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
. 2023 Feb 5;12(4):708.
doi: 10.3390/plants12040708.

Sustainable Soil Management: Effects of Clinoptilolite and Organic Compost Soil Application on Eco-Physiology, Quercitin, and Hydroxylated, Methoxylated Anthocyanins on Vitis vinifera

Eleonora Cataldo  1 , Maddalena Fucile  1 , Davide Manzi  2 , Cosimo Maria Masini  2 , Serena Doni  3 , Giovan Battista Mattii  1
Affiliations

Sustainable Soil Management: Effects of Clinoptilolite and Organic Compost Soil Application on Eco-Physiology, Quercitin, and Hydroxylated, Methoxylated Anthocyanins on Vitis vinifera

Eleonora Cataldo et al. Plants (Basel). .

Abstract

Climate change and compostinS1g methods have an important junction on the phenological and ripening grapevine phases. Moreover, the optimization of these composting methods in closed-loop corporate chains can skillfully address the waste problem (pomace, stalks, and pruning residues) in viticultural areas. Owing to the ongoing global warming, in many wine-growing regions, there has been unbalanced ripening, with tricky harvests. Excessive temperatures in fact impoverish the anthocyanin amount of the must while the serious water deficits do not allow a correct development of the berry, stopping its growth processes. This experiment was created to improve the soil management and the quality of the grapes, through the application of a new land conditioner (Zeowine) to the soil, derived from the compost processes of industrial wine, waste, and zeolite. Three treatments on a Sangiovese vineyard were conducted: Zeowine (ZW) (30 tons per ha), Zeolite (Z) (10 tons per ha), and Compost (C) (20 tons per ha). During the two seasons (2021-2022), measurements were made of single-leaf gas exchange and leaf midday water potential, as well as chlorophyll fluorescence. In addition, the parameters of plant yield, yeast assimilable nitrogen, technological maturity, fractionation of anthocyanins (Cyanidin-3-glucoside, Delphinidin-3-glucoside, Malvidin-3-acetylglucoside, Malvidin-3-cumarylglucoside, Malvidin-3-glucoside, Peonidin-3-acetylglucoside, Peonidin-3-cumarylglucoside, Peonidin-3-glucoside, and Petunidin-3-glucoside), Caffeic Acid, Coumaric Acid, Gallic Acid, Ferulic Acid, Kaempferol-3-O-glucoside, Quercetin-3-O-rutinoside, Quercetin-3-O-glucoside, Quercetin-3-O-galactoside, and Quercetin-3-O-glucuronide were analyzed. The Zeowine and zeolite showed less negative water potential, higher photosynthesis, and lower leaf temperature. Furthermore, they showed higher levels of anthocyanin accumulation and a lower level of quercetin. Finally, the interaction of the beneficial results of Zeowine (soil and grapevines) was evidenced by the embellishment of the nutritional and water efficiency, the minimizing of the need for fertilizers, the closure of the production cycle of waste material from the supply chain, and the improvement of the quality of the wines.

Keywords: Zeowine; composting process; gas exchanges; grapevine; soil management; water stress.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Weather patterns of the experiment location. Daily mean, maximum, and minimum air temperature (°C) and rainfall (mm) were measured from April to September (2021–2022, (A) and (B)). The arrows indicate the days during which the maximum temperature exceeded 34 °C.
Figure 1
Figure 1
Weather patterns of the experiment location. Daily mean, maximum, and minimum air temperature (°C) and rainfall (mm) were measured from April to September (2021–2022, (A) and (B)). The arrows indicate the days during which the maximum temperature exceeded 34 °C.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Physiological parameters (semel). Net photosynthesis (PN) and stomatal conductance (gs) of Vitis vinifera with three different soil management treatments. Measurements were conducted from May to September (2021 and 2022, (A)–(D)). Data (mean ± SE, n = 10) were subjected to one-way ANOVA. The bars represent the standard deviation. Different letters indicate significant differences between Zeowine, Zeolite, and Compost (LSD test, p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Physiological parameters (bis). Leaf temperature (°C), transpiration (E), and extrinsic water use efficiency (eWUE) of Vitis vinifera with three different soil management treatments. Measurements were conducted from May to September (2021 and 2022, (A)–(F)). Data (mean ± SE, n = 10) were subjected to one-way ANOVA. The bars represent the standard deviation. Different letters indicate significant differences between Zeowine, Zeolite, and Compost (LSD test, p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Physiological parameters (ter). Fluorescence of chlorophyll (Fv/Fm) of Vitis vinifera with three different soil management treatments. Measurements were conducted from June to September (2021 and 2022, (A,B)). Data (mean ± SE, n = 10) were subjected to one-way ANOVA. The bars represent the standard deviation. Different letters indicate significant differences between Zeowine, Zeolite, and Compost (LSD test, p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Physiological parameters (quater). Stem water potential (Ψstem) of Vitis vinifera with three different soil management treatments. Measurements were conducted from June to September ((A) 2021 and (B) 2022). Data (mean ± SE, n = 10) were subjected to one-way ANOVA. The bars represent the standard deviation. Different letters indicate significant differences between Zeowine, Zeolite, and Compost (LSD test, p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Technological maturity. Sugar content (°Brix), total acidity (TA), pH, and berry weight of Vitis vinifera treated with Zeowine, Zeolite, and Compost during two seasons (2021–2022, (A)–(H)). Measurements were conducted four times: full veraison (29 July 2021 and 18 July 2022), mid-maturation (18 August 2021 and 4 August 2022), full maturation (31 August 2021 and 17 August 2022), and harvest (14 September 2021 and 5 September 2022). Data (mean ± SE, n = 10) were subjected to one-way ANOVA. The bars represent the standard deviation. Different letters indicate significant differences between Zeowine, Zeolite, and Compost (LSD test, p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 7
Figure 7
Phenolic maturity. Total and extractable anthocyanins, total and extractable anthocyanins of Vitis vinifera treated with Zeowine, Zeolite, and Compost during two seasons (2021–2022, (A)–(H)). Measurements were conducted four times: full veraison (29 July 2021 and 18 July 2022) and (18 August 2021 and 4 August 2022), full maturation (31 August 2021 and 17 August 2022), and harvest (14 September 2021 and 5 September 2022). Data (mean ± SE, n = 10) were subjected to one-way ANOVA. The bars represent the standard deviation. Different letters indicate significant differences between Zeowine, zeolite, and compost (LSD test, p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 8
Figure 8
Yeast assimilable nitrogen (YAN). Yeast assimilable nitrogen (YAN) of Vitis vinifera treated with Zeowine, zeolite, and compost during two seasons (2021–2022, (A) and (B)). Measurements were conducted four times: full veraison (29 July 2021 and 18 July 2022), mid-maturation (18 August 2021 and 4 August 2022), full maturation (31 August 2021 and 17 August 2022), and harvest (14 September 2021 and 5 September 2022). Data (mean ± SE, n = 10) were subjected to one-way ANOVA. The bars represent the standard deviation. Different letters indicate significant differences between Zeowine, Zeolite, and Compost (LSD test, p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 9
Figure 9
PCA ecophysiology 2021 season. PCA of the following variables (27 May, 9 June, 28 June, 12 July, 29 July, 18 August, 31 August, and 14 September): stem midday water potential, net photosynthesis, transpiration, leaf temperature, stomatal conductance, the fluorescence of chlorophyll, and water use efficiency.
Figure 10
Figure 10
PCA ecophysiology 2022 season. PCA of the following variables (20 May, 13 June, 27 June, 4 July, 18 July, 4 August, 17 August, and 5 September): stem midday water potential, net photosynthesis, transpiration, leaf temperature, stomatal conductance, the fluorescence of chlorophyll, and water use efficiency.
Figure 11
Figure 11
PCA ecophysiology and grape parameters 2021 season. PCA of the following variables (29 July, 18 August, 31 August, and 14 September): stem midday water potential, net photosynthesis, transpiration, leaf temperature, stomatal conductance, the fluorescence of chlorophyll, water use efficiency, sugar content, pH, acidity, total and extractable polyphenol, total and extractable anthocyanins, and YAN.
Figure 12
Figure 12
PCA ecophysiology and grape parameters 2022 season. PCA of the following variables (18 July, 4 August, 17 August, and 5 September): stem midday water potential, net photosynthesis, transpiration, leaf temperature, stomatal conductance, the fluorescence of chlorophyll, water use efficiency, sugar content, pH, acidity, total and extractable polyphenol, total and extractable anthocyanins, and YAN.
Figure 13
Figure 13
Productive parameters. Cluster weight, yield per vine, and the number of clusters per vine (2021 and 2022 seasons, (A)–(F)). Measurements were at the harvest stage (14 September 2021 and 5 September 2022). Data (mean ± SE, n = 10) were subjected to one-way ANOVA. The bars represent the standard deviation. Different letters indicate significant differences between Zeowine, Zeolite, and Compost (LSD test, p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 14
Figure 14
Composting cycle at CMM.
Figure 15
Figure 15
Treatment applications at CMM.
Figure 16
Figure 16
Treatment application results at CMM.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Beheshti S., Heydari J., Sazvar Z. Food waste recycling closed loop supply chain optimization through renting waste recycling facilities. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022;78:103644. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2021.103644. - DOI
    1. Dwivedi Y.K., Hughes L., Kar A.K., Baabdullah A.M., Grover P., Abbas R., Andreini D., Abumoghli I., Barlette Y., Bunker D., et al. Climate change and COP26: Are digital technologies and information management part of the problem or the solution? An editorial reflection and call to action. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2022;63:102456. doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102456. - DOI
    1. Burg P., Vítěz T., Turan J., Burgová J. Evaluation of grape pomace composting process. Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendel. Brun. 2014;62:875–881. doi: 10.11118/actaun201462050875. - DOI
    1. Bian B., Hu X., Zhang S., Lv C., Yang Z., Yang W., Zhang L. Pilot-scale composting of typical multiple agricultural wastes: Parameter optimization and mechanisms. Bioresour. 2019;287:121482. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2019.121482. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Venkitasamy C., Zhao L., Zhang R., Pan Z. Integrated Processing Technologies for Food and Agricultural by-Products. Academic Press; Cambridge, MA, USA: 2019. Grapes; pp. 133–163.

LinkOut - more resources