Abstract
Abstract The Middle East, the cradle of viticulture and wine production, is gradually but steadily becoming hotter and drier because of climate change (CC). In the current study, we evaluated the effect of tillage and irrigation on yield and quality characteristics of the heat-resistant, indigenous red-grape variety Maratheftiko for one year. Yield increased (two-fold) in vines with irrigation and tillage compared to tillage with no irrigation. The absence of tillage buffered the negative effect of the lack of irrigation on yield. At the veraison stage, leaf stomatal conductance decreased in non-irrigated vines, independently of the application of tillage or not. At veraison, tillage increased (up to 27.5%) phenolics when compared to no tillage in non-irrigated vines. Vines accumulated more N, P, and K and less Mg during the flowering stage compared to veraison. At veraison, irrigation decreased K content in vines subjected to tillage and decreased Mg content in vines subjected to no tillage. Total soluble solids and anthocyanins of berries increased with the absence of irrigation and tillage. Total phenolics increased with tillage in both irrigated and non-irrigated plants. Our results indicate that no tillage systems may be viable as an adaptation strategy in the context of CC.
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
Irrigation with tillage doubled yield versus tillage without irrigation.
- Treatment
- irrigation and tillagee0
- Outcome
- Yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- two-folde0
- Comparator
- tillage with no irrigatione0
VitisOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield increased (two-fold) in vines with irrigation and tillage compared to tillage with no irrigation.”
t0“grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
No tillage buffered the yield loss from lack of irrigation.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The absence of tillage buffered the negative effect of the lack of irrigation on yield.”
t0“grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Non-irrigated vines had lower stomatal conductance at veraison regardless of tillage.
- Organ / stage
- veraison stagee0
- Treatment
- non-irrigatede0
- Outcome
- leaf stomatal conductancee0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At the veraison stage, leaf stomatal conductance decreased in non-irrigated vines, independently of the application of tillage or not.”
t0“grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage increased phenolics up to 27.5% versus no tillage in non-irrigated vines at veraison.
- Treatment
- tillagee0
- Outcome
- phenolicse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- up to 27.5%e0
- Qualifier
- non-irrigated vinese0
- Comparator
- no tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At veraison, tillage increased (up to 27.5%) phenolics when compared to no tillage in non-irrigated vines.”
t0“grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Vines accumulated more N, P and K at flowering than veraison.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vines accumulated more N, P, and K and less Mg during the flowering stage compared to veraison.”
t0“grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Vines accumulated less Mg at flowering than veraison.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vines accumulated more N, P, and K and less Mg during the flowering stage compared to veraison.”
t0“grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation decreased K content in tilled vines at veraison.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At veraison, irrigation decreased K content in vines subjected to tillage”
t0“grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation decreased Mg content in untilled vines at veraison.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“decreased Mg content in vines subjected to no tillage.”
t0“grapevines”
e1“At veraison, irrigation decreased K content in vines subjected to tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
Absence of irrigation and tillage increased berry soluble solids and anthocyanins.
- Treatment
- absence of irrigation and tillagee0
- Outcome
- Total soluble solids and anthocyanins of berriese0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total soluble solids and anthocyanins of berries increased with the absence of irrigation and tillage.”
t0“grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage increased total phenolics in both irrigation groups.
- Treatment
- tillagee0
- Outcome
- Total phenolicse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- both irrigated and non-irrigated plantse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total phenolics increased with tillage in both irrigated and non-irrigated plants.”
t0“grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors propose no tillage as a climate adaptation strategy.
- Outcome
- no tillage systems may be viable as an adaptation strategy in the context of CCe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no tillage systems may be viable as an adaptation strategy in the context of CC.”
t0“grapevines”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · yield · VitisResults differ
51 papers in the same direction as this paper · 28 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
79 papers more in this group
See all 83 papers →tillage · quality: sugar starch · VitisPositive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
tillage · yield · VitisPositive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →irrigation · quality: sugar starch · VitisPositive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
19 papers more in this group
See all 23 papers →tillage · quality: phytochemicals · VitisResults agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
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.