Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Plant Sci.
Sec. Plant Physiology
Volume 15 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1378749

Response of photosynthetic characteristics and yield of grape to different CO 2 concentrations in a greenhouse

Provisionally accepted
Yufan Zhou Yufan Zhou *Hossam S. Mahmoud Ali Hossam S. Mahmoud Ali *Jinshan Xi Jinshan Xi *Dongdong Yao Dongdong Yao *Huanhuan Zhang Huanhuan Zhang *Xujiao Li Xujiao Li *Kun Yu Kun Yu *Fengyun Zhao Fengyun Zhao *
  • College of Agriculture, Shihezi University, Shihezi, Xinjiang Uyghur Region, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Due to the enclosed environment of greenhouse grape production, the supply of CO2 required for photosynthesis is often insufficient, leading to photosynthetic down regulation and reduced yield. Currently, the optimal CO2 concentration for grape production in greenhouses is unknown, and precise control of actual CO2 levels remains a challenge. This study aims to investigate the effects of different CO2 concentrations on the photosynthetic characteristics and yield of grapes, to validate the feasibility of a CO2 gas irrigation system, and to identify the optimal CO2 concentration for greenhouse grape production. In this study, a CO2 gas irrigation system combining CO2 enrichment and gas irrigation techniques was used with 5-year-old Eurasian grape variety (Vitis Vinifera L.) 'Flame Seedless'. Four CO2 concentration treatments were applied: 500 ppm (500 ± 30 µmol•mol -1 ), 700 ppm (700 ± 30 µmol•mol -1 ), 850 ppm (850 ± 30 µmol•mol -1 ), and 1000 ppm (1000 ± 30 µmol•mol -1 ).As CO2 concentration increased, chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b and carotenoids in grape leaves all reached maximum values at 700 ppm and 850 ppm during the same irrigation cycle, while the chlorophyll a/b ratio was lower than at other concentrations. The net photosynthetic rate (Pn) and water use efficiency (WUE) of grape leaves were highest at 700 ppm. The transpiration rate and stomatal conductance at 700 ppm and 850 ppm were significantly lower than those at other concentrations. The light saturation point and apparent quantum efficiency reached their maximum at 850 ppm, followed by 700 ppm.Additionally, the maximum net photosynthetic rate, carboxylation efficiency, electron transport rate, and activities of SOD, CAT, POD, PPO, and Rubisco at 700 ppm were significantly higher than at other concentrations, with the highest yield recorded at 14.54 t•hm -2 . However, when the CO2 concentration reached 1000 ppm, both photosynthesis and yield declined to varying degrees. Under the experimental conditions, the optimal CO2 concentration for greenhouse grape production was 700 ppm, with excessive CO2 levels gradually inhibiting photosynthesis and yield. The results provide a theoretical basis for the future application of CO2 fertilization and gas irrigation techniques in controlled greenhouse grape production.

    Keywords: air injection system, CO2, grapes, Photosynthesis, yield, Subsurface drip

    Received: 30 Jan 2024; Accepted: 26 Jun 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Zhou, Mahmoud Ali, Xi, Yao, Zhang, Li, Yu and Zhao. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence:
    Yufan Zhou, College of Agriculture, Shihezi University, Shihezi, 832003, Xinjiang Uyghur Region, China
    Hossam S. Mahmoud Ali, College of Agriculture, Shihezi University, Shihezi, 832003, Xinjiang Uyghur Region, China
    Jinshan Xi, College of Agriculture, Shihezi University, Shihezi, 832003, Xinjiang Uyghur Region, China
    Dongdong Yao, College of Agriculture, Shihezi University, Shihezi, 832003, Xinjiang Uyghur Region, China
    Huanhuan Zhang, College of Agriculture, Shihezi University, Shihezi, 832003, Xinjiang Uyghur Region, China
    Xujiao Li, College of Agriculture, Shihezi University, Shihezi, 832003, Xinjiang Uyghur Region, China
    Kun Yu, College of Agriculture, Shihezi University, Shihezi, 832003, Xinjiang Uyghur Region, China
    Fengyun Zhao, College of Agriculture, Shihezi University, Shihezi, 832003, Xinjiang Uyghur Region, China

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.