Comparison between grapevine tissue temperature and air temperature

Quiñones, Andrés Javier Peña; Keller, Markus; Gutiérrez, Melba Ruth Salazar; Khot, Lav R.; Hoogenboom, Gerrit

doi:10.1016/j.scienta.2018.12.032

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Different training systems result in differences in canopy density and shoot orientation, which influences the microclimate around the clusters (Reynolds and Vanden Heuvel, 2009). Under the climatic conditions of the present study, a vertical temperature gradient of up to +4°C m −1 may exist upwards from the cooler trunk base (Peña Quiñones et al, 2019). An inflorescence that grows close to the ground is therefore likely to be exposed to cool air more often than is an inflorescence at a greater distance from the ground.…”

Section: Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 76%

Inflorescence temperature influences fruit set, phenology, and sink strength of Cabernet Sauvignon grape berries

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The temperature during the bloom period leading up to fruit set is a key determinant of reproductive success in plants and of harvest yield in crop plants. However, it is often unclear whether differences in yield components result from temperature effects on the whole plant or specifically on the flower or fruit sinks. We used a forced-convection, free-air cooling and heating system to manipulate the inflorescence temperature of field-grown Cabernet Sauvignon grapevines during the bloom period. Temperature regimes included cooling (ambient −7.5°C), heating (ambient +7.5°C), an ambient control, and a convective control. Cooling significantly retarded the time to fruit set and subsequent berry development, and heating shortened the time to fruit set and accelerated berry development relative to the two controls. Fruit set was decreased in cooled inflorescences, but although the cooling regime resulted in the lowest berry number per cluster, it also decreased seed and berry weight at harvest while not affecting seed number. Cooling inflorescences slightly decreased fruit soluble solids and pH, and increased titratable acidity, but did not affect color density. The inflorescence temperature did not impact leaf gas exchange and shoot growth, and shoot periderm formation occurred independently of the timing of fruit ripening. These results suggest that the temperature experienced by grape flowers during bloom time impacts fruit set and subsequent seed and berry development. Suboptimal temperatures not only reduce the proportion of flowers that set fruit but also limit the sink strength of the berries that do develop after fruit set. Shoot vigor and maturation, and leaf physiology, on the other hand, may be rather insensitive to temperature-induced changes in reproductive development.

show abstract

Section: Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 76%

Inflorescence temperature influences fruit set, phenology, and sink strength of Cabernet Sauvignon grape berries

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is also possible that parameters obtained here are correct, but the actual temperature experienced by buds in the field is different than that of air temperature. At night, radiative cooling can decrease bud temperature below that of air; and during the day, solar radiation may increase temperature, while wind may work to keep buds in equilibrium with air (55,56). Different effects of radiation on bud temperature may be especially relevant for studies comparing species with buds several orders of magnitude difference in size, as in the present case.…”

Section: Acknowledging Cold Hardiness In Phenological Modelsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Woody species do not differ in dormancy progression: differences in time to budbreak due to forcing and cold hardiness

Kovaleski

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Budbreak is one of the most observed and studied phenological phases in perennial plants. Two dimensions of exposure to temperature are generally used to model budbreak: accumulation of time spent at low temperatures (chilling); and accumulation of heat units (forcing). These two effects have a well-established negative correlation: the more chilling, the less forcing required for budbreak. Furthermore, temperate plant species are assumed to vary in amount of chilling required to complete endodormancy and begin the transition to breaking bud. Still, prediction of budbreak remains a challenge. The present work demonstrates across a wide range of species how bud cold hardiness must be accounted for to study dormancy and accurately predict time to budbreak. Cold hardiness defines the path length to budbreak, meaning the difference between the cold hardiness buds attain during the winter, and the cold hardiness at which deacclimated buds are predicted to open. This distance varies among species and throughout winter within a species. Increases in rate of cold hardiness loss (deacclimation) measured throughout winter show that chilling controls deacclimation potential – the proportion of the maximum rate response attained at high chill accumulation – which has a sigmoid relationship to chilling accumulation. For forcing, rates of deacclimation increase non-linearly in response to temperature. Comparisons of deacclimation potential show a dormancy progresses similarly for all species. This observation suggests that comparisons of physiologic and genetic control of dormancy requires an understanding of cold hardiness dynamics and the necessity for an update of the framework for studying dormancy and its effects on spring phenology.

show abstract

“…Both cameras were mounted on a ground-based utility vehicle platform at a height of 156 cm above ground, as shown in Figure 1. Thermal and RGB images were taken within 30 min before and after solar noon in a clear-sky and breeze-less day, since it has been shown that the stomata are essentially closed, and the canopy temperature is at its daily maximum at this time in grapevines that are subjected to a water deficit at this location [20,21].…”

Section: Image Acquisition and Field Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…were taken within 30 min before and after solar noon in a clear-sky and breeze-less day, since it has been shown that the stomata are essentially closed, and the canopy temperature is at its daily maximum at this time in grapevines that are subjected to a water deficit at this location [20,21]. Weather data (air temperature, soil temperature, wind speed, vapor pressure deficit (VPD), relative humidity) were obtained from an on-site AgWeatherNet station (http://weather.wsu.edu (accessed on 30 September 2019) located 415 m to the north of the vineyard.…”

Section: Image Acquisition and Field Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Electronic component aging can cause calibration shift and produce inaccurate temperature measurements by infrared thermal imaging. Calibration of the thermal camera was performed with a blackbody reference source set to different known temperatures ranging from 5 to 65 • C in an incremental step of 5 • C, which covers the range of leaf temperatures in a field environment [21]. Temperatures read by the thermal sensor were captured along with each reference temperature value to obtain the calibration coefficient; then, the coefficient was used to correct the pixelated temperature in thermal imagery.…”

Section: Image Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ground-Based Thermal Imaging for Assessing Crop Water Status in Grapevines over a Growing Season

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The quality of wine grapes in dry climates greatly depends on utilizing optimal amounts of irrigation water during the growing season. Robust and accurate techniques are essential for assessing crop water status in grapevines so that both over-irrigation and excessive water deficits can be avoided. This study proposes a robust strategy to assess crop water status in grapevines. Experiments were performed on Riesling grapevines (Vitis vinfera L.) planted in rows oriented north–south and subjected to three irrigation regimes in a vineyard maintained at an experimental farm in southeastern Washington, USA. Thermal and red–green–blue (RGB) images were acquired during the growing season, using a thermal imaging sensor and digital camera installed on a ground-based platform such that both cameras were oriented orthogonally to the crop canopy. A custom-developed algorithm was created to automatically derive canopy temperature (Tc) and calculate crop water stress index (CWSI) from the acquired thermal-RGB images. The relationship between leaf water potential (Ψleaf) and CWSI was investigated. The results revealed that the proposed algorithm combining thermal and RGB images to determine CWSI can be used for assessing crop water status of grapevines. There was a correlation between CWSI and Ψleaf with an R-squared value of 0.67 for the measurements in the growing season. It was also found that CWSI from the shaded (east) side of the canopy achieved a better correlation with Ψleaf compared to that from the sunlit (west) side around solar noon. The created algorithm allowed real-time assessment of crop water status in commercial vineyards and may be used in decision support systems for grapevine irrigation management.

show abstract

Comparison between grapevine tissue temperature and air temperature

Cited by 13 publications

References 34 publications

Inflorescence temperature influences fruit set, phenology, and sink strength of Cabernet Sauvignon grape berries

Inflorescence temperature influences fruit set, phenology, and sink strength of Cabernet Sauvignon grape berries

Woody species do not differ in dormancy progression: differences in time to budbreak due to forcing and cold hardiness

Ground-Based Thermal Imaging for Assessing Crop Water Status in Grapevines over a Growing Season

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About