Carotenoid Compounds in Grapes and Their Relationship to Plant Water Status
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：C. Oliveira ; A. C. Silva Ferreira ; M. Mendes Pinto ; T. Hogg ; F. Alves ; and P. Guedes de Pinho
- 刊名：Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
- 出版年：2003
- 出版时间：September 24, 2003
- 年：2003
- 卷：51
- 期：20
- 页码：5967 - 5971
- 全文大小：78K
- 年卷期：v.51,no.20(September 24, 2003)
- ISSN：1520-5118
文摘
The aim of this work was to study the relationship between carotenoid contents in grapevine berriesand plant water status. For this purpose, a black grapevine variety, Vitis vinifera L. cv. Touriga Nacional,was studied. The experiments were carried out in the same Douro vineyards, with plants of the sameage, in two different water retention soils. A higher water retention capacity soil, soil A, and a lowerwater retention capacity soil, soil B, were both in a 1.2 m deep silt-loam schist-derived soil. Thetraining system was the double cordon trained and spur pruned. A first range was nonirrigated (NI)and a second one was irrigated (I), 60% of evapotranspiration (ET0). For soil B, a 30% of ET0 treatmentwas also applied. The plant water status was estimated by predawn leaf water potential. The effectsof plant water status on berry growth were studied by measurement of the berry weight and totalsoluble solids (
Brix). The carotenoid profile was quantitatively determined by high-performance liquidchromatography/diode array. Carotenoids determined were 
-carotene, lutein, neoxanthin, violaxanthin,and luteoxanthin. The comparison between irrigated and nonirrigated grapes was followed from 2weeks before veraison until the ripe stage. Results showed that at harvest time, berries exposed tothe NI had a lower weight than those exposed to the irrigated treatment (60% of ET0), 0.89 vs 1.36g/berry and 0.94 vs 1.34 g/berry, for soils A and B, respectively. The irrigated treatment contributedto a higher sugar concentration in both soils. However, depending on the soil water retention capacity,the carotenoid contents were different in soils A and B. For soil A, the total carotenoid content wassimilar for both NI and I treatments. However, with regard to soil B, in irrigated treatment, levels ofcarotenoids were approximately 60% lower than those found for the NI. It seems to be possible toproduce higher weight berries (with higher sugar levels) with similar carotenoid contents. On theother hand, soil characteristics had a larger influence than irrigation on the concentration of carotenoidsin grapes, resulting in an important viticultural parameter to take into account in aroma precursorformation.Keywords: Vitis vinifera; carotenoids; plant water status; irrigation; berry growth
Brix). The carotenoid profile was quantitatively determined by high-performance liquidchromatography/diode array. Carotenoids determined were -carotene, lutein, neoxanthin, violaxanthin,and luteoxanthin. The comparison between irrigated and nonirrigated grapes was followed from 2weeks before veraison until the ripe stage. Results showed that at harvest time, berries exposed tothe NI had a lower weight than those exposed to the irrigated treatment (60% of ET0), 0.89 vs 1.36g/berry and 0.94 vs 1.34 g/berry, for soils A and B, respectively. The irrigated treatment contributedto a higher sugar concentration in both soils. However, depending on the soil water retention capacity,the carotenoid contents were different in soils A and B. For soil A, the total carotenoid content wassimilar for both NI and I treatments. However, with regard to soil B, in irrigated treatment, levels ofcarotenoids were approximately 60% lower than those found for the NI. It seems to be possible toproduce higher weight berries (with higher sugar levels) with similar carotenoid contents. On theother hand, soil characteristics had a larger influence than irrigation on the concentration of carotenoidsin grapes, resulting in an important viticultural parameter to take into account in aroma precursorformation.Keywords: Vitis vinifera; carotenoids; plant water status; irrigation; berry growth