Abstract
The contradiction between water supply and demand has become increasingly prominent due to the large agricultural water consumption and low irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) in the extremely arid area of Xinjiang, which needs to be solved by efficient irrigation. In this study, the effects of different irrigation levels (the lower and upper limits of irrigation (LULI) were 50–80%, 60–90%, and 70–100% of the field capacity (FC), respectively) under two irrigation methods (root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)) on the photosynthetic physiology and yield of grape were analyzed to explore suitable irrigation schemes in extremely arid areas. The results show that the diurnal variation curve of the net photosynthetic rate (Pn) of grape leaves in the extreme arid region was not sensitive to the response of irrigation methods. However, RZI could improve the apparent quantum efficiency and maximum photosynthetic rate by 60.00% and 31.25%, respectively, reduce the light compensation point by 17.91%, and alleviate the photosynthetic lunch break phenomenon. Under FI, the physiological indexes of leaves increased with the increase in the LULI, while the Pn and SPAD values were the largest under RZI when the LULI was 60–90% of FC. The daily average Pn value of T2 in 2021 and 2022 ranged from 12.93 to 17.77 μmol·m−2·s−1. Compared with FI, RZI significantly improved the leaf water potential, Pn, and SPAD values by increasing the soil water content (SWC) of the 40–80 cm soil layer by 5.04–8.80%, which increased the yield by 6.86–18.67%. The results show that the yield and water use efficiency reached the peak when the LULI was 60–90% of FC under RZI, which could provide theoretical support for efficient irrigation of vineyards in extremely arid areas.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Grape leaf net photosynthetic rate diurnal pattern was insensitive to irrigation method.
Verbatim
e0“the diurnal variation curve of the net photosynthetic rate (Pn) of grape leaves in the extreme arid region was not sensitive to the response of irrigation methods.”
e1“the photosynthetic physiology and yield of grape were analyzed”
Claim · model-written summary
Root zone irrigation raised apparent quantum efficiency by 60%.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“RZI could improve the apparent quantum efficiency and maximum photosynthetic rate by 60.00% and 31.25%, respectively”
e1“the photosynthetic physiology and yield of grape were analyzed”
e2“root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)”
Claim · model-written summary
Root zone irrigation raised maximum photosynthetic rate by 31.25%.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“RZI could improve the apparent quantum efficiency and maximum photosynthetic rate by 60.00% and 31.25%, respectively”
e1“the photosynthetic physiology and yield of grape were analyzed”
e2“root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)”
Claim · model-written summary
Root zone irrigation lowered light compensation point by 17.91%.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“reduce the light compensation point by 17.91%”
e1“the photosynthetic physiology and yield of grape were analyzed”
e2“root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)”
Claim · model-written summary
Root zone irrigation alleviated the photosynthetic lunch break.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“alleviate the photosynthetic lunch break phenomenon”
e1“the photosynthetic physiology and yield of grape were analyzed”
e2“root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)”
Claim · model-written summary
Under furrow irrigation, leaf physiological indexes rose as irrigation limits rose.
Verbatim
e0“Under FI, the physiological indexes of leaves increased with the increase in the LULI”
e1“the photosynthetic physiology and yield of grape were analyzed”
e2“root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)”
Claim · model-written summary
Under root zone irrigation, Pn and SPAD were highest at irrigation limits of 60–90% field capacity.
Verbatim
e0“the Pn and SPAD values were the largest under RZI when the LULI was 60–90% of FC.”
e1“the photosynthetic physiology and yield of grape were analyzed”
e2“root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)”
Claim · model-written summary
Daily average Pn for T2 in 2021 and 2022 ranged from 12.93 to 17.77 μmol·m−2·s−1.
Verbatim
e0“The daily average Pn value of T2 in 2021 and 2022 ranged from 12.93 to 17.77 μmol·m−2·s−1.”
e1“the photosynthetic physiology and yield of grape were analyzed”
Claim · model-written summary
Root zone irrigation raised soil water content at 40–80 cm by 5.04–8.80%.
Verbatim
e0“increasing the soil water content (SWC) of the 40–80 cm soil layer by 5.04–8.80%”
e1“the photosynthetic physiology and yield of grape were analyzed”
e2“root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)”
e3“root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)”
Claim · model-written summary
Root zone irrigation significantly improved grape leaf water potential, Pn and SPAD versus furrow irrigation.
Verbatim
e0“Compared with FI, RZI significantly improved the leaf water potential, Pn, and SPAD values”
e1“the photosynthetic physiology and yield of grape were analyzed”
e2“root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)”
e3“root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)”
Claim · model-written summary
Root zone irrigation increased grape yield by 6.86–18.67%.
Verbatim
e0“which increased the yield by 6.86–18.67%”
e1“the photosynthetic physiology and yield of grape were analyzed”
e2“root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)”
e3“root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)”
Claim · model-written summary
Grape yield and water use efficiency peaked at 60–90% field capacity under root zone irrigation.
Verbatim
e0“the yield and water use efficiency reached the peak when the LULI was 60–90% of FC under RZI”
e1“the photosynthetic physiology and yield of grape were analyzed”
e2“root zone irrigation (RZI) and furrow irrigation (FI)”
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
- positive
- positive
- no effect
79 papers more in this group
See all 83 papers →irrigation · soil: physics · VitisPositive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →irrigation · physiology: photosynthesis · VitisPositive and negative results
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 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.