lime‐susceptible (3309 C) and a lime‐tolerant (41 B) hybrid rootstock and grown in 45 L pots of a calcareous and a non‐calcareous soil. Each treatment included plants bearing clusters and plants without clusters; in the latter case the bunches were removed 15 days before blooming. During the third growth year, shoot length, leaf chlorophyll (Chl), and mineral element concentrations were recorded. At the end of the growing cycle the grapevines were divided into leaves, shoots, berries, cluster stems, trunk, roots, and dry matter and mineral element composition per organ were analyzed. The 41 B rootstock showed its lime‐tolerance by exhibiting little reduction of shoot length when grown in the calcareous soil as compared to the non‐calcareous one, while 3309 C growing in the calcareous soil induced a dramatic shoot length reduction. The rootstock also affected the leaf chl concentration according to the known degree of lime‐tolerance/susceptibility: “Pinot blanc” grafted on 3309 C and growing on the calcareous soil showed chlorotic leaves while the plants grafted on 41 B had green leaves; cluster removal did not affect leaf chl. The fruit load (expressed as berry dry matter) was strongly affected by the soil and the rootstock; in the calcareous soil 41 B rootstock produced twice as high cluster dry matter than did 3309 C. A higher macronutrient uptake for the plants growing under lime‐stress conditions was affected by 41 B rootstock. Cluster removal in plants grown on calcareous soil produced different effects, as follows: in the case of 41 B rootstock, a redistribution of photosynthate to other sinks like shoot tip and roots occurred, while in the case of 3309 C only the roots benefited. Under lime‐stress condition the plants grafted on 41 B took up more iron (recorded as total amount in the leaves) than did those grafted on 3309 C.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 11
Claim · model-written summary
41 B showed little shoot length reduction in calcareous soil.
- Material
- 41 Be0
- Treatment
- calcareous soile0
- Outcome
- shoot lengthe0
- Direction
- little reductione0
- Comparator
- non‐calcareous onee0
VitisOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The 41 B rootstock showed its lime‐tolerance by exhibiting little reduction of shoot length when grown in the calcareous soil as compared to the non‐calcareous one”
t0“Grapevine Rootstock Effects”
Claim · model-written summary
3309 C caused dramatic shoot length reduction in calcareous soil.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“3309 C growing in the calcareous soil induced a dramatic shoot length reduction”
t0“Grapevine Rootstock Effects”
Claim · model-written summary
Pinot blanc on 3309 C had chlorotic leaves in calcareous soil.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0““Pinot blanc” grafted on 3309 C and growing on the calcareous soil showed chlorotic leaves while the plants grafted on 41 B had green leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Pinot blanc on 41 B had green leaves in calcareous soil.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0““Pinot blanc” grafted on 3309 C and growing on the calcareous soil showed chlorotic leaves while the plants grafted on 41 B had green leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Cluster removal did not affect leaf chlorophyll.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“cluster removal did not affect leaf chl”
t0“Grapevine Rootstock Effects”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil and rootstock strongly affected berry dry matter.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The fruit load (expressed as berry dry matter) was strongly affected by the soil and the rootstock”
t0“Grapevine Rootstock Effects”
Claim · model-written summary
In calcareous soil 41 B produced twice the cluster dry matter of 3309 C.
- Treatment
- 41 B rootstocke0
- Outcome
- cluster dry mattere0
- Direction
- twice as highe0
- Value
- twicee0
- Comparator
- 3309 Ce0
- Setting
- calcareous soile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in the calcareous soil 41 B rootstock produced twice as high cluster dry matter than did 3309 C”
t0“Grapevine Rootstock Effects”
Claim · model-written summary
41 B increased macronutrient uptake under lime stress.
- Treatment
- 41 B rootstocke0
- Outcome
- macronutrient uptakee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- lime‐stress conditionse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A higher macronutrient uptake for the plants growing under lime‐stress conditions was affected by 41 B rootstock”
t0“Grapevine Rootstock Effects”
Claim · model-written summary
With 41 B in calcareous soil, cluster removal redistributed photosynthate to shoot tips and roots.
- Material
- 41 Be0
- Treatment
- Rootstockt0
- Outcome
- redistribution of photosynthate to other sinks like shoot tip and rootse0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in the case of 41 B rootstock, a redistribution of photosynthate to other sinks like shoot tip and roots occurred”
t0“Grapevine Rootstock Effects”
Claim · model-written summary
With 3309 C in calcareous soil, only roots benefited from cluster removal.
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“while in the case of 3309 C only the roots benefited”
t0“Grapevine Rootstock Effects”
Claim · model-written summary
Under lime stress 41 B plants took up more iron than 3309 C plants.
- Treatment
- 41 Be0
- Outcome
- iron (recorded as total amount in the leaves)e0
- Direction
- moree0
- Comparator
- 3309 Ce0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under lime‐stress condition the plants grafted on 41 B took up more iron (recorded as total amount in the leaves) than did those grafted on 3309 C”
t0“Grapevine Rootstock Effects”
The same questions in other papers
grafting · nutrient: content · VitisPositive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →grafting · growth · VitisPositive and negative results
19 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
27 papers more in this group
See all 31 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.