Farklı Toprak İşleme ve Yaprak Alma Uygulamalarının Syrah Üzüm Çeşidinde Su Stresi, Salkım ve Tane Özellikleri Üzerine Etkileri

Year 2017, Volume: 54 Issue: 4, 397 - 407, 27.12.2017

İlknur Korkutal , Elman Bahar , Seçil Bayram

https://doi.org/10.20289/zfdergi.386422

Cited By: 20

Abstract

Bu araştırmada
Tekirdağ koşullarında Syrah üzüm
çeşidinde farklı toprak işleme ve yaprak alma uygulamalarının su stresi, tane
ve salkım özellikleri üzerine etkilerini belirlemek amacıyla
gerçekleştirilmiştir. Toprak işleme uygulamaları korumalı toprak işleme (KTİ),
korumalı toprak işleme+geleneksel toprak işleme (KTİ+GTİ) ve geleneksel toprak
işleme (GTİ) uygulamaları olmak üzere 3 farklı şekilde yapılmıştır. Yaprak alma
uygulamaları ise kontrol (AY+KY) uygulaması (ana yaprak ve koltuk yaprakların
omca üzerinde bırakıldığı uygulamalar), AY (ana yaprakların omca üzerinde
bırakıldığı uygulamalar) ve KY (koltuk yaprakların omca üzerinde bırakıldığı
uygulamalar) olmak üzere 3 farklı şekilde yapılmıştır. Buna göre; KTİ+GTİ
uygulamasının yaprak su potansiyelini, tane kabuk alanının tane eti hacmine
oranını, tane iriliğini azalttığı görülmüştür. KTİ uygulaması ise yaprak su
potansiyelini, tane kabuk alanının tane eti hacmine oranını azaltmış; tane
iriliğini artırmıştır. Yaprak alma uygulamalarından AY uygulaması tane iriliği
ve verim değerlerini azaltırken; tane kabuk alanının tane eti hacmine oranını
ve salkım iriliğini artırmıştır. KY uygulamasının tane iriliğini artırdığı,
tane kabuk alanının tane eti hacmine oranını azalttığı tespit edilmiştir. Sonuç
olarak, kırmızı şaraplık üzüm çeşidi olan Syrah için toprak işleme
uygulamalarında KTİ uygulaması, yaprak alma uygulamalarında ise Kontrol (AY+KY)
uygulaması önerilebilir.

Keywords

Syrah, yaprak su potansiyeli, toprak işleme, yaprak alma, tane

Different Soil Tillage and Leaf Removals Effects on Water Stress, Berry and Cluster Properties of cv. Syrah

Abstract

In this study, different soil tillage and leaf
removal treatments' effects on water stress, yield and quality were studied in
Tekirdağ province conditions. Three different soil tillage treatments were
used; conservative soil tillage (CST), conservative soil tillage + traditional
soil tillage (CST+TST) and traditional soil tillage (TST). Three different leaf
removal applications were used; control (ML+SL) treatment (main leaf and
secondary leaves left together on vine), ML (main leaves left on the vine), SL
(secondary leaves left on vine). According to that; with CST+TST treatment,
leaf water potential, Berry Skin Area/Berry Flesh Volume ratio, yield increased
while berry size decreased. With CST treatment leaf water potential, BSA/BFV
ratio and yield decreased while berry size increased. With ML leaf removal
treatment; berry size and yield decreased while BSA/BFV ratio, cluster size
increased. With SL treatment; berry size increased while, BSA/BFV ratio
decreased. In conclusion, for cv. Syrah red wine cultivar, CST soil tillage
treatment and control (ML+SL) leaf removal treatment could be recommended.

Keywords

Syrah, leaf water potential, soil tillage, leaf removal, berry

References

• Bahar, E., İ. Korkutal ve A.S.Yaşasın. 2010. Bağcılıkta örtülü toprak işleme ve kulllanılan örtü bitkileri. ADÜ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(2):3-13.
• Bahar, E. ve C. Kurt. 2015. Farklı toprak işleme ve yaprak alanı/ürün miktarlarının Syrah üzüm çeşidinin fizyolojisi, morfolojisi ve üzüm bileşimi üzerine etkileri: I. Yaprak su potansiyelleri, sürgün, salkım, tane özellikleri ve verim üzerine etkileri. Selçuk Tarım ve Gıda Bilimleri Dergisi-A 27 (Türkiye 8. Bağcılık ve Teknolojileri Sempozyumu Özel Sayısı):296-315.
• Barbagallo, M.G., S. Guidoni and J.J. Hunter. 2011. Berry size and qualitative characteristics of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Syrah. South African Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 32(1):129-136. Carbonneau, A. 1998. Aspects qualitatifs. 258-276. In: Tiercelin, JR (Ed.), Traite d’irrigation. Tec & Doc. Lavosier Ed. Paris. 1011 p.
• Carbonneau, A., A. Deloire and B. Jaillard. 2007. La Vigne. Physiologie, Terroir, Culture. Dunod, Paris, ISBN: 9782100499984.
• Chaves, M.M., O. Zarrouk, R. Francisco, J.M. Costa, T. Santos, A.P. Regalado, M.L. Rodrigues and C.M. Lopes. 2010. Grapevine under deficit irrigation: hints from physiological and molecular data. Annals of Botany, 105:661-676.
• Dai, Z.W., N. Ollat, E. Gomès, S. Decroocq, J.P. Tandonnet, L. Bordenave, P. Pieri, G. Hilbert, C. Kappel, C. van Leeuwen, P. Vivin and S. Delrot. 2011. Ecophysiological, genetic, and molecular causes of variation in grape berry weight and composition: A review. AJEV, 62(4):413-425.
• De La Hera Orts, M.L., A. Martínez-Cutillas, J.M. López-Roca and E. Gómez-Plaza. 2005. Effect of moderate irrigation on grape composition during ripening. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 3(3):352-361.
• Deloire, A., A. Carbonneau, Z. Wang and H. Ojeda. 2004. Vine and water, a short review. Journal International Science Vigne Vin, 38(1):1-13.
• Etchebarne, F., H. Ojeda and J.J. Hunter. 2010. Leaf:fruit ratio and vine water status effects on Grenache Noir (Vitis vinifera L.) berry composition: water, sugar, organic acids and cations. South African Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 31(2):106-115.
• Gray, J.D. and B.G. Coombe. 2009. Variation in Shiraz berry size originates before fruit set but harvest is a point of re-synchronisation for berry development after flowering. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 15:156-165.
• Horwath, W.R., J.P. Mitchell and J.W. Six. 2008. Tillage and crop management effects on air, water, and soil quality in California. University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Research Publication 8331, September 2008:1-9.
• Hunter, J.J. 1997. Implications of seasonal canopy management and growth compensation in grapevine. South African Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 21(2):81-91.
• Kriedemann, P.E. and I. Goodwin. 2003. Regulated Deficit Irrigation and Partial Rootzone Drying. Cambera: Land and Water Australia Irrigation Insights No. 3.
• Kuljancic, I.D., D. Papric, N. Korac, P. Bozovic, M. Borisev, M. Medic and D. Ivanisevic. 2009. Photosynthetic activity in leaves on laterals and top leaves on main shoots of Sila cultivar before grape harvest. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 7(13):2072-2074.
• Lopes, C.M., T.P. Santos, A. Monteiro, M.L. Rodrigues, J.M. Costa and M.M. Chaves. 2011. Combining cover cropping with deficit irrigation in a Mediterranean low vigor vineyard. Scientia Horticulturae, 129:603-612.
• Lorenz, D.H., K.W. Eichhorn, H. Bleiholder, R. Klose, U. Meier and E. Weber. 1995. Phenological growth stages of the grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) codes and descriptions according to the extended BBCH Scale. Australian Journal Grape and Wine Research, 1:100-110.
• McGourty, G. 2004. Cover Cropping Systems for Organically Farmed Vineyards. Practical Winery&Vineyard, September-October 2004, 1-7.
• Monteiro, A. and C.M. Lopes. 2007.Influence of cover crop on water use and performance of vineyard in Mediterranean Portugal. Agricultural Ecosystems & Environment, 121(4):336-342. OIV. 2009. 2nd Edition of the OIV descriptor list for grape varieties and Vitis species. 178 p.
• Palliotti, A., T. Gardia, J.G. Berrios, S. Civardic and S. Poni. 2012. Early source limitation as a tool for yield control and wine quality improvement in a high-yielding red Vitis vinifera L. Cultivar. Scientia Horticulturae, 145:10-16.
• Palma, L., V. Novello, L. Tarricome, L. Frabboni, G. Lopriore and F. Soleti. 2007. Grape and wine quality as influenced by the agronomical soil protection in a viticultural system of southern Italy. Quaderni di Scienze Viticole ed Enologiche, University of Torino, 29:83-111.
• Poni, S., F. Bernizzoni, S. Civardi and N. Libelli. 2009. Effects of pre-bloom leaf removal on growth of berry tissues and must composition in two red Vitis vinifera L. cultivars. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 15(2):97-194.
• Pou, A., J. Guias, M. Moreno, M. Tomas, H. Medrano and J. Cifre. 2011. Cover cropping in (Vitis vinifera L, cv. Manto Negro) vineyards under Mediterranean conditions: Effects on plant vigour, yield and grape quality. Journal International Science Vigne Vin, 45(4):223-234.
• Roby, G. and M.A. Matthew. 2004. Relative proportions of seed, skin and flesh, in ripe berriesfrom Cabernet Sauvignon grapevines grown in a vineyard either well irrigated or under water deficit. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 10(1):74-82.
• Schultz, H.R. 1993. Photosynthesis of sun and shade leaves of field-grown grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) and relation to leaf age. Suitability of the plastochron concept for the expression of physiological age. Vitis, 32:197-205.
• Schultz, H.R. 1995. Grape canopy structure, light microclimate and photosynthesis. I. A two-dimensional model of the spatial distribution of surface area densities and leaf ages in two canopy systems. Vitis, 34:211-215.
• Shellie, K. and B. Brown. 2012. Influence of deficit irrigation on nutrient indices in wine grape (Vitis vinifera L.). Agricultural Sciences, 3(2):268-273.
• Silvestre, J.C., S. Canas, J. Brazao, I. Caldeira, P. Climaco, F. Duarte, N.S. Conceicao, C. Arruda, M.I. Ferreira and A.C. Malheiro. 2012. Influence of timing and intensity of deficit irrigation on vine vigour, yield and berry and wine composition of Tempranillo in southern Portugal. Acta Horticulturae, 931:193-201.
• Sofo, A., V. Nuzzo, G. Tataranni, M. Manfra, M. De Nisco and A. Scopa. 2012. Berry morphology and composition in irrigated and non-irrigated grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.). Journal of Plant Physiology, 169:1023-1031.
• Vaudour, E. 2003. Les Terroirs Viticoles. Definitions, Caracterisation et Protection. Dunod, Paris, ISBN: 2100064541.