Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 493

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Deficit irrigation in grapevine improves water‐use efficiency while controlling vigour and production quality

Open access
Chaves, M.M., Santos, T.P., Souza, C.R., Ortuño, M.F., Rodrigues, M.L., Lopes, C.M., Maroco, J.P., Pereira, J.S.·2007·Annals of Applied Biology

Abstract

Grapevine irrigation is becoming an important practice to guarantee wine quality or even plant survival in regions affected by seasonal drought. Nevertheless, irrigation has to be controlled to optimise source to sink balance and avoid excessive vigour. The results we present here in two grapevine varieties (Moscatel and Castelão) during 3 years, indicate that we can decrease the amount of water applied by 50% (as in deficit irrigation, DI, and in partial root drying, PRD) in relation to full crop’s evapotranspiration (ETc) [full irrigated (FI) vines] with no negative effects on production and even get some gains of quality (in the case of PRD). We report that in non‐irrigated and in several cases in PRD vines exhibit higher concentrations of berry skin anthocyanins and total phenols than those presented by DI and FI vines. We showed that these effects on quality were mediated by a reduction in vigour, leading to an increase on light interception in the cluster zone. Because plant water status during most of the dates along the season was not significantly different between PRD and DI, and when different, PRD even exhibited a higher leaf water potential than DI vines, we conclude that growth inhibition in PRD was not a result of a hydraulic control. The gain in crop water use in DI and PRD was accompanied by an increase of the δ 13 C values in the berries in DI and PRD as compared to FI, suggesting that we can use this methodology to assess the integrated water‐use efficiency over the growing season.

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 · 10.1111/j.1744-7348.2006.00123.x

Cites

1 of 1 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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 493

Metadata

Authors
Chaves, M. M., Santos, T. P., Souza, C. R., Ortuño, M. F., Rodrigues, M. L., Lopes, C. M., Maroco, J. P., & Pereira, J. S.
Venue
Annals of Applied Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-03-13
Volume
150
Issue
2
Pages
237-252
ISSN
  • 0003-4746 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-7348
OpenAlex
W2126153881
Cited by
493
References
1
FWCI
13.86
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Deficit irrigation in grapevine improves water‐use efficiency while controlling vigour and production quality. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1744-7348.2006.00123.x
The paper
Chaves, M. M., Santos, T. P., Souza, C. R., Ortuño, M. F., Rodrigues, M. L., Lopes, C. M., Maroco, J. P., & Pereira, J. S. (2007). Deficit irrigation in grapevine improves water‐use efficiency while controlling vigour and production quality. Annals of Applied Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7348.2006.00123.x

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.