• Satisha JogaiahEmail author


In many of the semiarid and arid climatic regions where grape is largely grown on commercial scale, abiotic stresses such as soil and water salinity and water scarcity are the major constraints. Drought and salinity stress can cause a variety of symptoms common to other major stresses such as light, heat and nutrient deficiency, and the symptoms are very specific to time and geographical location. In grapevines there are several combinations of mechanisms which can help to tolerate most of these stresses. Since abiotic stress tolerance in grapes is controlled by multigenes, it is very difficult to understand the stress tolerance at molecular level. Poor vine growth and severe foliar damage due to excess salt accumulation coupled with drastic reduction in productive life span of own-rooted grapevines necessitated the use of rootstocks to combat these abiotic stresses also. Many of the grape rootstocks are known to possess drought- and salt-tolerant traits which can be seen on grafted scions through several mechanisms at both cellular and whole-plant levels. This chapter focuses on such mechanism of grapevines (directly by vines or indirectly by rootstocks) to overcome adverse situations of these stresses at morphological, physio-biochemical, nutritional and molecular level. In recent years, with scenario of climate change, some of the mechanisms adapted by grapevines to tolerate flooding stress are also reviewed.


Abiotic Stress Heat Stress Salinity Stress Compatible Solute Moisture Stress 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ablett E, Seaton G, Scott K, Shelton D, Graham MW, Baverstock P, Lee LS, Henry R (2000) Analysis of grape ESTs: global gene expression patterns in leaf and berry. Plant Sci 159:87–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agaoglu YS, Ergul A, Aras S (2004) Molecular characterization of salt stress in grapevine cultivars (Vitis vinifera L) and rootstocks. Vitis 43:107–110Google Scholar
  3. Alizadeh M, Singh VSK, Patel B, Bhattacharya RC, Yadav BP (2010) In vitro responses of grape rootstocks to NaCl. Biol Plant 54:381–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alsaidi IH, Shakir IA, Hüssein AJ, Saidiq J (1987) Effect of salinity on the rooting of cuttings of Abbasi and Kambli cultivars (Vitis vinifera L.). Ann Agric Sci 32:1581–1600Google Scholar
  5. Arbazadeh F, Dutt G (1987) Salt tolerance of grape rootstock under greenhouse conditions. Am J Enol Vitic 38:95–99Google Scholar
  6. Ashraf M, Ahmad S (2000) Influence of sodium chloride on ion accumulation, yield components, and fiber characteristics in salt-tolerant and salt-sensitive lines of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Field Crops Res 66:115–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bailey–Serres J, Voesenek LACJ (2008) Flooding stress: acclimations and genetic diversity. Annu Rev Plant Biol 59:313–339PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Balbi V, Devoto A (2008) Jasmonate signalling network in Arabidopsis thaliana: crucial regulatory nodes and new physiological scenarios. New Phytol 177:301–318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Baneh HD, Attari H, Hassani A, Abdollahi R (2013) Salinity effects on the physiological parameters and oxidative enzymatic activities of four Iranian grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.) cultivar. Int J Agric Crop Sci 9:1022–1027Google Scholar
  10. Banilas G, Korkas E, Ebglezos V, Nisiotou AA, Hatzopoulos P (2012) Genome-wide analysis of the heat shock protein 90 gene family in grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.). Aust J Grape Wine Res 18:29–38Google Scholar
  11. Bartles D, Sunkar R (2005) Drought and salt tolerance in plants. Crit Rev Plant Sci 24:23–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bauerle TL, Smart DR, Bauerle W, Stockert CM, Eissenstat DM (2008) Root foraging in response to heterogeneous soil moisture in two grapevines that differ in potential growth rate. New Phytol 179:857–866Google Scholar
  13. Bavaresco L, Lovisolo C (2000) Effect of grafting on grapevine chlorosis and hydraulic conductivity. Vitis 39:89–92Google Scholar
  14. Behboudian NM, Walker RR, Torokfalvy E (1986) Effects of water stress and salinity on photosynthesis of Pistachio. Sci Hortic 29:251–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bhardwaj R, Arora N, Sharma P, Arora HK (2007) Effects of 28-homobrassinolide on seedling growth, lipid peroxidation and antioxidative enzyme activities under nickel stress in seedlings of Zea mays L. Asian J Plant Sci 6:765–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bliss RD, Platt-Aloia KA, Thompson WW (1984) Changes in Plasmalemma organization in cowpea radicle during imbibition in water and NaCl solutions. Plant Cell Environ 7:606–609Google Scholar
  17. Bohnert HJ, Gong Q, Li P, Ma S (2006) Unraveling abiotic stress tolerance mechanisms—getting genomics going. Curr Opin Plant Biol 9:180–188PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Bol JF, Linthorst HJM, Cornelissen BJC (1990) Plant pathogenesis-related proteins induced by virus infection. Annu Rev Phytopathol 28:113–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Broin M, Cuine S, Eymery F, Rey P (2002) The plastidic 2- cysteine peroxiredoxin is a target for a thioredoxin involved in the protection of the photosynthetic apparatus against oxidative damage. Plant Cell 14:1417–1432PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Calzadilla PI, Gazquez A, Maiale SJ, Ruiz OA, Benardina MA (2014) Polyamines as indicators and modulators in the abiotic stress in plants. In: Anjum NA, Gill SS, Gill R (eds) Plant adaptation to environmental changes. CAB International, United KingdomGoogle Scholar
  21. Carbonell-Bejerano P, Santa Maria E, Torres-Perez R, Royo C, Lijavetzky D, Bravo G, Aguirreolea J, Sanchez-Diaz M, Antolín M, Martinez-Zapater J (2013) Thermotolerance responses in ripening berries of Vitis vinifera L. Cv Muscat Hamburg. Plant Cell Physiol 54(7):200–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cavagnaro JB, Ponce MT, Guzman J, Cirrincione MA (2006) Argentinean cultivars of Vitis vinifera grow better than European ones when cultured in vitro under salinity. Biol Cell 30:1–7Google Scholar
  23. Chaves MM, Oliveira MM (2004) Mechanisms underlying plant resilience to water deficits: prospects for water-saving agriculture. J Exp Bot 55:2365–2384PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Chaves MM, Maroco JP, Pereira JS (2003) Understanding plant responses to drought – from genes to the whole plant. Funct Plant Biol 30:239–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Chen L, Song Y, Li S, Zhang L, Zou C, Yu D (2012) The role of WRKY transcription factors in plant abiotic stresses. Biochem Biophys Acta 1819:120–128Google Scholar
  26. Choi YJ, Hur YY, Jung SM, Roh JH, Nam JC, Park SJ (2012) Changes in gene expression of native Korean Vitis flexousa during flood and its subsequent recovery. In: Conference on mechanisms of abiotic stress tolerance in plants 8–9 June, Gaesin Culture Centre, Chungbuk National University, South Korea, p 194Google Scholar
  27. Choi YJ, Hur YY, Jung SM, Kim SH, Noh JHM, Park SJ, Park KS, Yun HK (2013) Transcriptional analysis of Dehydrin1 genes responsive to dehydrating stress in grapevines. Hortic Environ Biotech 54:272–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Colmer TD, Voesenek LACJ (2009) Flooding tolerance: suites of plant traits in variable environments. Funct Plant Biol 36:665–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Colmer TD, Gibberd MR, Wiengweera A, Tinh TK (1998) The barrier to radial oxygen loss from roots of rice (Oryza sativa L.) is induced by growth in stagnant solution. J Exp Bot 49:1431–1436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Comas LH, Bauerle TL, Essenstat DM (2010) Biological and environmental factors controlling root dynamics and function: effects of root ageing and soil moisture. Aust J Grape Wine Res 16:131–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Cramer GR, Ergul A, Grimplet J (2007) Water and salinity stress in grapevines: early and late changes in transcript and metabolite profiles. Funct Integr Genom 7:111–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Cramer GR, Van- Sluyfer SC, Hopper DW, Pascovici C, Keighley T, Haynes PA (2013) Proteomic analysis indicates massive changes in metabolism prior to the inhibition of growth and photosynthesis of grapevine (Vitis vinifera L) in response to water deficit. BMC Plant Biol 13:49PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Dardeniz A, Muftuoglu NM, Altay H (2006) Determination of salt tolerance of some American grape rootstocks. Bangladesh J Bot 35:143–150Google Scholar
  34. Davies FS, Lakso AN (1978) Water relations in apple seedlings changes in water potential components, Abscisic acid levels and stomatal conductances under irrigated and non irrigated conditions. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 103:310–313Google Scholar
  35. Delaunois B, Colby T, Belloy N, Conreux A, Harzen A, Baillieul F, Clement C, Schmidt J, Jeandet P, Cordelier S (2013) Large-scale proteomic analysis of the grapevine leaf apoplastic fluid reveals mainly stress-related proteins and cell wall modifying enzymes. BMC Plant Biol 13:24PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Deluc LG, Grimplet J, Matt M, Craig O, Karen AS, Cramer GR, Cushman JC (2006) Transcriptional profiling throughout grape berry development under well watered and water deficit stress conditions. International plant and animal genome conference, San Diego, 2006, W171Google Scholar
  37. Deuschle K, Funck D, Forlani G, Stransky H, Biehl A, Leister D, van der Graaff E, Kunze R, Frommer WB (2004) The role of Δ1-pyrroline-5-carboxylate dehydrogenase in proline degradation. Plant Cell 16:3413–3425PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Downton WJS, Loweys BR, Grant WJR (1990) Salinity effects on the stomatal behavior of grapevine. New Phytol 16:499–503Google Scholar
  39. Dry PR, Loveys BR, During H (2000) Partial drying of the root zones of grape vines. 1. Transient change in shoot growth and gas exchange. Vitis 39:3–7Google Scholar
  40. Dubrovina AS (2012) Expression of calcium dependent protein kinase (CDPK) genes in Vitis amurensis under abiotic stress conditions. J Stress Physiol Biochem 8:19Google Scholar
  41. During H (1984) Evidence for osmotic adjustment to drought in grapevines (Vitis vinifera). Vitis 32:1–10Google Scholar
  42. During H (1988) CO2 assimilation and photorespiration of grapevine leaves: responses to light and drought. Vitis 27:199–208Google Scholar
  43. During H, Dry PR (1995) Osmoregulation in water stressed roots: response of leaf conductance and photosynthesis. Vitis 34:15–17Google Scholar
  44. During H, Loveys BR (1982) Diurnal changes in water relations and abscisic acid in field grown Vitis vinifera cvs. I. Leaf water potential components and leaf conductance under humid temperate and semiarid conditions. Vitis 21:223–232Google Scholar
  45. During H, Loveys BR, Dry PR (1997) Root signals affect water use efficiency and shoot growth. Acta Horticult 427:1–14Google Scholar
  46. Farooq M, Wahid A, Lee DJ (2009) Exogenously applied polyamines increase drought tolerance of rice by improving leaf water status, photosynthesis and membrane properties. Acta Physiol Plant 31:937–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Fiedler S, Vepraskas MJ, Richardson JL (2007) Soil redox potential: importance, field measurements, and observations. Adv Agron 94:2–56Google Scholar
  48. Fisarakis I, Chartzoulakis J, Stavrakas D (2001) Response of Sultana vines (Vitis vinifera L.) on six rootstocks to NaCl salinity exposure and recovery. Agric Water Manag 51:13–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Fisarakis I, Nikolaou N, Tsikalas P, Therios I, Stavrakas D (2004) Effect of salinity and rootstock on concentration of potassium, calcium, magnesium, phosphorus and nitrate-nitrogen in Thompson seedless grapevine. J Plant Nutr 27:2117–2134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Foyer CH, Lelandais M, Kunert KJ (1994) Photooxidative stress in plants. Physiol Plant 92:696–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Fozouni M, Abbaspour N, Doulati Baneh H (2012) Short term response of grapevine grown hydroponically to salinity: mineral composition and growth parameters. Vitis 51:95–101Google Scholar
  52. Gibberd MR, Walker RR, Condon AG (2003) Whole-plant transpiration efficiency of ‘Sultana’ grapevine grown under saline conditions is increased through the use of a Cl-excluding rootstock. Funct Plant 30:643–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Glissant D, Dédaldéchamp F, Delrot S (2008) Transcriptomic analysis of grape berry softening during ripening. J Int Sci Vigneet Vin 42:1–13Google Scholar
  54. Greenway H, Munns R (1980) Mechanisms of salt tolerance in nonhalophytes. Ann Rev Plant Physiol 31:149–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Grimplet J, Laurent D, Wheatley M, Osborne C, Schalauch K, Carmer G, Cushman J (2006) Tissue-specific mRNA profiling within the grape berry under well watered and water deficit stress conditions. International plant and animal genome conference, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  56. Grumet R, Isleib TG, Hanson AD (1985) Genetic control of glycine betaine level in barley. Crop Sci 25:618–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Hanana M, Daldoul S, Fouquet R, Deluc L, Leon C, Hoefer M, Barrieu F, Ghorbel A (2014) Identification and characterization of a seed-specific grapevine dehydrin involved in abiotic stress response within tolerant varieties. Turk J Bot 38:1157–1168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Hanin M, Brini F, Ebel C, Toda Y, Takeda S, Masmoudi K (2011) Plant dehydrins and stress tolerance – versatile proteins for complex mechanisms. Plant Signal Behav 6:1503–1509PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Hardie WJ, Martin SR (2000) Shoot growth on de-fruited grapevines: a physiological indicator for irrigation scheduling. Aust J Grape Wine Res 6:52–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Heidari Sharif Abad H (2002) Plant and salinity. The Publications of Research Institution for Forests and Rangelands. Tehran, Iran, p 199Google Scholar
  61. Houimli SIM, Denden M, Mouhandes BD (2010) Effects of 24-pibrassinolide on growth, chlorophyll, electrolyte leakage and proline by pepper plants under NaCl-stress. Eur Asian J Bio Sci 4:96–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Howarth CJ, Ashraf M, Harris PJC (2005) Genetic improvement of tolerance to high temperature. In: Ashraf M, Harris PJC (eds) Abiotic stresses: plants resistance through breeding and molecular approaches. Howarth Press, New York, pp 277–300Google Scholar
  63. Ismail A, Riemann M, Nick P (2012) The jasmonate pathway mediates salt tolerance in grapevines. J Exp Bot 63:2127–2139. doi: 10.1093/jxb/err426 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Jackson MB (2004) The impact of flooding stress on plants and crops.
  65. Jalili Marandi R, Jalil Doostali P, Hassani R (2009) Studying the tolerance of two apple roots to different concentrations of sodium chloride inside the glass. Mag Hortic Sci Iran 40:2Google Scholar
  66. Jogaiah S, Oulkar DP, Banerjee K, Sharma J, Patil AS, Maske SR, Somkuwar RG (2013) Biochemically induced variations during some phenological stages in Thompson Seedless grapevines grafted on different rootstocks. S Afr J Enol Vitic 34:36–45Google Scholar
  67. Jogaiah S, Ramteke SD, Sharma J, Upadhyay AK (2014) Moisture and salinity stress induced changes in biochemical constituents and water relations of different grape rootstock cultivars. Int J Agronom. Article ID 789087, 8 pp. doi: Google Scholar
  68. Jorrey JG (1976) Root hormones and plant growth. Annu Rev Plant Physiol 27:435–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Kaldenhoff R, Ribas-Carbo M, Sans JF, Lovisolo C, Heckwolf M, Uehlein N (2008) Aquaporins and plant water balance. Plant Cell Environ 31:658–666PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Katam R, Saurez J, Williams S, Matta F, Gottschalk V (2013) Differential expression of transcripts to water deficit stress in Florida hybrid bunch grape. Proc Fla State Hortic Soc 126:8–13Google Scholar
  71. Keller M, Kummer M, Vasconcelos MC (2001) Soil nitrogen utilization for growth and gas exchange by grapevines in response to nitrogen supply and rootstock. Aust J Grape Wine Res 7:2–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Klingler JP, Balelli G, Zhu JK (2010) ABA-receptors. The start of a new paradigm in phytohormone signalling. J Exp Bot 61:3199–3210PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Kodur S, Tisdall M, Tang C, Walker RR (2010) Accumulation of potassium in grapevine rootstocks (vitis) grafted to Shiraz as affected by growth, root-traits and transpiration. Vitis 49:7–13Google Scholar
  74. Kozlowski TT, Pallardy SG (1984) Effects of flooding on water, carbohydrate and mineral relations. In: Kozlowski TT (ed) Flooding and plant growth. Academic, Orlando, pp 165–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Kramer PJ, Boyer JS (1995) Stomata and gas exchange. In: Kramer PJ, Boyer JS (eds) Water relations of plants and soils. Academic, London, pp 257–282Google Scholar
  76. Kuiper PJC (1968) Lipids in grape roots in relation to chloride transport. Plant Physiol 43:1367–1371Google Scholar
  77. Kumar M, Busch W, Birke H, Kemmerling B, Nurnberger T (2009) Heat shock factor HsfB1 and HsfB2b are involved in the regulation of Pdf1.2 expression and pathogen resistance in Arabidopsis. Mol Plants 2:152–165Google Scholar
  78. Kumar AS, Hima Kumari P, Sharna Kumar G, Mohanalatha C, Ravi Kishor PB (2015) Osmotin: a plant sentinel and a possible agonist of mammalian adiponectin. Front Plant Sci 6:163. doi:3389/fpls.2015.00163Google Scholar
  79. Levitt J (1980) Responses of plants to environmental stresses, vol II. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  80. Liu GT, Jun-Fang Wang JF, Cramer G, Dai ZW, Duan W, Xu HG, Wu BH, Fan PG, Wang LJ, Li SH (2012) Transcriptomic analysis of grape (Vitis vinifera L.) leaves during and after recovery from heat stress. BMC Plant Biol 12:174PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Loulakakis LKA (1997a) Genomic organization and expression of an osmotin-like gene in Vitis vinifera. Vitis 36:157–158Google Scholar
  82. Loulakakis LKA (1997b) Nucleotide sequence of a Vitis vinifera L. cDNA (Accession No. Y10992) encoding for osmotin-like protein (PGR97-064). Plant Physiol 113:1464Google Scholar
  83. Lovisolo C, Schubert A (2006) Mercury hinders recovery of shoot hydraulic conductivity during grapevine rehydration: evidence from a whole plant approach. New Phytol 172:469–478PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Lovisolo C, Hartung W, Schubert A (2002) Whole-plant hydraulic conductance and root-to-shoot flow of abscisic acid independently affected by water stress in grapevines. Funct Plant Biol 29:1349–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Lovisolo C, Perrone I, Hartung W, Schubert A (2008) An abscisic acid-related reduced transpiration promotes gradual embolism repair when grapevines are rehydrated after drought. New Phytol 180:642–651PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Lovisolo C, Perrone A, Carra A, Ferrandino, Flexas J, Medrano H, Schubert A (2010) Drought-induced changes in development and function of grapevine (Vitis spp.) organs and in their hydraulic and non hydraulic interactions at the whole plant level: a physiological and molecular update. Funct Plant Biol 37:98–116Google Scholar
  87. Mangelsen E, Wanke D, Kilina J, Sundberg E, Harter K, Jaasson C (2010) Significance of light, sugar and amino acids supply for diurnal gene regulation in developing Barley caryopsis. Plant Physiol 153:14–33Google Scholar
  88. Marguerit E, Brendel O, Leben E, Van Leeuwen C, Ollat N (2012) Rootstock control of scion transpiration and its acclimation to water deficit are controlled by different genes. New Phytol 194:416–429PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Maurel C, Verdoucq L, Luu DT, Santoni V (2008) Plant aquaporins: membrane channels with multiple integrated functions. Ann Rev Plant Biol 59:595–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Mazzucotelli E, Mastrangelo AM, Crosatti C et al (2008) Abiotic stress response in plants: when post-transcriptional and post-translational regulations control transcription. Plant Sci 174:420–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Menendez AB, Rodriguez AA, Maiale SJ, Rodriguez-Kessler M, Jimenez-Bremont JF, Ruiz OA (2012) Polyamines contribution to the improvement of crop plants tolerance to abiotic stress. In: Tuteja N, Gill SS (eds) Crop improvement under adverse conditions. Springer, Morlenbach, pp 113–137Google Scholar
  92. Mohammadkhani N, Heidari R, Abbaspour N, Rahmani F (2012) Growth responses and aquaporin expressions in grape genotypes under salinity. Iran J Plant Physiol 2:497–507Google Scholar
  93. Morgan JM (1984) Osmoregulation and water stress in higher plants. Ann Rev Plant Physiol 35:299–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Morlat R, Jacquet A (1993) The soil effects on the grapevine root system in several vineyards of the Loire valley (France). Vitis 32:35–42Google Scholar
  95. Moschou PN, Wu J, Cona A, Tavladoraki P, Angelini R, Roubelakis- Angelakis KA (2012) The polyamines and their catabolic products are significant players in the turnover of nitrogenous molecules in plants. J Exp Bot 63:5003–5015PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Mullins MG, Bouquet A, Williams LE (1996) Biology of grapevine. Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, Cambridge, p 239Google Scholar
  97. Munn R (2002) Comparative physiology of salt and water stress. Plant Cell Environ 25:239–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Nauriyal JP, Gupta OP (1967) Studies on salt tolerance of grape. I-Effect of total salt concentration. J Res Ludhiana 4:197–205Google Scholar
  99. Nelson DE, Raghothama KG, Singh NK, Hasegawa PM, Bressan RA (1992) Analysis of structure and transcriptional activation of an osmotin gene. Plant Mol Biol 19:577–588Google Scholar
  100. Neumann PM, Volkenburgh EV, Cleland RE (1988) Salinity stress inhibits bean leaf expansion by reducing turgor, not wall extensibility. Plant Physiol 88:233–237PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Palaniappan R (1986) Salt tolerance studies in fruit crops. Annual report, IIHR Bangalore (India), pp 84–85Google Scholar
  102. Palliotti A, Cartechini A, Nasoini L (2001) Grapevine adaptation to continuous water limitation during the season. Adv Hortic Sci 15:39–45Google Scholar
  103. Paltronieri P, Bonsegna S, Domenico S, Santino A (2011) Molecular mechanisms in plant abiotic stress response. Field Veg Crop Res 48:15–24Google Scholar
  104. Pan HQ, Zhan JC, Liu HT, Zhang JH, Chen JY, Wen PF, Huang WD (2006) Salicylic acid synthesized by benzoic acid 2-hydroxylase participate in the development of thermotolerance in pea plants. Plant Sci 171:226–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Pandey RM, Divate MR (1976) Salt tolerance in grapes. I. Effect of sodium salts singly and in combination on some of the morphological characters of grape varieties. Indian J Plant Physiol 19:230–239Google Scholar
  106. Parage C, Tavares R, Réty S et al (2012) Structural, functional, and evolutionary analysis of the unusually large stilbene synthase gene family in grapevine. Plant Physiol 160:1407–1419PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Paranychianakis NV, Angelakis AN (2007) The effect of water stress and rootstock on the development of leaf injuries in grapevines irrigated with saline effluent. Agril Water Manag 2531:1–8Google Scholar
  108. Parida AK, Das AB (2005) Salt tolerance and salinity effects on plants: a review. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 60:324–349PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Picaud S, Becq F, Dedaldechamp F, Ageorges A, Delrot S (2003) Cloning and expression of two plasma membrane aquaporins expressed during the ripening of grape berry. Funct Plant Biol 30:621–630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Prior LD, Grieve AM, Slavish PG, Gullis PR (1992) Sodium chloride and soil texture interactions in irrigated field grown Sultana grapevines. II. Plant mineral content, growth and physiology. Aust J Agric Res 43:1067–1084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Puhakainen T, Hess MW, Makela P, Svensson J, Heino P, Palva ET (2004) Overexpression of multiple dehydrin genes enhances tolerance to freezing stress in Arabidopsis. Plant Mol Biol 54:743–753PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Raskin I (1992) Role of salicylic acid in plants. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 43:439–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Regina MA, Carbonneau A (1997) Gas exchanges in Vitis vinifera under water stress regime III. Abscisic acid and varietal behavior. Perquisa Agropecuaria Braseleira 32:579–584Google Scholar
  114. Reinth M, Terregrosa L, Luchaire N, Chatbanyong R, Lecourieux D, Kelly MT, Romieu C (2014) Day and night heat stress trigger different transcriptomic responses in green and ripening grapevine (Vitis vinifera) fruit. BMC Plant Biol 14:108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Rizhsky L, Liang HJ, Shuman J, Shulaev V, Davletova S, Mittler R (2004) When defense pathways collide. The response of Arabidopsis to a combination of drought and heat stress. Plant Physiol 134:1683–1696PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Rocheta M, Becker JD, Coito JL, Carvalho L, Amancio S (2013) Heat and water stress induce unique transcriptional signatures of heat-shock proteins and transcription factors in grapevine. Funct Integr Genomics. doi: 10.1007/s10142-013-0338-z Google Scholar
  117. Rodrigues ML, Chaves MM, Wendler R (1993) Osmotic adjustment in water stressed grapevine leaves in relation to carbon assimilation. Aust J Plant Physiol 20:309–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Rorat D (2006) Plant dehydrins – tissue location, structure and function. Cell Mol Biol Lett 11:536–556Google Scholar
  119. Rorat T, Szabala BM, Grygorowicz B, Yin Z, Rey P (2006) Expression of SK3-typed dehydrin in transporting organs is associated with cold acclimation in Solanum species. Planta 224:205–221Google Scholar
  120. Roy SJ, Tucker EJ, Tester M (2011) Genetic analysis of abiotic stress tolerance in crops. Curr Opin Plant Biol 14:232–239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Ruggiero C, Di Lorenzo R, Agelino G, Scaglione G, Gambino C, Do Vaio C (2012) Root hydraulic conductivity in three self-rooted and grafted table grape cultivars. J Int Sci Vigne Vine 46:177–183Google Scholar
  122. Ruhl EH (2000) Effect of rootstock and K+ supply on pH and acidity of grape juice. Acta Horticult 512:31–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Sadder MT, Doss AC (2014) Characterization of dehydrins ahDHN from Mediterranean saltbush (Atriplex halimus). Turk J Biol 38:469–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Salisbury FB, Ross CW (1992) Plant physiology, 4th edn. Wadsworth Publishing Company, BelmontGoogle Scholar
  125. Salleo S, Lo Gullo MA (1993) Drought resistance strategies and vulnerability to cavitation of some Mediterranean sclerophyllous trees. In: Borghetti M, Grace J, Raschi A (eds) Water transport in plants under climatic stress. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 99–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Satisha J, Prakash GS (2006) The influence of water and gas exchange parameters on grafted grapevines under conditions of moisture stress. S Afr J Enol Vitic 27:40–45Google Scholar
  127. Satisha J, Prakash GS, Murti GSR, Upreti KK (2006) Response of grape rootstocks to soil moisture stress. J Hortic Sci 1:19–23Google Scholar
  128. Satisha J, Prakash GS, Murti GSR, Upreti KK (2007) Water stress and rootstocks influences hormonal status of grafted grapevines. Eur J Hortic Sci 72:202–205Google Scholar
  129. Satisha J, Somkuwar RG, Sharma J, Upadhyay AK, Adsule PG (2010) Influence of rootstock on growth, yield and fruit composition of Thompson Seedless grown in the Pune region of India. S Afr J Enol Vitic 31:1–8Google Scholar
  130. Sauer MR (1968) Effect of vine rootstocks on chloride concentration in Sultana scions. Vitis 7:223–226Google Scholar
  131. Schultz HR (2007) Climate change and world viticulture. Cost action 858 workshop: vineyard under environmental constraints: adaptations to climate change. Abiotic stress ecophysiology and grape functional genomics. University of Lodz, PolandGoogle Scholar
  132. Schultz HR, Matthews MA (1988) Resistance to water transport in shoots of Vitis vinifera L. Plant Physiol 88:718–724PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Scienza A, Boselli M (1981) Frequency and biometric characteristics of stomata in some grapevine rootstocks. Vitis 20:281–292Google Scholar
  134. Seguin B, de Cortazar IG (2005) Climate warming: consequences for viticulture and the notion of ‘terroirs’ in Europe. Acta Hortic 689:61–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Serra I, Strever A, Myburgh P, Deloire A (2013) Review: the interaction between rootstocks and cultivars (Vitis vinifera L.) to enhance drought tolerance in grapevine. Aust J Grape Wine Res. doi: 10.1111/ajgw.12054 Google Scholar
  136. Shang Y, Yan L, Liu IQ, Zheng C, Chao M, Xin Q, Wu FQ, Wang XF, Du SY, Jiang J, Zhang XF, Zhao R, Sun HI, Liu R, Yi YT, Zhang DP (2010) The Mg-chelatase h subunit of Arabidopsis antagonizes a group of transcription repressors to relieve ABA responsive genes of inhibition. Plant Cell 22:1909–1935PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Sharma J, Upadhya AK (2008) Rootstock effect on Tas-A-Ganesh (Vitis vinifera L.) for sodium and chloride uptake. Acta Hortic 785:113–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Sharma J, Upadhyay AK (2004) Effect of moisture stress on performance of own rooted and grafted vines of Tas-A-Ganesh (Vitis vinifera L.). Acta Hortic 662:253–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Sharma J, Shikhamany SD, Satisha J, Raghupathi B (2006) Diagnosis of nutrient imbalances in bunch stem necrosis affected Thompson Seedless grapes grafted on Dogridge rootstocks using DRIS. Indian J Hortic 63:139–144Google Scholar
  140. Sharma J, Upadhyay AK, Band D, Patil SD (2010) Studies on black leaf symptom development and its impact on nutrient profile and fruitfulness in Thompson Seedless grapevines grafted on Dogridge rootstock. Indian J Hortic 67:156–160Google Scholar
  141. Sharma J, Upadhyay AK, Bande D, Patil SD (2011) Susceptibility of Thompson Seedless grapevines raised on different rootstocks to leaf blackening and necrosis under saline irrigation. J Plant Nutr 34:1711–1722Google Scholar
  142. Shi H, Shen Q, Qi Y, Yan H, Nie H, Chen Y, Zhao T, Katagiri F, Tang D (2013) BR-Signaling KinaSE1 physically associates with Flagellin Sensing2 and regulates plant innate immunity in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 25:1143–1157Google Scholar
  143. Skene KGM, Barlass M (1988) Response to NaCI of grapevines regenerated from multiple shoot culture exhibiting mild salt tolerance in vitro. Am J Enol Vitic 39:125–128Google Scholar
  144. Skibbe M, Qu N, Galis I, Baldwin IT (2008) Induced plant defenses in the natural environment Nicotiana attenuata WRKY3 and WRKY6 coordinate responses to herbivory. Plant Cell 20:1984–2000PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Smirnoff N, Crawford RMM (1983) Variation in the structure and response to flooding of root aerenchyma in some wetland plants. Ann Bot 51:237–249Google Scholar
  146. Song Y, Jing SJ, Yu DQ (2009) Overexpression of the stress induced OSWRKY08 improves the osmotic stress tolerance in Arabidopsis. China Sci Bull 54:4671–4678Google Scholar
  147. Storey D, Schachtman P, Thomas MR (2003) Root structure and cellular chloride, sodium and potassium distribution in salinized grapevines. Plant Cell Environ 26:789–800PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Striegler RK, Howell GS, Flore JA (1993) Influence of rootstock on the response of Seyval grapevines to flooding stress. Am J Enol Vitic 44:313–319Google Scholar
  149. Sykes SR, Newman S (1987) Apparent variation in chloride accumulation between vines of cultivars Italia and Mataro grown under furrow irrigation. Aust Salinity Newsl 15:71Google Scholar
  150. Takahashi T, Kakehi JI (2010) Polyamines: ubiquitous poly cations with unique roles in growth and stress responses. Ann Bot 105:1–6. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcp259 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Tavladoraki P, Alessandra Cona A, Federico R, Tempera G, Viceconte N, Saccoccio S, Battaglia V, Toninello A, Agostinelli E (2012) Polyamine catabolism: target for antiproliferative therapies in animals and stress tolerance strategies in plants. Amino Acids 42:411–426PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Tesniere CM, Romeiu C, Vayda ME (1993) Changes in the gene expression of grapes in response to hypoxia. Am J Enol Vitic 44:445–451Google Scholar
  153. Tisi A, Federico R, Moreno S, Lucretti S, Moschou PN, Roubelakis- Angelakis KA, Angelini R, Cona A (2011) Perturbation of polyamine catabolism can strongly affect root development and xylem differentiation. Plant Physiol 157:200–215PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. Toumi I, Moschou PN, Paschalidis KA, Bouamama B, Salem-fnayou AB, Ghorbel AW, Mliki A, Roubelakis-Angelakis KA (2010) Abscisic acid signals reorientation of polyamine metabolism to orchestrate stress responses via the polyamine exodus pathway in grapevine. J Plant Physiol 167:519–525PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Tregeagle JM (2007) Sustainable salt exclusion by salt excluding rootstocks of grapevine (Vitis). PhD thesis, La Trobe University, BundooraGoogle Scholar
  156. Tregeagle JM, Tisdall JM, Blackmore DH, Walker RR (2006) A diminished capacity for chloride exclusion by grapevine rootstocks following long term saline irrigation in an inland versus a coastal region of Australia. Aust J Grape Wine Res 12:178–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. Troncoso A, Matte C, Cantos M, Lavee S (1999) Evaluation of salt tolerance of in vitro-grown grapevine rootstock varieties. Vitis 38:55–60Google Scholar
  158. Turner NC, Jones MM (1980) Turgor maintenance by osmotic adjustment: a review and evaluation. In: Turner NC, Kramer PJ (eds) Adaptation of plants to water and high temperature stress. Wiley, New York, pp 78–103Google Scholar
  159. Upadhyay A, Upadhyay AK, Bhirangi R (2012) Expression of Na+/H+ antiporter gene in response to water and salinity stress in salt tolerant and sensitive grape rootstocks. Biol Plant 56:762–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Upadhyay AK, Sharma J, Satisha J (2013) Influence of rootstocks on salinity tolerance of Thompson Seedless grapevines. J Appl Hortic 15:173–177Google Scholar
  161. Upreti KK, Murti GSR (2010) Response of grape rootstocks to salinity: changes in root growth, polyamines and abscisic acid. Biol Plant 54:730–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Upreti KK, Varalakshmi LR, Jayaram HL (2012) Influence rootstocks on salinity tolerance of grapevine: changes in biomass, photosynthesis, abscisic acid and glycine betaine. Indian J Plant Physiol 17:128–136Google Scholar
  163. Vandeleur KR, Mayo G, Shelden CM, Gilliham M, Kaiser NB, Tyerman DS (2009) The role of plasma membrane intrinsic protein aquaporins in water transport through roots: diurnal and drought stress responses reveal different strategies between isohydric and anisohydric cultivars of grapevine. Plant Physiol 149:445–460PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Vanholme B, Grunewald W, Bateman A, Kohchi T, Gheysen G (2007) The tify family previously known as ZIM. Trends Plant Sci 12:239–244PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Vaseva II, Anders J, Feller U (2014) Identification and expression of different dehydrin subclasses involved in drought response of Trifolium repens. J Plant Physiol 171:213–224PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. Vidigal P, Carvalho R, Amancio S, Carvalho L (2013) Peroxiredoxins are involved in two independent signalling pathways in the abiotic stress protection in Vitis vinifera. Biol Plant 57:675–683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Walker RB, Blackmore DH, Clingeleffer RP, Ray CL (2002) Rootstock effects on salt tolerance of irrigated field-grown grapevines (Vitis viniferaL. cv. Sultana). I. Yield and vigor inter-relationships. Aust J Grape Wine Res 8:3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  168. Wan SB, Wang W, Wen PG, Chen JY, Kong WF, Pan QH, Zhan JC, Tian LI, Liu HT, Huang WD (2007) Cloning of phospholipase D from grape berry and its expression under heat acclimation. J Biochem Mol Biol 40:593–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. Wang L, Li SH (2006) Salicylic acid induced heat or cold tolerance in relation to Ca2+ homoeostasis and antioxidant systems in young grape plants. Plant Sci 170:685–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Wang LJ, Li SH (2007) The effects of salicylic acid on distribution of 14C assimilation and photosynthesis in young grape plants under heat stress. Acta Hortic 738:779–7851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Wang Y, Ying J, Kuzma M, Chalifoux M, Sample A, McArthur C, Uchacz T, Sarvas C, Wan J, Dennis DT et al (2005) Molecular tailoring of farnesylation for plant drought tolerance and yield protection. Plant J 43:413–424Google Scholar
  172. Wang LJ, Chen ST, Kun WF, Li SH, Archbold DD (2006) Salicylic acid pre-treatment alleviates chilling injury and affect the antioxidant systems and HSP of peach during cold storage. Postharvest Biol Tech 41:244–251Google Scholar
  173. Wang D, Pajerowska-Mukhtar K, Hendrickson Culler A, Dong X (2007) Salicylic acid inhibits pathogen growth in plants through repression of the auxin signaling pathway. Curr Biol 17:1784–1790Google Scholar
  174. Wang LJ, Fan L, Loescher W, Duan W, Liu G, Cheng J, Luo H, Li S (2010a) Salicylic acid alleviates decreases in photosynthesis under heat stress and accelerates recovery in grapevine leaves. BMC Plant Biol 10:34PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. Wang W, Jang K, Yang HR, Wen PF, Zhang P, Wan HL, Huang WD (2010b) Distribution of resveratrol and stilbene synthase in young grapevines (Vitis vinifera L. Cv. Cabernet Sauvignon) and the effect of UV-C on its accumulation. Plant Physiol Biochem 48:142–152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. Wang M, Vannozzi A, Wang G, Liang YH, Tonielli GB, Zenoni S, Cavallini E, Pezzotti M, Cheng ZM (2014) Genome and transcription analysis of the grapevine (Vitis vinifera L) WRKY gene family. Hortic Res 1: Article No. 14016. doi:  10.1038/hortres.2014.16
  177. Wegner LH (2010) Oxygen transport in waterlogged plants. In: Mancuso S, Shabala S (eds) Waterlogging signalling and tolerance in plants. Springer, Berlin, pp 3–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  178. Wi SJ, Kim WT, Park KY (2006) Over expression of carnation S-adenosyl methionine decarboxylase gene generates a broad-spectrum tolerance to abiotic stresses in transgenic tobacco plants. Plant Cell Rep 25:1111–1121PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  179. Wimalasekera R, Tebartz F, Scherer GF (2011) Polyamines, polyamine oxidases and nitric oxide in development, abiotic and biotic stresses. Plant Sci 181:593–603PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  180. Xu Z, Zhou G (2008) Response of leaf stomatal density to water status and its relationship with photosynthesis in a grass. J Exp Bot 59:3317–3325PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  181. Yamaguchi K, Takahashi Y, Berberich T, Imai A, Miyazaki A, Takahashi T et al (2006) The polyamine spermine protects against high salt stress in Arabidopsis thaliana. FEBS Lett 580:6783–6788. doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2006.10.078 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  182. Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K, Shinozaki K (2006) Transcriptional regulatory networks in cellular responses and tolerance to dehydration and cold stresses. Annu Rev Plant Biol 57:781–803PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. Yan L (2013) Studies on water logging tolerance of grape rootstocks. Master of Horticulture (Pomology) thesis submitted to Shadong Agri Univ, Shadong, China.
  184. Yan Y, He M, Zhu Z, Li S, Xu Y, Zhang C, Singer S, Wang Y (2012) Identification of the dehydrin gene family from grapevine species and analysis of their responsiveness of various forms of abiotic and biotic stress. BMC Plant Biol 54:743–753Google Scholar
  185. Yildirim O, Aras A, Ergul A (2004) Response of antioxidant system to short term salinity stress in grape vine rootstocks-1616C and Vitis vinifera L. cv. Razaki. Acta Biol Cracov Ser Bot 46:151–158Google Scholar
  186. Yohannes DB (2006) Studies on salt tolerance of Vitis spp. Ph.D thesis submitted to University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, India, p 132Google Scholar
  187. Yokoi S, Quintero FJ, Cubero B, Ruiz MT, Bressan RA, Hasegawa PM, Pardo JM (2002) Differential expression and function of Arabidopsis thaliana NHX Na+/H+ antiporters in the salt stress response. Plant J 30:529–539PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  188. Zamboni M, Fregoni M, Iacono F (1986) Compaortamento di specie edibridi di vite in condizioni di siccita. Attidel IV simpocio. Internazionale GeneticadellaVite Vignevini 12:119–122Google Scholar
  189. Zawoznik MS, Ameneiros M, Benavides MP, Vasquez S, Groppa MD (2011) Response to saline stress and aquaporin expression in Azospirillum-inoculated barley seedlings. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 90:1389–1397Google Scholar
  190. Zhu B, Chen THH, Li PH (1995) Activation of two osmotin-like protein genes by abiotic stimuli and fungal pathogen in transgenic potato plants. Plant Physiol 108:929–937Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Fruit cropsICAR-Indian Institute of Horticultural ResearchBengaluruIndia

Personalised recommendations