Plant Physiol.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Plant Physiology 89:1136-1140 (1989)
© 1989 American Society of Plant Biologists

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Roper, T. R.
Right arrow Articles by Williams, L. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Roper, T. R.
Right arrow Articles by Williams, L. E.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Roper, T. R.
Right arrow Articles by Williams, L. E.
Environmental and Stress Physiology

Net CO2 Assimilation and Carbohydrate Partitioning of Grapevine Leaves in Response to Trunk Girdling and Gibberellic Acid Application

Teryl R. Roper1 and Larry E. Williams

Department of Viticulture and Enology, University of California, Davis, California 93648, Kearney Agricultural Center, Parlier, California 93648

Leaf net CO2 assimilation rate (A), stomatal conductance (gs), carboxylation efficiency, and foliar nonstructural carbohydrates were measured on mature, field-grown Vitis vinifera L. (cv Thompson Seedless) vines that had been trunk girdled, sprayed with gibberellic acid, or both, shortly after anthesis. Girdling reduced A, gs, and carboxylation efficiency when measured 2 weeks after imposition of the treatments. Diurnal measurements indicated that A of girdled vines was less than that of control vines between 1000 and 1800 hours. Gibberellic acid mitigated the depressing effect of girdling on gs during the same diurnal measurements. The concentrations of foliar carbohydrates were greatest for the girdled vines, followed by the combination treatment and were lowest for the control vines. Foliar carbohydrates were greater for girdled vines 4 weeks after the treatments were imposed, however, by this time there was no significant difference in A between the control and girdled vines. Two and 4 weeks after the experiment was initiated root carbohydrate concentrations were less for the girdled vines when compared to the control vines. The data indicate that the reduction in A of girdled grapevines is not associated with the accumulation of leaf nonstructural carbohydrates following the girdling treatment.

1 Present address: Department of Horticulture, University of Wisconsin, 1575 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Exp BotHome page
G. Lebon, G. Wojnarowiez, B. Holzapfel, F. Fontaine, N. Vaillant-Gaveau, and C. Clement
Sugars and flowering in the grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.)
J. Exp. Bot., July 1, 2008; 59(10): 2565 - 2578.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Exp BotHome page
L. Urban, M. Lechaudel, and P. Lu
Effect of fruit load and girdling on leaf photosynthesis in Mangifera indica L.
J. Exp. Bot., September 1, 2004; 55(405): 2075 - 2085.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ASPB Publications PLANT PHYSIOLOGY THE PLANT CELL
Copyright © 1989 by the American Society of Plant Biologists