Show simple item record

dc.contributorVirginia Tech
dc.contributor.authorHatch, T. A.
dc.contributor.authorHickey, C. C.
dc.contributor.authorWolf, T. K.
dc.date.accessioned2014-07-10T13:56:41Z
dc.date.available2014-07-10T13:56:41Z
dc.date.issued2011-09
dc.identifier.citationHatch, T. A.; Hickey, C. C.; Wolf, T. K., "Cover Crop, Rootstock, and Root Restriction Regulate Vegetative Growth of Cabernet Sauvignon in a Humid Environment," Am. J. Enol. Vitic September 2011 vol. 62 no. 3 298-311. DOI: 10.5344/ajev.2011.11001
dc.identifier.issn0002-9254
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/49439
dc.description.abstractCover crops, rootstocks, and root restriction were evaluated as means to regulate vegetative growth of Cabernet Sauvignon grapevines in a humid environment. Treatments were arranged as a strip-split-split plot with row-middle and under-trellis cover crop (UTCC) compared to row-middle only cover crop combined with 85 cm weed-free strips in the vine row as main plots. Rootstocks Riparia Gloire (Riparia), 420A, and 101-14 were subplots, while sub-subplots comprised two treatments: vines were either planted in root-restrictive (RR) fabric bags (0.015 m(3)) at vineyard establishment or were planted without root restriction. Root restriction and UTCC were independently effective in suppressing vegetative development as measured by rate and seasonal duration of shoot growth, lateral shoot development, trunk circumference, and dormant pruning weights. Riparia was the most effective rootstock in limiting vegetative development among the three evaluated; vines grafted to Riparia had similar to 25% lower cane pruning weights than did vines grafted to 420A or 101-14. Under-trellis cover crop reduced cane pruning weights by 47% relative to vines grown on herbicide strips. Canopy architecture was generally improved by both UTCC and by root restriction, but generally unaffected by rootstock. Root restriction reduced the discrimination against C-13 assimilation in both berries and leaf laminae tissue as measured by delta C-13, while under-trellis floor management did not affect this measure of chronic water stress. The principal direct effeci of the UTCC and the root-restriction treatments was a sustained reduction in stem (xylem) water potential (psi(stem)). Stomatal conductance and net assimilation rate were depressed by increasing water deficit, particularly for root-restricted vines. Results suggest practical measures can be used to create a more favorable vine balance under conditions of variable rainfall, such as exist in the eastern United States.
dc.description.sponsorshipVirginia Wine Board
dc.description.sponsorshipVirginia Agricultural Council
dc.description.sponsorshipViticulture Consortium:East
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherAmerican Society for Enology and Viticulture
dc.subjectcanopy management
dc.subjectcover crops
dc.subjectrootstocks
dc.subjectroot restriction
dc.subjectvine
dc.subjectbalance
dc.subjectwater-use efficiency
dc.subjectdeficit irrigation
dc.subjectfruit composition
dc.subjectvitis-vinifera
dc.subjectmediterranean climate
dc.subjectintercropping system
dc.subjectisotope
dc.subjectcomposition
dc.subjectwine quality
dc.subjectgrapevines
dc.subjectvineyard
dc.subjectbiotechnology & applied microbiology
dc.subjectfood science & technology
dc.subjecthorticulture
dc.titleCover Crop, Rootstock, and Root Restriction Regulate Vegetative Growth of Cabernet Sauvignon in a Humid Environment
dc.typeArticle - Refereed
dc.identifier.urlhttp://www.ajevonline.org/content/62/3/298.full
dc.date.accessed2014-07-09
dc.title.serialAmerican Journal of Enology and Viticulture
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.5344/ajev.2011.11001
dc.type.dcmitypeText


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record