Row orientation effects on whole-canopy gas exchange of potted and field-grown grapevines

Stefano Poni, C Intrieri, B Rebucci, E Magnanini

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

32 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The effects of canopy orientation (North-South vs. East-West) on total canopy assimilation (TCA) and transpiration (TCE) were evaluated on potted grapevines mounted on wheeled platforms for full swivel rotation. Eight vines were assembled in pairs to form four canopy walls 2 m long, 1.1 m tall and 0.25-0.30 m wide. TCA and TCE readings were also taken in the field on four NS-oriented, hedgerow cordon-trained grapevines. Diurnal trends of TCA recorded on potted vines showed little variability when related to row orientation. The TCE pattern for EW followed essentially that of light intensity, whereas a NS orientation induced a marked decrease in TCE at midday before recovering in mid-afternoon. As a result, water use efficiency (WUE) in NS rows was higher during the midday hours. Total canopy water loss in NS was linearly correlated with estimates of intercepted light, suggesting that water use was a function of both, light intensity and canopy geometry (i.e. more light lost to the ground at noon, hence less transpiration). The results for the NS-oriented field-grown canopies differed to some extent from those of the pot experiments. TCA showed a more marked afternoon decline and TCE flattened at noon, though with no apparent decrease. WUE efficiency was lowest at the highest evaporative demand. The daily water loss of field vines could not be predicted by total light interception estimates only, indicating a more complex regulation of canopy transpiration than recorded on potted plants.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)147-154
Number of pages8
JournalVITIS
Volume37
Publication statusPublished - 1998

Keywords

  • vineyard design

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Row orientation effects on whole-canopy gas exchange of potted and field-grown grapevines'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this