Alternative budburst management in Campanha Gaúcha vineyards

Seeking a less toxic alternative to budburst management than hydrogen cyanamide, doses of the mineral-organic product Erger® were tested in combination with calcium nitrate (Ca(NO3)2). The experiment was conducted in Santana do Livramento, southern Brazil, during the 2013/14 and 2014/15 growth cycles, in a ‘Merlot’ vineyard conducted in a vertical trellis system, pruned in double Guyot, with SO4 rootstock. Treatments were: Control (unsprayed); 5.0% Ca(NO3)2; 2.5% Erger® + 5.0% Ca(NO3)2; 5.0% Erger® + 5.0% Ca(NO3)2; 7.5% Erger® + 5.0% Ca(NO3)2; 3.5% Dormex® (positive control). All Erger® treatments stimulated budbreak, increasing budburst from 68% (unsprayed and calcium nitrate means) to 83% (Erger® means) in the first cycle and from 85% to 96% in the second one, with no difference among doses. Plants treated with Dormex® had budburst similar to Erger® in the first cycle (85%), but budburst in the second cycle was only 72%, possibly due to burned buds. Therefore, Erger®, in concentrations of 2.5% or more with 5% calcium nitrate, may be a promising alternative to induce budburst in regions with restrictions in cold availability.

Index terms
bud dormancy; hydrogen cyanamide; Erger®; Merlot; Vitis vinifera

Authorship

Aline Mabel Rosa

Agronomist, Doctoral student in Plant Science, UFRGS. Porto Alegre-RS, Brazil, E-mail: linerosa@gmail.com Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do SulBrasilPorto Alegre, RS, Brasil Agronomist, Doctoral student in Plant Science, UFRGS. Porto Alegre-RS, Brazil, E-mail: linerosa@gmail.com

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9300-0875

Gilmar Arduino Bettio Marodin

Agronomist, PhD, Professor in the Department of Horticulture and Silviculture, UFRGS. Porto Alegre-RS, Brazil. E-mail: marodin@ufrgs.br Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do SulBrasilPorto Alegre, RS, Brasil Agronomist, PhD, Professor in the Department of Horticulture and Silviculture, UFRGS. Porto Alegre-RS, Brazil. E-mail: marodin@ufrgs.br

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7932-2074

Flávio Bello Fialho

Agronomist, PhD, Researcher at Embrapa, Bento Gonçalves-RS, Brazil. E-mail: flavio.bello@embrapa.br Embrapa Uva e VinhoBrasilBento Gonçalves, RS, Brasil Agronomist, PhD, Researcher at Embrapa, Bento Gonçalves-RS, Brazil. E-mail: flavio.bello@embrapa.br

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8568-2204

Vagner de Vargas Marchi

Bachelor in Viticulture and Oenology, Scholarship at Embrapa, Bento Gonçalves-RS, Brazil. E-mail: vagnerv.marchi@gmail.com Embrapa Uva e VinhoBrasilBento Gonçalves, RS, Brasil Bachelor in Viticulture and Oenology, Scholarship at Embrapa, Bento Gonçalves-RS, Brazil. E-mail: vagnerv.marchi@gmail.com

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0915-567X

Henrique Pessoa dos Santos

Agronomist, D.Sc, Researcher at Embrapa, Bento Gonçalves-RS, Brazil. E-mail: henrique.p.santos@embrapa.br Embrapa Uva e VinhoBrasilBento Gonçalves, RS, Brasil Agronomist, D.Sc, Researcher at Embrapa, Bento Gonçalves-RS, Brazil. E-mail: henrique.p.santos@embrapa.br

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4066-1463

SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Figures | Tables

Figures (4)
Tables (1)

Thumbnail

Figure 1
Chilling hours (CH, number of hours with temperature < 7.2°C) and cumulative heat sum after pruning (DD, degree-days above a base temperature of 9.4°C) in ‘Merlot’ vineyards during two cycles (2013/14 and 2014/15). Temperature data was registered using a Campbell Scientific automatic station located 50 m from the vineyard, in Santana do Livramento, RS. The horizontal gray line represents the ‘Merlot’ chilling requirement of 300 CH. Budburst dates of each cycle (13/09/2013 and 31/08/2014) is indicated by the arrows.

Thumbnail

Figure 2
Observed budburst (%) in ‘Merlot’ grapevines treated with different doses of Erger®+ Ca(NO3)2 during two cycles, in Santana do Livramento, RS. Two negative control treatments (untreated or sprayed with Ca(NO3)2) and one positive control (Dormex®) were included for comparison. All Erger® treatments were sprayed combined with 5% Ca(NO3)2. Vertical bars represent the 95% confidence interval of the mean. Within each cycle, treatments with the same letters do not differ (Tukey test, at 5% probability).

Thumbnail

Figure 3
Visual contrast of observed budburst in ‘Merlot’ grapevines pruned in double Guyot, in control plants (a) and plants treated with 5% Erger® (b) or 3.5% Dormex® (c), during the 2014/15 cycle in Santana do Livramento-RS. Arrows indicate budburst failures, due to sustained dormancy (control) or burned buds (Dormex®).

Thumbnail

Figure 4
Phenology evolution of ‘Merlot’ variety conducted in Double Guyot pruning system resulted from treatments with Erger® and Dormex® in production cycles 2013/14 and 2014/15. Control treatments were unsprayed (Control) or sprayed with Ca(NO3)2, and all Erger® treatments were sprayed combined with 5% Ca(NO3)2. Santana do Livramento-RS, 2015. Within each cycle, treatments with the same letters do not differ (Tukey test, at 5% probability).

Thumbnail

Table 1
Yield components related to number of berries of ‘Merlot’ grapevines treated with Erger® or Dormex® and meaningful contrasts defined in the statistical analysis. Control treatments were unsprayed (Control) or sprayed with Ca(NO3)2, and all Erger® treatments were sprayed combined with 5% Ca(NO3)2. Santana do Livramento, RS, Brazil, 2014/15 cycle.

Figure 1 Chilling hours (CH, number of hours with temperature < 7.2°C) and cumulative heat sum after pruning (DD, degree-days above a base temperature of 9.4°C) in ‘Merlot’ vineyards during two cycles (2013/14 and 2014/15). Temperature data was registered using a Campbell Scientific automatic station located 50 m from the vineyard, in Santana do Livramento, RS. The horizontal gray line represents the ‘Merlot’ chilling requirement of 300 CH. Budburst dates of each cycle (13/09/2013 and 31/08/2014) is indicated by the arrows.

Figure 2 Observed budburst (%) in ‘Merlot’ grapevines treated with different doses of Erger®+ Ca(NO3)2 during two cycles, in Santana do Livramento, RS. Two negative control treatments (untreated or sprayed with Ca(NO3)2) and one positive control (Dormex®) were included for comparison. All Erger® treatments were sprayed combined with 5% Ca(NO3)2. Vertical bars represent the 95% confidence interval of the mean. Within each cycle, treatments with the same letters do not differ (Tukey test, at 5% probability).

Figure 3 Visual contrast of observed budburst in ‘Merlot’ grapevines pruned in double Guyot, in control plants (a) and plants treated with 5% Erger® (b) or 3.5% Dormex® (c), during the 2014/15 cycle in Santana do Livramento-RS. Arrows indicate budburst failures, due to sustained dormancy (control) or burned buds (Dormex®).

Figure 4 Phenology evolution of ‘Merlot’ variety conducted in Double Guyot pruning system resulted from treatments with Erger® and Dormex® in production cycles 2013/14 and 2014/15. Control treatments were unsprayed (Control) or sprayed with Ca(NO3)2, and all Erger® treatments were sprayed combined with 5% Ca(NO3)2. Santana do Livramento-RS, 2015. Within each cycle, treatments with the same letters do not differ (Tukey test, at 5% probability).

Table 1 Yield components related to number of berries of ‘Merlot’ grapevines treated with Erger® or Dormex® and meaningful contrasts defined in the statistical analysis. Control treatments were unsprayed (Control) or sprayed with Ca(NO3)2, and all Erger® treatments were sprayed combined with 5% Ca(NO3)2. Santana do Livramento, RS, Brazil, 2014/15 cycle.

Treatments¹	Fertile shoots² (%)	Bunches per plant	Berries per bunch	Berries per plant
Control	67.9	20.4	96.9	1817
Control + 5%Ca(NO₃)₂	63.3	22.2	83.1	1799
2.5% Erger^®+ 5% Ca(NO₃)₂	70.0	26.2	67.4	1769
5.0% Erger^®+ 5% Ca(NO₃)₂	75.6	31.8	67.9	2093
7.5% Erger^®+ 5% Ca(NO₃)₂	70.5	30.2	62.3	1882
3.5% Dormex^®	68.8	27.4	68.3	1843
Coefficient of variation (%)	18.2	23.4	19.4	17.1
Controls vs. Chemicals³	p=0.12	p=0.0048**	p<0.0001**	p=0.22
Erger^®vs. Dormex^®	p=0.49	p=0.54	p=0.57	p=0.45
Erger^®dose	p=0.55	p=0.36	p=0.51	p=0.022*

^*
Significance (*p<0.05; **p<0.01) of hierarchical orthogonal contrasts
¹
Concentration of commercial product (v/v) and Ca(NO3)2 (w/v) in water.
²
Number of shoots with at least one bunch divided by total number of shoots.
³
Contrast of the two controls (no spraying and Ca(NO3)2) against dormancy breaking products (Erger® and Dormex®).

How to cite

copy

Sociedade Brasileira de Fruticultura Via de acesso Prof. Paulo Donato Castellane, s/n , 14884-900 Jaboticabal SP Brazil, Tel.: +55 16 3209-7188/3209-7609 - Jaboticabal - SP - Brazil
E-mail: rbf@fcav.unesp.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

Versão para download de PDF

PDF

Inglês

Versões e tradução automática

Versão original do texto

English

Tradução automática

Google Translator
Microsoft Translator

Como citar

RIS

BIBTEX

Outros formatos de citação e exportação:

SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online
Rua Dr. Diogo de Faria, 1087 – 9º andar – Vila Clementino 04037-003 São Paulo/SP - Brasil
E-mail: scielo@scielo.org

Leia a Declaração de Acesso Aberto

Métricas

Alternative budburst management in Campanha Gaúcha vineyards

PlumX

Mensagem

[TFN0101] ^*
Significance (*p<0.05; **p<0.01) of hierarchical orthogonal contrasts

[TFN0102] ¹
Concentration of commercial product (v/v) and Ca(NO3)2 (w/v) in water.

[TFN0103] ²
Number of shoots with at least one bunch divided by total number of shoots.

[TFN0104] ³
Contrast of the two controls (no spraying and Ca(NO3)2) against dormancy breaking products (Erger® and Dormex®).