Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jun 16;11(12):1594.
doi: 10.3390/plants11121594.

Biostimulants as an Alternative to Improve the Wine Quality from Vitis vinifera (cv. Tempranillo) in La Rioja

Cristina E Olavarrieta  1 , Maria Carmen Sampedro  2 , Asier Vallejo  1 , Nikola Štefelová  3 , Ramón J Barrio  1 , Nuria De Diego  3
Affiliations

Biostimulants as an Alternative to Improve the Wine Quality from Vitis vinifera (cv. Tempranillo) in La Rioja

Cristina E Olavarrieta et al. Plants (Basel). .

Abstract

The application of biostimulants appears to be an environmentally friendly, innovative, and sustainable agronomical tool to mitigate the negative effects induced by adverse climatology in traditional grape-growing regions such as La Rioja (Spain). However, their mechanism of action in grapevines is still unclear. We evaluated how commercial substances (two from Ascophyllum nodosum extraction and one amino acids-based biostimulant) and the non-proteinogenic amino acid β-aminobutyric acid (BABA) affect the quality and quantity of musts and grapes in Vitis vinifera L. cv. Tempranillo from a semi-arid region of La Rioja during two seasons. We hypothesized an enhancement in organic metabolites in berries and leaves in response to these treatments, changing the organoleptic characteristics of the final products. The treatments altered the primary metabolites such as carbohydrates, organic acids (AcOrg), and free amino acids, first in the leaves as the effect of the foliar application and second in grapes and musts. As the main result, the biostimulant efficiency depended on the climatology and vineyard location to improve the final yield. Whereas biostimulant application enhanced the yield in 2018 (less dry year), it did not help production in 2019 (dry year). BABA was the most efficient biostimulant, enhancing plant production. Regarding yield quality, the biostimulant application improved the musts mainly by enhancing the fumaric acid content and by reducing carbohydrates, except in BABA-treated plants, where they were accumulated. These results corroborate biostimulants as an exciting approach in wine production, especially for improving wine quality.

Keywords: Vitis vinifera L.; biostimulants; grapevine; growth stages; phenology; primary metabolism; water deficit.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Precipitation, maximal temperature (TMax), minimal temperature (Tmin), (a) calculated crop evapotranspiration (ETc), and water deficit (WD) (b) of the vineyard in 2018. Precipitation, maximal temperature (TMax), minimal temperature (Tmin), (c) calculated crop evapotranspiration (ETc), and water deficit (WD) (d) of the vineyard in 2019.
Figure 2
Figure 2
(a) Leaf water content (LWC (%)) in Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo before (T0B) and after (T24B) the second foliar application with distiller water (C), BABA, or three commercial biostimulants (Greetnal (GT), Basofoliar (BF), or SoilExpert (ST)) in the 2018 or 2019 season. (b) Ratio of the LWC between T24B and T0B for the two subplots (A and B) and seasons. Different letters indicated significant differences according to Duncan’s test after ANOVA.
Figure 3
Figure 3
(a) Number of clusters per vine; (b) cluster weight (g); (c) cluster length (cm); (d) grape diameter (mm); (e) vine yield (kg); (f) survival (%) in plants of Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo from two subplots (A and B) sprayed with distilled water (C), BABA, or three commercial biostimulants (Greetnal, Basofoliar, or SoilExpert) in the 2018 or 2019 season. Different letters indicated significant differences according to Duncan’s test after ANOVA.
Figure 3
Figure 3
(a) Number of clusters per vine; (b) cluster weight (g); (c) cluster length (cm); (d) grape diameter (mm); (e) vine yield (kg); (f) survival (%) in plants of Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo from two subplots (A and B) sprayed with distilled water (C), BABA, or three commercial biostimulants (Greetnal, Basofoliar, or SoilExpert) in the 2018 or 2019 season. Different letters indicated significant differences according to Duncan’s test after ANOVA.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Water use efficiency (kg mm−1) in plants of Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo from two subplots (A and B) sprayed with distilled water (C), BABA, or three commercial biostimulants (Greetnal, Basofoliar, or SoilExpert) in the 2018 or 2019 season. Different letters indicated significant differences according to Duncan’s test after ANOVA.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Parallel plot representing the LWC and survival as the log2 of the ratio between the treatment and control in plants of Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo from two subplots (A and B) sprayed with distilled water (C), BABA, or three commercial biostimulants (Greetnal, Basofoliar, or SoilExpert) in the (a) 2018 and (b) 2019 seasons. Parallel plot representing the production as the log2 of the ratio between the treatment and control in the (c) 2018 and (d) 2019 seasons.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Partial least squares discrimination analysis (PLS-DA) in leaves of Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo from two subplots (A and B) collected before and after the first (T0A and T24A, before flowering) and second (T0B and T24B, after flowering) foliar application and at maturity (TF) in the 2018 or 2019 season with (a) distilled water (control) vs. BABA; (b) distilled water (control) vs. Basofoliar (BF); (c) distilled water (control) vs. Greetnal (GT); (d) distilled water (control) vs. SoilExpert (ST). Free AAs: L-aspartic acid (Asp), L-glutamic acid (Glu), L-asparagine (Asn), L-glutamine (Gln), L-arginine (Arg), L-alanine (Ala), γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA), β-aminobutyric acid (BABA) and α-aminobutyric acid (AABA). Carbohydrates: D-(-)-fructose (Fruct), D-(+)-glucose (Gluc), sucrose (Sac), and maltose (Malt). AcOrg: oxalic acid (Oxal), L-(+)-tartaric acid (Tart), DL-malic acid (Mal), acetic acid (Acet), citric acid (Cit), succinic acid (Suc), and fumaric acid (Fum).
Figure 7
Figure 7
Partial least squares discrimination analysis (PLS-DA) in grapes (a) and must (b) of Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo sprayed with distilled water (control) vs. BABA; grapes (c) and must (d) of Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo sprayed with distilled water (control) vs. Basofoliar (BF); grapes (e) and must (f) of Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo sprayed with distilled water (control) vs. Greetnal (GT); grapes (g) and must (h) of Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo sprayed with distilled water (control) vs. SoilExpert (ST); from two subplots (A and B) collected before and after harvest (TV and TF).
Figure 7
Figure 7
Partial least squares discrimination analysis (PLS-DA) in grapes (a) and must (b) of Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo sprayed with distilled water (control) vs. BABA; grapes (c) and must (d) of Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo sprayed with distilled water (control) vs. Basofoliar (BF); grapes (e) and must (f) of Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo sprayed with distilled water (control) vs. Greetnal (GT); grapes (g) and must (h) of Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo sprayed with distilled water (control) vs. SoilExpert (ST); from two subplots (A and B) collected before and after harvest (TV and TF).
Figure 8
Figure 8
Principal component analysis of the metabolite content in three commercial biostimulants (Greetnal (GT), Basofoliar (BF), or SoilExpert (ST)).
Figure 9
Figure 9
Health status of (a) BABA-treated grapes; (b) distilled water-treated grapes (control) and (c) Greetnal-treated grapes from plot A at harvest (24 October 2018).
Figure 9
Figure 9
Health status of (a) BABA-treated grapes; (b) distilled water-treated grapes (control) and (c) Greetnal-treated grapes from plot A at harvest (24 October 2018).
Figure 10
Figure 10
Experimental design of foliar applications in the vineyard.
Scheme 1
Scheme 1
Experimental setup in Vitis vinifera var. Tempranillo.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. OIV Actualidad de La Coyuntura Del Sector Vinícola Mundial En 2019. 2020. [(accessed on 24 April 2022)]. Available online: http://www.oiv.int/public/medias/7304/es-actualidad-de-la-coyuntura-del-....
    1. Consejo Regulador de la Denominación de Origen Calificada Rioja Estadísticas Rioja 2019. [(accessed on 25 November 2020)]. Available online: https://www.riojawine.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/ESTADISTICAS_RIOJA2....
    1. Fraga H., Malheiro A.C., Moutinho-Pereira J., Santos J.A. An overview of climate change impacts on European viticulture. Food Energy Secur. 2012;1:94–110. doi: 10.1002/fes3.14. - DOI
    1. Wang W., Vinocur B., Altman A. Plant responses to drought, salinity and extreme temperatures: Towards genetic engineering for stress tolerance. Planta. 2003;218:16. doi: 10.1007/s00425-003-1105-5. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Palliotti A., Tombesi S., Silvestroni O., Lanari V., Gatti M., Poni S. Changes in vineyard establishment and canopy management urged by earlier climate-related grape ripening: A Review. Sci. Hortic. 2014;178:43–54. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2014.07.039. - DOI