Loading…
Modifications of ‘Summer Black’ grape berry quality as affected by the different rootstocks
•Grape berry nutrition and flavor were widely modified by the rootstocks.•The Beta rootstock improved berry quality.•The SO4 rootstock impaired berry quality.•The rootstocks of 5BB and 101-14 imparted varying effects on different parameters. Grafting grapevines on resistant rootstocks is an effectiv...
Saved in:
Published in: | Scientia horticulturae 2016-10, Vol.210, p.130-137 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | •Grape berry nutrition and flavor were widely modified by the rootstocks.•The Beta rootstock improved berry quality.•The SO4 rootstock impaired berry quality.•The rootstocks of 5BB and 101-14 imparted varying effects on different parameters.
Grafting grapevines on resistant rootstocks is an effective tool to overcome biotic and abiotic stress constraints. The increasing consumer attention for fruit quality makes it indispensable to evaluate the impacts of resistant rootstocks on fruit quality. In this paper, berry quality modifications induced by the rootstocks were determined in the ‘Summer Black’ grape. Compared to the own-rooted vines, berry and cluster weights, berry texture and skin color were altered by the rootstocks to varying extents. Beta maintained TSS/TA and the contents of fructose, glucose and sucrose; in contrast, SO4, 5BB and 101–14M impaired these parameters. The rootstocks modified berry nutrition and flavor by affecting the contents of cations and free amino acids. Aroma amount and components were largely modified by the rootstocks; Beta largely enhanced the amount of total aroma volatiles and ester compounds while SO4 imparted the reverse influence. Hence, berry nutrition and flavor were widely modified by the rootstocks; the Beta rootstock favored berry quality, and SO4 impaired berry quality; the effects of 5BB and 101–14M on berry quality varied according to the different parameters. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0304-4238 1879-1018 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.scienta.2016.07.023 |