Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 185

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Partial rootzone drying: regulation of stomatal aperture and carbon assimilation in field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera cv. Moscatel)

Open access
Souza, Claudia R. de, Maroco, João P., Santos, Tiago P. dos, Rodrigues, M. Lucília, Lopes, Carlos M., Pereira, João S., Chaves, M. Manuela·2003·Functional Plant Biology

Abstract

The effects of 'partial rootzone drying' (PRD) irrigation compared with other irrigation systems, namely non-irrigated (NI), full irrigation (FI) and deficit irrigation (DI), on stomatal conductance and carbon assimilation were evaluated in field-grown grapevines ( Vitis vinifera L. cv. Moscatel). At the end of the growing season, pre-dawn leaf water potential was highest in FI (–0.18 ± 0.01 MPa; mean ± s.e.), intermediate in PRD (–0.30 ± 0.01 MPa) and DI (–0.36 ± 0.02 MPa), and lowest in NI vines (–0.64 ± 0.03 MPa). Stomatal conductance measured under controlled conditions of light and temperature was reduced in NI ( ca 60%) and PRD ( ca 30%) vines compared with DI and FI vines. Under ambient conditions, NI vines had lower rates of stomatal conductance ( ca 26%), net CO2 assimilation ( ca 28%) and light-adapted PSII quantum yields ( ca 47%) than PRD, DI and FI vines. No significant differences were found among the three irrigated treatments. Both maximum electron transport rate ( J max; ca 30%) and triose-phosphate utilization rates (TPU; ca 20%) were significantly lower in NI and PRD vines than in DI and FI vines. Carbon isotope composition (d13C) of grape berries was highest in NI vines (–24.3‰), followed by PRD (–25.4‰) and DI (–25.8‰) and lowest in FI (–26.4‰) vines, suggesting a long-term increase in the efficiency of leaf gas exchange in NI compared with PRD, DI and FI vines. Sap-flow data and estimates of relative stomatal limitation are in accordance with the observed stomatal closure in PRD vines. In this study, we show that PRD irrigation was able to maintain a vine water status closed to FI, but with double water use efficiency, which was due to a reduction of stomatal conductance with no significant decrease in carbon assimilation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1071/fp02115

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 185

Metadata

Authors
Souza, C. R. D., Maroco, J. P., Santos, T. P. D., Rodrigues, M. L., Lopes, C. M., Pereira, J. S., & Chaves, M. M.
Venue
Functional Plant Biology
Published
2003-06-24
Volume
30
Issue
6
Pages
653-662
ISSN
  • 1445-4408 (ISSN-L)
  • 1445-4416
OpenAlex
W2119134947
Cited by
185
References
2
FWCI
13.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.