Water limitation and rootstock genotype interact to alter grape berry metabolism through transcriptome reprogramming.
Grapevine is a perennial crop often cultivated by grafting a scion cultivar on a suitable rootstock. Rootstocks influence scions, particularly with regard to water uptake and vigor. Therefore, one of the possibilities to adapt viticulture to the extended drought stress periods is to select rootstocks conferring increased tolerance to drought. However, the molecular mechanisms associated with the ability of rootstock/scion combination to influence grape berry metabolism under drought stress are still poorly understood. The transcriptomic changes induced by drought stress in grape berries (cv. Pinot noir) from vines grafted on either 110R (drought-tolerant) or 125AA (drought-sensitive) rootstock were compared. The experiments were conducted in the vineyard for two years and two grape berry developmental stages (50% and 100% veraison). The genome-wide microarray approach showed that water stress strongly impacts gene expression in the berries, through ontology categories that cover cell wall metabolism, primary and secondary metabolism, signaling, stress, and hormones, and that some of these effects strongly depend on the rootstock genotype. Indeed, under drought stress, berries from vines grafted on 110R displayed a different transcriptional response compared to 125AA-concerning genes related to jasmonate (JA), phenylpropanoid metabolism, and pathogenesis-related proteins. The data also suggest a link between JA and secondary metabolism in water-stressed berries. Overall, genes related to secondary metabolism and JA are more induced and/or less repressed by drought stress in the berries grafted on the drought-sensitive rootstock 125AA. These rootstock-dependent gene expression changes are relevant for berry composition and sensory properties.
Ecophysiologie et Génomique Fonctionnelle de la Vigne, University Bordeaux, ISVV, UMR 1287 , Villenave d'Ornon F-33140, France.
Mariam
M
Berdeja
Ecophysiologie et Génomique Fonctionnelle de la Vigne, University Bordeaux, ISVV, UMR 1287 , Villenave d'Ornon F-33140, France.
Philippe
P
Nicolas
Ecophysiologie et Génomique Fonctionnelle de la Vigne, University Bordeaux, ISVV, UMR 1287 , Villenave d'Ornon F-33140, France.
Christian
C
Kappel
Ecophysiologie et Génomique Fonctionnelle de la Vigne, University Bordeaux, ISVV, UMR 1287 , Villenave d'Ornon F-33140, France.
Zhan Wu
ZW
Dai
Ecophysiologie et Génomique Fonctionnelle de la Vigne, University Bordeaux, ISVV, UMR 1287 , Villenave d'Ornon F-33140, France.
Ghislaine
G
Hilbert
Ecophysiologie et Génomique Fonctionnelle de la Vigne, University Bordeaux, ISVV, UMR 1287 , Villenave d'Ornon F-33140, France.
Anthony
A
Peccoux
Department of General and Organic Viticulture, Hochschule Geisenheim University , Geisenheim, Germany.
Magali
M
Lafontaine
Ecophysiologie et Génomique Fonctionnelle de la Vigne, University Bordeaux, ISVV, UMR 1287 , Villenave d'Ornon F-33140, France.
Nathalie
N
Ollat
Ecophysiologie et Génomique Fonctionnelle de la Vigne, University Bordeaux, ISVV, UMR 1287 , Villenave d'Ornon F-33140, France.
Eric
E
Gomès
Ecophysiologie et Génomique Fonctionnelle de la Vigne, University Bordeaux, ISVV, UMR 1287 , Villenave d'Ornon F-33140, France.
Serge
S
Delrot