4.5 Article

Mobilisation and distribution of starch and total N in two grapevine cultivars differing in their susceptibility to shedding

Journal

FUNCTIONAL PLANT BIOLOGY
Volume 31, Issue 11, Pages 1127-1135

Publisher

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/FP04028

Keywords

nitrogen uptake; reserve mobilisation; shedding; starch; Vitis vinifera

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

As a part of a project aimed at elucidating the causal relationship between reserve mobilisation and the extent of shedding in Vitis vinifera L., we compared storage and fate of carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) reserves in two varieties differing in their susceptibility to fruitlet abscission. Merlot (susceptible) and Pinot Noir (P. Noir, not susceptible) vines were grown in trenches under semi-controlled conditions over a 3-y period after planting. Mobilisation of stored C and N, distribution of reserve materials within the vines and N-15 uptake were followed particularly during the spring growth flush and floral development in the third year. At dormancy, starch levels in the perennial tissues (roots, trunk, canes) were higher in Merlot than in P, Noir. During the spring growth flush, starch level decreased markedly in the roots of both cultivars until early bloom. At that time, starch started to accumulate in P, Noir but not in Merlot. Similar variations were found with total N. Accordingly, N-15 analysis showed that translocation of storage N to the annual tissues was nearly achieved at early bloom in P. Noir while it continued until pea berry size in Merlot. In parallel, N uptake increased during the spring growth flush, and it was higher in P. Noir than in Merlot. These results indicate that transition between heterotrophic (root) and autotrophic (leaf) mode of nutrient allocation towards the developing inflorescences occurs earlier in P. Noir. Possible consequences are discussed in relation to the susceptibility of each cultivar to shedding.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available