Effects of different uprooting dates on rooting and vegetative development parameters of different American grapevine rootstock scions

Year 2022, Volume: 9 Issue: 4, 1073 - 1079, 18.10.2022

Fadime Ates , Alper Dardeniz , Mehmet Ali Gündoğdu , Tolga Sarıyer , Esra Şahin

https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans.1080339

Abstract

This study was conducted in the years 2013 and 2014 to determine rooting and vegetative development parameters of different American grapevine rootstock (‘5BB’, ‘110R’, ‘140Ru’, ‘1613C’, ‘1103P’ and ‘41B’) scions uprooted in different dates. Present findings revealed that hard and insufficient rooting problems especially of ‘140Ru’, ‘41B’ and ‘110R’ American grapevine rootstock scions were resulted from genetic characteristics and insufficient number of days between uprooting and planting dates. Significant increases were observed in rooting ratio (%), number of roots (roots/scion), root fresh weight (g scion–1), root scale (0–4), shoot length (cm), number of nodes (leaves) (nodes/scion), shoot fresh weight (g scion–1), scion weight (g) and shooting ratio (%) of American grapevine rootstock scions with the increasing number of days between uprooting and planting dates.

Keywords

American grapevine rootstock,, rooting ratio,, root fresh weight,, uprooting date,, vegetative development,

Amerikan Asma Anaç Kalemlerinin Köklenme ve Vejetatif Gelişimi Üzerine Farklı Söküm Tarihlerinin Etkisi

Abstract

This study was conducted in the years 2013 and 2014 to determine rooting and vegetative development parameters of different American grapevine rootstock (‘5BB’, ‘110R’, ‘140Ru’, ‘1613C’, ‘1103P’ and ‘41B’) cuttings uprooted in different dates. It was concluded based on present findings that weak and insufficient rooting problems especially in 110R, 140Ru and 41B American grapevine rootstock cuttings were mostly resulted from genetic characteristics and insufficient number of days between planting and uprooting dates. Significant increases were provided in rooting ratio (%), number of roots (roots cutting-1), root fresh weight (g cutting-1), root scale (0–4), shoot length (cm), number of nodes (leaves) (nodes cutting-1), shoot fresh weight (g cutting-1), cutting weight (g) and shooting ratio (%) of American grapevine rootstock cuttings with the increasing number of days between uprooting and planting dates.

Keywords

Amerikan asma anacı,, köklenme oranı,, kök yaş ağırlığı,, söküm zamanı,, vejetatif gelişim,

References

• Aguín, O., Mansilla, J.P., Vilariño, A. and Sainz, M.J. 2004. Effects of mycorrhizal inoculation on root morphology and nursery production of three grapevine rootstocks. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 55 (1): 108–111.
• Alco, T., Dardeniz, A., Sağlam, M., Özer, C. and Acıkbas, B. 2015. The effect of different cultivar/rootstock on grafting room efficiency and callus formation in grafted vines. Selcuk J Agr Food Sci–A 27. (Turkey 8th Symposium on Viticulture and Technology Special Issue) ISSN: 1309–0550.
• Altındisli, A., Kara, S. and Kısmalı, İ. 1998. Effects of different media on the yield and quality of different media. 4. Viticulture Symposium Proceedings. 346–361. 20–23 October, Yalova
• Anonymous 2015. FAO Tarımsal üretim ve alan istatistikleri. http://www.faostat.org. (Available from: 02.06.2015).
• Cağlar, S. and Bayram, A. 2006. Effects of vesicular–arbuscular mycorrhizal (vam) fungi on the leaf nutritional status of four grapevine rootstocks. EJHS. 71 (3): 109–113.
• Dardeniz, A. 2001. Research on the effects of different crops and shoots on grape and bar yield and quality in some grape varieties and rootstocks. Ege University Institute of Science and Technology. 167 p. (PhD Thesis).
• Dardeniz, A. and Sahin, A.O. 2005. The effects of the combinations of different varieties and rootstocks on the vegetative growth and nursery plant ratio for the production of grafted vine rootstocks. BAHÇE 34, (2): 1–9.
• Kara, S., Altındişli, A. and Askın, A. 1998. A study on the effects of different rooting media and IBA doses on rooting of 41B rootstock under fogging unit. 4. Viticulture Symposium. 354–356. 20–23 October, Yalova.
• Kara, Z. and Özdemir, Ş. 2009. The effects of mixed Mycorrhiza (biovam) inoculations to the cuttings of some grape and rootstocks subsequent vegetative growths of saplings. Turkey 7th Symposium on Viticulture and Technology. Volume 1. 181–189. 5–9 October, Salihli/Manisa.
• Kara, Z. and Sabır, A. 2010. Effects of Herbagreen application on vegetative development of some grapevine rootstock during nursery propagation in glasshouse. 2nd International Symposium on Sustainable Development. 127–132.
• Kara, Z., Özer, A. and Sabır, A. (2011a): The effects of mycorrhizal preparation (MP) applications on vegetative development of some Grape Seedling and Cuttting. 6th National Horticulture Congress. 4–8 October, Şanlıurfa.
• Kara, Z., Söylemezoğlu, G., Çakır, A., Sabır, A. and Shidfar, M. 2011b. Effects of mycorrhizal preparation (MP, Biovam) applications in the production of grafted vine saplings. 6th National Horticulture Congress. 4–8 October, Sanlıurfa.
• Kelen, M. and Demirtaş, İ. 2001. Effects of IBA doses with different rooting mediums on rooting rates and root quality of 5BB and 420A American grapevine rootstocks. Journal of Agricultural Sciences,7 (1): 142–146.
• Köse, B., Ates, S. and Celik, H. 2016. The effects of grafted vine yield and growth of ‘Foxy grape’ (Vitis labrusca L.) and Shiraz (Vitis vinifera L.) grape on grafted different rootstocks in the heavy textured soil conditions. Harran Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences, 20 (2): 135–145.
• Küçükyumuk, C. 2009. Effects of different irrigation intervals and mulch applications on seed yield and quality of grafted vine saplings. Süleyman Demirel University, Institute of Science and Technology. 188 p. (PhD Thesis).
• Özdemir, G., Akpınar, C., Sabır, A., Tangolar, S. and Ortas, İ. 2010. Effect of Inoculation with mycorrhizal fungi on growth and nutrient uptake of grapevine genotypes (Vitis spp), European Journal of Horticultural Science, 75 (3): 103–110.
• Sabır, A., Özdemir, G., Bilir, H. and Tangolar, S. 2005. The effects of two different mainstreaming media and some rootstocks on the success of seedlings in the production of grapevine. Turkey 6th Symposium on Viticulture. Volume 2. 440–445. Tekirdag.
• Somkuvar, R.G., Bondage, D.D., Surange, M.S. and Ramteke, S.D. 2011. Rooting behavior, polyphenol oxidase activity, and biochemical changes in grape rootstocks at different growth stages. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 35 (3): 281–287.
• Turhan, E., Dardeniz, A. and Müftüoğlu, N.M. 2005. Determining the tolerances to salinity stress of some American grapevine rootstocks. BAHÇE 34, (2): 11–19.
• Uzun, İ. 1996. Viticulture. Mediterranean University Publication Number: 96. 171 p. Antalya.
• Vrsic, S., Pulko, B. and Kocsis, L. 2016. Effects of rootstock genotypes on compatibility, biomass and the yield of Welschriesling. Hort. Sci. (Prague), 43: 92–99.
• Zachariakiis, M., Tzorakakis, E., Kritsotakis, I., Siminis, C.I. and Manios, V. 2001. Humic substances stimulate plant growth and nutrient accumulation in grapevine rootstocks. Acta Horticulturae, 549: 131–136.