Water balance and pigment composition of grapevine leaves in relation to heat and drought resistance

The study of heat and drought resistance in grapevines has become particularly relevant due to climatic changes in the Anapa-Taman zone of the Krasnodar krai, where water deficit and high temperatures during active berry growth impair both fruit quality and plantation productivity. The aim of this work was to assess the adaptation of grapevine cultivars of diverse ecological and geographical origins to water deficit and high temperatures using parameters of leaf water relations and photosynthetic pigment content. The findings are intended to support the selection of cultivars suitable for cultivation in the Anapa-Taman zone of the Krasnodar krai and to select genotypes that could be used in breeding programs as donors and sources of economically valuable traits. The plant material comprised crossings and interspecific hybrids of various ecological and geographical origins: Kristall (Hungary), Dostoinyi, Krasnostop AZOS, Vostorg (Russia), Aligote (France), and Zarif (Tajikistan). This research investigated the water regime and the content of photosynthetic pigments in leaves during the summer growing seasons of 2023-2025. It was found that the adaptive characteristics of the leaves enable all grapevine cultivars to maintain full physiological activity throughout the vegetative period. Leaf water content decreased in summer by 1.77-5.04% depending on the cultivar and the phenological phase. In the artificial turgor loss experiment, the Krasnostop AZOS and Aligote cultivars showed the lowest water loss – 10.34 % and 9.87 %, respectively. In the other studied cultivars, water loss ranged from 17.03 % to 19.62 %. Chlorophyll content increased by the end of summer by 11.30-25.06 %, depending on the cultivar. Furthermore, the proportion of carotenoids in the leaf pigment composition, which perform a stress-protective function, also increased. The Krasnostop AZOS and Aligote cultivars exhibited the minimum chlorophyll/carotenoid ratios – 2.23 and 2.28, respectively, in contrast to other cultivars where these ratios ranged from 3.03 to 3.47. Based on the physiological and biochemical data obtained, the Krasnostop AZOS and Aligote cultivars demonstrated the highest potential for heat and drought resistance. These cultivars are recommended as donor parents in breeding programs for the development of new cultivars.

1. Petrov V. S., Marmorshtein A. A., Lukyanova A. A. Adaptive phenological response of introduced grape varieties Occientalis C. Negr. on changes in weather and climatic conditions in the South of Russia, Plodovodstvo i vinogradarstvo YUga Rossii. 2022;73(1):62-76. DOI: 10.30679/2219-5335-2022-1-73-62-76. (in Russ.).

2. Rosstat. Areas, gross harvests, and yield of perennial plantings in the Russian Federation in 2024 [website]. URL: https://rosstat.gov.ru/compendium/document/13277 [date of access: 12.09.2025]. (in Russ.).

3. Balint G., Reynolds A. G. Irrigation level and time of imposition impact vine physiology, yield components, fruit composition and wine quality of Ontario Chardonnay, Scientia horticulturae. 2017;214:252-272. DOI: 10.1016/j.scienta.2016.11.052.

4. Romero Azorin P., Garcia Garcia J. The Productive, economic, and social efficiency of vineyards using combined drought-tolerant rootstocks and efficient low water volume deficit irrigation techniques under Mediterranean semiarid conditions, Sustainability. 2020;12(5):1930. DOI: 10.3390/su12051930.

5. Cataldo E., Fucile M., Mattii G. B. Leaf Eco-Physiological Profile and Berries Technological Traits on Potted Vitis vinifera L. cv. Pinot Noir Subordinated to Zeolite Treatments under Drought Stress, Plants. 2022;11(13):1735. DOI: 10.3390/plants11131735.

6. Lehr P. P., Hernández‐Montes E., Ludwig‐Müller J., Keller M., Zörb C. Abscisic acid and proline are not equivalent markers for heat, drought and combined stress in grapevines, Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research. 2022;28(1):119-130. DOI: 10.1111/ajgw.12523.

7. Cui X., Zhang B., Chen C., Tang Y., Zhang P., Zhang J. Physiological change and screening of differentially expressed genes of wild Chinese Vitis yeshanensis and American Vitis riparia in response to drought stress, Scientia Horticulturae. 2020;266:109140. DOI: 10.1016/j.scienta.2019.109140.

8. Patono D. L., Said‐Pullicino D., Eloi Alcatrāo L., Firbus A., Ivaldi G., Chitarra W., Lovisolo C. Photosynthetic recovery in drought‐rehydrated grapevines is associated with high demand from the sinks, maximizing the fruit‐oriented performance, The Plant Journal. 2022;112(4):1098-1111. DOI: 10.1111/tpj.16000.

9. Herrera J. C., Calderan A., Gambetta G. A., Peterlunger E., Forneck A., Sivilotti P. [et al.] Stomatal responses in grapevine become increasingly more tolerant to low water potentials throughout the growing season, The Plant Journal. 2022;109(4):804-815. DOI: 10.1111/tpj.15591.

10. Polukhina E. V. Adaptive capabilities seedless grape varieties in a sharply continental climate, The Agrarian Scientific Journal. 2023;10:54-59. DOI: 10.28983/asj.y2023i10pp54-59. (in Russ.).

11. Somkuwar R. G., Kakade P. B., Jadhav A. S., Ausari P. K., Nikumbhe P. H., Deshmukh N. A. Leaf area index, photosynthesis and chlorophyll content influences yield and quality of Nanasaheb Purple Seedless grapes under semi-arid condition, Journal of Scientific Research and Reports. 2024;30(9):750-758. DOI: 10.9734/jsrr/2024/v30i92402.

12. Kiseleva G. K., Il’ina I. A., Zaporozhets N. M., Sokolova V. V. Adaptability resistance of grapes to stress conditions of summer period, Vestnik of the Russian Agricultural Science. 2022;3:35-38. DOI: 10.30850/vrsn/2022/3/35-38. (in Russ.).

13. Sun P., Tahir M. M., Lu X., Liu Z., Zhang X., Zuo X., Yang W. Comparison of leaf morphological, anatomical, and photosynthetic responses to drought stress among eight apple rootstocks, Fruit Research. 2022;2(1):1-13. DOI: 10.48130/Fru-Res-2022-0020.

14. Gerbi H., Paudel I., Zisovich A., Sapir G., Ben-Dor S., Klein T. Physiological drought resistance mechanisms in wild species vs. rootstocks of almond and plum, Trees. 2022;36(2):669-683. DOI: 10.1007/s00468-021-02238-0.

15. Khoyerdi F. F., Shamshiri M. H., Estaji A. Changes in some physiological and osmotic parameters of several pistachio genotypes under drought stress, Scientia horticulturae. 2016;198:44-51. DOI: 10.1016/j.scienta.2015.11.028.

16. Arifova Z. I., Chelebiev E. F., Smykov A. V., Khalilov E. S., Uskov M. K. Drought resistance of apple tree and raspberry varieties and forms promising for the Crimea region, E3S Web of Conferences. EDP Sciences. 2021;254:01015. DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/202125401015.

17. Filimon R. V., Rotaru L., Filimon R. M. Quantitative investigation of leaf photosynthetic pigments during annual biological cycle of Vitis vinifera L. table grape cultivars, South African Journal of Enology and Viticulture. 2016;37(1):1-14. DOI: 10.21548/37-1-753.

18. Xiao F., Yang Z. Q., Lee K. W. Photosynthetic and physiological responses to high temperature in grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) leaves during the seedling stage, The Journal of Horticultural Science and biotechnology. 2017;92(1):2-10. DOI: 10.1080/14620316.2016.1211493.

19. Candar S., Seçkin G. U., Kizildeniz T., Korkutal İ., Bahar E. Variations of chlorophyll, proline, and abscisic acid (ABA) contents in grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.) under water deficit conditions, Erwerbs-Obstbau. 2023;65(6):1965-1977. DOI: 10.1007/s10341-023-00875-y.

20. Sun T., Wang P., Rao S., Zhou X., Wrightstone E., Lu S. [et al.] Co-chaperoning of chlorophyll and carotenoid biosynthesis by ORANGE family proteins in plants, Molecular Plant. 2023;16(6):1048-1065. DOI: 10.1016/j.molp.2023.05.006.

21. Kushnirenko M. D. Physiology of water exchange and drought resistance of fruit plants. Kishinev: Shtiinca, 1975, 142 s. (in Russ.).

22. Lichtenthaler H. K. Chlorophylls and carotenoids: pigments of photosynthetic biomembranes, Methods in Enzymology. 1987;148:350-382. DOI: 10.1016/0076-6879(87)48036-1.