1 Introduction

Grapevine (Vitis vinifera) is one of the most economically significant fruit crops globally, cultivated for various purposes including wine production, table grapes, raisins, and grape juice (Zhang et al., 2021; Bharati et al., 2023). Achieving high yield in grapevines is crucial for the profitability and sustainability of viticulture. Yield not only affects the economic returns for grape growers but also influences the quality and quantity of the final products (Zinelabidine et al., 2021; Leão and Oliveira, 2023). Understanding the factors that contribute to grape yield is essential for optimizing production and meeting market demands.

Achieving high yield in grapevines is fraught with challenges, including environmental stresses, climate change, and the prevalence of pests and diseases (Keller, 2010; Bharati et al., 2023). Environmental factors such as water availability, temperature, and light conditions play a significant role in yield formation and fruit quality (Kuhn et al., 2013; Guilpart et al., 2014; Zhu et al., 2020). Additionally, the genetic makeup of grapevine cultivars and their interaction with rootstocks can significantly influence yield outcomes (Leão and Oliveira, 2023).

However, these challenges also present opportunities for innovation and improvement. Advances in agronomic practices, such as the adaptation of regional agronomic diagnosis and the use of mechanized methods like dry-on-vine (DOV) for raisin production, have shown promise in managing yield variability and enhancing productivity (Fidelibus, 2021; Merot et al., 2022). Furthermore, integrating genomic selection with polyploidization techniques offers potential for developing superior grapevine genotypes with enhanced yield and stress resistance (Bharati et al., 2023).

This study examines the factors influencing grape yield, including environmental conditions, genetic factors, and agronomic practices. It identifies the critical periods and conditions that affect grape yield formation and fruit quality, and evaluates the effectiveness of various agronomic interventions and technological advancements in optimizing grape yield. The findings aim to provide a reference for grape growers to achieve sustainable high-yield grape production under evolving environmental conditions and market demands.

2 Genetic Factors Influencing Grapevine Yield

2.1 Varietal differences and cultivar selection

Varietal differences and the selection of appropriate cultivars play a crucial role in determining grapevine yield. Studies have shown that different grapevine cultivars exhibit significant genetic variation in traits such as bunch weight, berry weight, and fruit yield per vine, which are critical for high yield production. For instance, high estimates of genotypic and phenotypic coefficients of variation for these traits indicate the presence of adequate genetic variation among grapevine genotypes, making them suitable for improvement through selection (Gupta et al., 2015). Additionally, the selection of cultivars with specific traits, such as loose cluster architecture, can enhance resilience to diseases and improve overall yield (Rossmann et al., 2020).

2.2 Genetic improvement and breeding programs

Genetic improvement and breeding programs have been pivotal in developing grapevine varieties with enhanced yield performance. Traditional breeding methods, combined with modern biotechnological approaches, have led to the creation of new grapevine varieties that are more productive and resilient to environmental stresses. For example, advancements in plant regeneration and genetic transformation techniques have enabled the development of transgenic grape lines with improved yield, quality, and stress tolerance (Zhang et al., 2021). Moreover, the integration of polyploidization and genomic selection has been proposed as a powerful tool to accelerate the breeding of superior grapevine genotypes with desirable traits (Bharati et al., 2023).

2.3 Genetic markers and genomic selection

The use of genetic markers and genomic selection has revolutionized grapevine breeding by allowing for the precise identification and selection of desirable traits. Molecular marker-based methods, such as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), have been employed to map traits related to fruit set and yield components (Zhu et al., 2024). For instance, a study identified 164 SNPs associated with fruit set-related traits, suggesting a complex polygenic determinism and the potential for pyramiding advantageous alleles to generate superior cultivars (Zinelabidine et al., 2021). Additionally, next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies have facilitated high-throughput genotyping, trait mapping, and genomic selection, further enhancing the efficiency of grapevine breeding programs (Butiuc-Keul and Coste, 2023).

3 Nutritional Management for High Yield

3.1 Soil fertility and nutrient requirements

Soil fertility is foundational to grapevine health and productivity. Grapevines require a balanced supply of macronutrients (N, P, K) and micronutrients to support their physiological growth and fruit development. Deficiencies in essential nutrients can lead to chlorosis, necrosis, and overall poor vine health, which negatively impacts yield and grape quality (Brunetto et al., 2015; James et al., 2022). Long-term studies have shown that maintaining soil fertility through appropriate fertilization practices can significantly enhance grape yield and quality by improving soil organic matter and microbial activity (Zhu et al., 2022).

3.2 Fertilizer application strategies

Fertilizer application strategies must be tailored to the specific nutrient requirements of grapevines and the existing soil nutrient status. Integrated approaches that combine organic and inorganic fertilizers have been shown to be effective. For instance, using a mix of mineral nitrogen (60%~80%) and organic or bio-fertilizers (20%~40%) can improve growth characteristics and yield while minimizing the negative impacts of excessive mineral nitrogen use (Muhammed et al., 2023). Additionally, the method of fertilizer application, such as fertigation, can influence nutrient uptake efficiency and soil nutrient status. Studies have demonstrated that combining soil and fertigation methods can optimize nutrient availability and improve grapevine performance (Pushpavathi et al., 2021).

3.3 Role of organic amendments

Organic amendments play a vital role in sustainable grapevine nutrition management. The use of organic fertilizers, such as chicken manure, humic acids, and fulvic acids, can enhance soil fertility by increasing organic carbon content and promoting beneficial microbial activity (James et al., 2022; El-Salhy et al., 2023). Organic amendments not only improve soil structure and nutrient availability but also contribute to better water retention and root development. Research has shown that replacing a portion of mineral fertilizers with organic amendments can lead to improved berry quality, higher sugar content, and better overall grapevine health (El-Salhy et al., 2023; Muhammed et al., 2023). Moreover, organic and biodynamic management practices, although sometimes resulting in lower yields, can enhance soil health and long-term sustainability of vineyards (Döring et al., 2015).

4 Water Management and Irrigation Practices

4.1 Irrigation strategies for high yield

Effective irrigation strategies are crucial for optimizing grapevine yield and quality, especially in regions with seasonal drought. Deficit irrigation (DI) has emerged as a promising approach, allowing grapevines to endure mild water stress without significant yield reduction and potentially enhancing fruit quality. This method involves applying water below full crop evapotranspiration (ETc), which can improve water use efficiency (WUE) and control vine vigor (Chaves et al., 2010). For instance, a study on Spanish grapevine cultivars demonstrated that moderate irrigation improved plant water status, leaf photosynthesis, and transpiration, leading to increased grape yield, particularly in the Tempranillo variety. Additionally, direct root-zone irrigation, a subsurface drip irrigation strategy, has shown to outperform traditional surface drip irrigation by improving grape yield and WUE while restricting root growth, which can be beneficial under varied climate conditions (Ma et al., 2020).

4.2 Water use efficiency

Improving WUE is essential for sustainable vineyard management, particularly under the increasing aridity induced by global climate change. WUE reflects the ratio between carbon assimilated by photosynthesis and water lost through transpiration. Strategies such as regulated deficit irrigation (RDI) and partial root drying (PRD) can enhance WUE by maintaining partial stomatal closure, although this may reduce photosynthesis and yield (Flexas et al., 2010; Silva et al., 2018). For example, an experiment in north-eastern Portugal found that the highest WUE was achieved with no irrigation, but this resulted in very low yield. The best balance between yield and berry quality was obtained by irrigating from flowering to veraison at approximately 50% of potential evapotranspiration (Oliveira et al., 2012). Moreover, combining mulching with sub-surface irrigation has been shown to maximize WUE, increase yield, and improve berry quality (Zhang et al., 2014).

4.3 Addressing drought stress

Addressing drought stress in grapevines involves understanding the physiological and molecular responses to water scarcity. Grapevines exhibit different behaviors under water stress, such as isohydric and anisohydric responses, which influence their ability to maintain water status and photosynthetic activity (Chaves et al., 2010; Silva et al., 2018). For instance, deficit irrigation can improve WUE and control vine vigor, which in turn enhances fruit quality by increasing the concentration of anthocyanins and total phenols in the berry skin. Additionally, the use of transparent plastic covers in combination with deficit irrigation has been shown to save water and improve grapevine cultivation in tropical conditions without affecting yield and fruit quality (Silva et al., 2018). Properly regulated deficit irrigation, combined with low to moderate nitrogen application, can reduce canopy size, accelerate ripening, and improve fruit color, although it may also reduce yeast-assimilable nitrogen in the fruit, increasing the risk of fermentation issues.

5 Canopy Management and Training Systems

5.1 Pruning and training techniques

Pruning and training techniques are fundamental to shaping the grapevine canopy and influencing its productivity (Figure 1). Different training systems, such as Gobelet and Vertical Shoot Positioning (VSP), have been shown to impact vegetative growth, light interception, and fruit composition. For instance, the Gobelet system enhances vegetative activity and yield due to improved light exposure, making it suitable for regions with high photosynthetic active radiation (PAR) (Salvi et al., 2017). Additionally, mechanical pruning methods, such as mechanical box pruning, can increase yield per meter of row by promoting vegetative compensation and maintaining optimal canopy architecture (Kurtural et al., 2013).

Figure 1 Pruning and training techniques of grape planting base of Cixi Jiakai Food Co., Ltd

5.2 Light interception and photosynthetic efficiency

Light interception is a critical factor in determining the photosynthetic efficiency of grapevines. The training system and canopy management practices significantly affect the light microclimate within the canopy. For example, divided canopy systems can optimize light distribution, thereby enhancing photosynthetic efficiency and improving fruit composition. Studies have shown that an optimal canopy density of about three leaf layers maximizes light interception while minimizing shading, which is essential for maintaining high photosynthetic rates. Moreover, leaning canopies to the west can increase morning light interception, improving water use efficiency and yield under Mediterranean conditions (Buesa et al., 2020).

5.3 Managing leaf area and shoot density

Managing leaf area and shoot density is vital for balancing vine vigor and yield. Canopy management practices such as shoot thinning, leaf removal, and cluster thinning can modify canopy architecture and improve light penetration. For instance, shoot thinning combined with pre-anthesis defoliation has been shown to reduce leaf area and yield while increasing sugar concentrations in grapes (Silvestroni et al., 2016). Similarly, shoot thinning and leaf removal can decrease leaf area index and increase canopy porosity, positively affecting berry ripening and reducing the incidence of bunch rot (Wang et al., 2019). Controlling shoot density is also crucial for maintaining an optimal canopy microclimate, as high shoot densities can lead to excessive shading and reduced bud fruitfulness (Collins et al., 2020).

6 Pest and Disease Management for High Yield

6.1 Common pests and diseases in grapevines

Grapevines are susceptible to a variety of pests and diseases that can significantly impact yield and quality. Key diseases include powdery mildew (Erysiphe necator), grey mould (Botrytis cinerea), downy mildew (Plasmopara viticola), and trunk diseases such as Botryosphaeria dieback, Esca, and Eutypa dieback (Du et al., 2015; Hillis et al., 2016; Guilpart et al., 2017; Rashad et al., 2021). Common pests include the Japanese beetle and soil-dwelling orthopteran pests like weta (Hemiandrus sp.), which damage vine buds and reduce yield (Nboyine et al., 2018; Wodzicki et al., 2023).

6.2 Integrated pest management (IPM)

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) combines biological, cultural, physical, and chemical tools to manage pests and diseases sustainably. Recent advancements in IPM for grapevines include the use of laser-guided intelligent sprayers, which have shown to reduce spray volume by 29% to 83% compared to conventional methods, resulting in significant chemical cost savings and effective control of fungal diseases and Japanese beetles (Wodzicki et al., 2023). Agroecological practices, such as using pea straw mulch and mussel shells, have also been effective in reducing pest densities and increasing yields (Nboyine et al., 2018). Additionally, rain shelters have been demonstrated to significantly reduce disease severity and enhance profitability in regions with high rainfall (Du et al., 2015).

6.3 Disease-resistant varieties and genetic approaches

The development and use of disease-resistant grapevine varieties are critical for sustainable viticulture. Traditional breeding and modern biotechnological methods, such as transgenesis, cisgenesis, and genome editing, have been employed to enhance resistance to major fungal and oomycete pathogens (Rashad et al., 2021; Pirrello et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2024). For instance, the application of silica nanoparticles has shown promise in reducing downy mildew severity by up to 81.5% and improving yield and berry quality (Rashad et al., 2021). Furthermore, beneficial bacteria and their secondary metabolites are being explored as biocontrol agents to reduce the reliance on chemical pesticides and enhance plant defenses (Compant et al., 2013).

7 Case Study: High Yield Strategies in A Specific Vineyard

7.1 Background of the vineyard

The vineyard selected for this case study is located in the Berg River Valley region of South Africa, known for its favorable conditions for viticulture. The vineyard primarily cultivates the Dan-ben-Hannah/Ramsey table grape variety, which is well-suited to the local climate and soil conditions. The vineyard employs drip irrigation systems to optimize water use and ensure consistent moisture levels for the grapevines (Howell and Conradie, 2016).

7.2 Agronomic practices implemented

Several agronomic practices were implemented to enhance yield and fruit quality in this vineyard. Three different fertigation strategies were compared: (i) application of fertilizers two weeks after bud break, fruit set, and post-harvest (LF), (ii) weekly applications from two weeks after bud break until ten weeks after harvest, except during berry ripening (WF), and (iii) daily fertigation pulses (DF). Each strategy aimed to optimize nutrient availability throughout the growing season (Howell and Conradie, 2016). The vineyard employed various canopy management techniques, including shoot thinning and defoliation at different growth stages. These practices aimed to balance vegetative growth and fruit production, thereby improving grape quality and yield (Silvestroni et al., 2016). The use of mulches, such as straw and living mulch, was implemented to control weeds, maintain soil moisture, and enhance soil quality. These mulches also contributed to higher organic matter and improved soil structure, which are beneficial for grapevine health and productivity (DeVetter et al., 2015). Partial rootzone drying (PRD) was used to manage vine vigor and water use efficiency. This technique involves drying part of the root system while maintaining moisture in the other part, which helps in reducing excessive vegetative growth and improving fruit quality without compromising yield.

7.3 Results and key takeaways

The implementation of these agronomic practices yielded significant results. The daily fertigation pulses (DF) strategy resulted in higher nutrient accumulation in the grapevines, particularly nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K) in the berry skins. This strategy also led to higher petiole P and leaf blade P concentrations compared to the other fertigation strategies (Howell and Conradie, 2016). The use of shoot thinning combined with preanthesis defoliation (St+Dpa) increased sugar concentrations in the grapes, enhancing fruit quality. However, this practice also reduced leaf area and yield by 33% compared to the control, indicating a trade-off between yield and quality (Silvestroni et al., 2016).

The application of straw and living mulches effectively controlled weed populations and improved several indicators of soil quality, such as organic matter content, total organic carbon, and soil enzymatic activity. These improvements contributed to maintaining grapevine productivity and fruit quality (DeVetter et al., 2015). The partial rootzone drying (PRD) technique successfully reduced shoot growth and water use while maintaining crop yield and improving fruit quality. This method proved to be an effective tool for managing vine vigor and optimizing water use in the vineyard.

8 Challenges and Constraints in Achieving High Yield

8.1 Environmental and climate factors

Environmental and climate factors play a crucial role in grapevine yield. Climate change, characterized by increased temperatures, altered precipitation patterns, and extreme weather events, poses significant challenges to grape production. For instance, high temperatures can negatively affect fruit set and ripening, leading to reduced yields (González-Fernández et al., 2020). Additionally, drought conditions, which are becoming more frequent, can significantly reduce grapevine yield and quality (Kızıldeniz et al., 2017). Soil characteristics, such as Soil Available Water Capacity (SAWC) and soil pH, also influence yield variability across different regions (Figure 2) (Fernandez-Mena et al., 2023a; Fernandez-Mena et al., 2023b). The combination of these factors necessitates the development of adaptive strategies to mitigate the adverse effects of climate change on grapevine yield (Keller, 2010; Schultz, 2016).

Figure 2 Soil and climate zones related to grapevine yield at the municipality level in Languedoc-Roussillon (Adopted from Fernandez-Mena et al., 2023a)

8.2 Economic and market constraints

Economic and market constraints are equally critical in achieving high grapevine yields. The balance between grapevine productivity and economic viability is delicate, as both fruit yield and quality are essential for market success. Shifting consumer preferences and global competition require grape producers to continuously adapt their practices to meet market demands (Keller, 2010). Moreover, the economic impact of climate change on grape production is challenging to quantify, necessitating comprehensive risk analyses and scenario planning to ensure economic sustainability (Schultz, 2016). The cost of implementing adaptive strategies, such as irrigation systems and climate-resilient grape varieties, can also be a significant barrier for many producers (Naulleau et al., 2021).

8.3 Long-term sustainability considerations

Long-term sustainability is a critical consideration in grapevine production. Sustainable practices must balance high yields with the preservation of environmental resources and the ability to withstand biotic and abiotic stresses. The transition to sustainable viticulture systems involves understanding the interactions between environmental variables, plant material, and farming practices (Fernandez-Mena et al., 2023a; Fernandez-Mena et al., 2023b). Additionally, the development of methodologies to evaluate adaptation strategies, considering both short-term and long-term impacts, is essential for providing relevant information to decision-makers in the wine industry (Figure 3) (Naulleau et al., 2021). Ensuring the sustainability of grape production also involves addressing the challenges posed by climate change, such as water scarcity and increased temperatures, through innovative and integrated management practices (Bonfante et al., 2017; Kızıldeniz et al., 2017).

Figure 3 Conceptual diagram of the spatio-temporal model needed to design and evaluate strategies for adaptation to climate change across viticultural regions (Adopted from Naulleau et al., 2021) Image caption: A: temporal scale integration and associated adaptation levers; B: spatial factors; C: exploration of adaptation strategies; D: calculation of evaluation indicators. In yellow, blue, and brown, three adaptation strategies that consist of three different spatial combinations of adaptation levers (in green, orange, and dark blue) (Adopted from Naulleau et al., 2021)

9 Future Directions and Recommendations

9.1 Innovations in grape production

The future of grape production lies in the integration of advanced technologies and innovative practices to address the challenges posed by climate change, resource limitations, and evolving consumer preferences. Recent advancements in molecular genetic techniques, such as biolistic bombardment and Agrobacterium-mediated transformation, have shown promise in developing grapevine varieties with enhanced yield performance, quality, stress tolerance, and disease resistance. These genetic innovations, coupled with improved plant regeneration systems, can significantly boost grape production efficiency and sustainability. Moreover, the adaptation of regional agronomic diagnosis approaches has proven useful in understanding and managing yield variability in grapevine systems. This method allows for a comprehensive analysis of multiple factors affecting yield, enabling targeted interventions to optimize production. Additionally, the use of advanced climate data sources and multi-scale evaluation methods can help in developing robust adaptation strategies to mitigate the impacts of climate change on grapevine production.

9.2 Integration of traditional and modern techniques

Integrating traditional viticultural practices with modern technological advancements can create a balanced approach to grape production. Traditional practices such as organic and biodynamic management have been shown to influence grapevine growth, yield, and fruit quality, although they may result in lower yields compared to integrated treatments. By combining these practices with modern techniques, such as precision agriculture and advanced irrigation systems, growers can enhance the overall productivity and sustainability of their vineyards. Furthermore, understanding the critical periods during which grapevine yield formation is sensitive to environmental stresses, such as water and nitrogen availability, can help in optimizing management practices to ensure high yields in subsequent seasons. This knowledge can be integrated with modern monitoring tools to provide real-time data and actionable insights for growers.

9.3 Recommendations for growers and researchers

For growers, it is essential to adopt a holistic approach that combines traditional knowledge with modern innovations. Implementing precision agriculture techniques, such as soil moisture sensors and automated irrigation systems, can help in optimizing water use and improving yield consistency. Additionally, adopting genetic advancements and selecting appropriate rootstock-cultivar combinations can enhance grapevine resilience to environmental stresses and improve fruit quality. Researchers should focus on developing and refining methodologies for evaluating adaptation strategies, considering both short-term and long-term impacts on grapevine productivity. Collaborative efforts between researchers and growers are crucial to ensure the practical applicability of research findings. Moreover, there is a need for further studies on the mechanisms underlying the effects of different management practices on grapevine growth and yield, particularly in the context of organic and biodynamic systems.

Acknowledgments

I am deeply grateful to Professor R. Cai for his multiple reviews of this paper and for his constructive revision suggestions.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

The author affirms that this research was conducted without any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

Askari-Khorasgani O., and Pessarakli M., 2019, Fruit quality and nutrient composition of grapevines: a review, Journal of Plant Nutrition, 42: 2133-2150.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2019.1643369

Bharati R., Sen M., Severová L., Svoboda R., and Fernández-Cusimamani E., 2023, Polyploidization and genomic selection integration for grapevine breeding: a perspective, Frontiers in Plant Science, 14: 1248978.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1248978

Bonfante A., Alfieri S., Albrizio R., Basile A., Mascellis R., Gambuti A., Giorio P., Langella G., Manna P., Monaco E., Moio L., and Terribile F., 2017, Evaluation of the effects of future climate change on grape quality through a physically based model application: a case study for the Aglianico grapevine in Campania region, Italy, Agricultural Systems, 152: 100-109.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AGSY.2016.12.009

Brunetto G., Melo G., Toselli M., Quartieri M., and Tagliavini M., 2015, The role of mineral nutrition on yields and fruit quality in grapevine, pear and apple, Revista Brasileira De Fruticultura, 37: 1089-1104.

https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-2945-103/15

Buesa I., Ballester C., Mirás-Avalos J., and Intrigliolo D., 2020, Effects of leaning grapevine canopy to the West on water use efficiency and yield under Mediterranean conditions, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 295: 108166.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2020.108166

Butiuc-Keul A., and Coste A., 2023, Biotechnologies and strategies for grapevine improvement, Horticulturae, 9(1): 62.

https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae9010062

Chaves M., Zarrouk O., Francisco R., Costa J., Santos T., Regalado A., Rodrigues M., and Lopes C., 2010, Grapevine under deficit irrigation: hints from physiological and molecular data, Annals of Botany, 105(5): 661-676.

https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcq030

Collins C., Wang X., Lesefko S., Bei R., and Fuentes S., 2020, Effects of canopy management practices on grapevine bud fruitfulness, OENO One, 54: 313-325.

https://doi.org/10.20870/oeno-one.2020.54.2.3016

Compant S., Brader G., Muzammil S., Sessitsch A., Lebrihi A., and Mathieu F., 2013, Use of beneficial bacteria and their secondary metabolites to control grapevine pathogen diseases, BioControl, 58: 435-455.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10526-012-9479-6

DeVetter L., Dilley C., and Nonnecke G., 2015, Mulches reduce weeds, maintain yield, and promote soil quality in a continental-climate vineyard, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 66: 54-64.

https://doi.org/10.5344/ajev.2014.14064

Döring J., Frisch M., Tittmann S., Stoll M., and Kauer R., 2015, Growth, yield and fruit quality of grapevines under organic and biodynamic management, PLoS One, 10(10): e0138445.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138445

Du F., Deng W., Yang M., Wang H., Mao R., Shao J., Fan J., Chen Y., Fu Y., Li C., He X., Zhu Y., and Zhu S., 2015, Protecting grapevines from rainfall in rainy conditions reduces disease severity and enhances profitability, Crop Protection, 67: 261-268.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CROPRO.2014.10.024

El-Salhy A., Al-Wasfy M., Salem E., and Abdalla O., 2023, Minimizing mineral-N fertilization Superior seedless grapevines by using humic and fulvic acids, Assiut Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 54: 227-238.

https://doi.org/10.21608/ajas.2023.179162.1207

Fernandez-Mena H., Guilpart N., Lagacherie P., Roux R., Graveline N., Touzard J., Hannin H., and Gary C., 2023a, Grapevine yield big-data for soil and climate zoning, a case study in Languedoc-Roussillon, France, BIO Web of Conferences, 68: 01043.

https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20236801043

Fernandez-Mena H., Guilpart N., Lagacherie P., Roux R., Plaige M., Dumont M., Gautier M., Graveline N., Touzard J., Hannin H., and Gary C., 2023b, Grapevine yield gap: identification of environmental limitations by soil and climate zoning in the region of Languedoc-Roussillon (South of France), OENO One, 57(2): 361-379.

https://doi.org/10.20870/oeno-one.2023.57.2.7246

Fidelibus M., 2021, Grapevine variety and number of canes affect dry-on-vine (DOV) raisin production on an overhead arbor trellis, Horticulturae, 7(10): 356.

https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae7100356

Flexas J., Galmés J., Gallé A., Gulías J., Pou A., Ribas-Carbó M., Tomás M., and Medrano H., 2010, Improving water use efficiency in grapevines: potential physiological targets for biotechnological improvement, Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 16: 106-121.

https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1755-0238.2009.00057.X

González-Fernández E., Piña-Rey A., Fernández-González M., Aira M., and Rodríguez-Rajo F., 2020, Prediction of grapevine yield based on reproductive variables and the influence of meteorological conditions, Agronomy, 10(5): 714.

https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10050714

Guilpart N., Metay A., and Gary C., 2014, Grapevine bud fertility and number of berries per bunch are determined by water and nitrogen stress around flowering in the previous year, European Journal of Agronomy, 54: 9-20.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EJA.2013.11.002

Guilpart N., Roux S., Gary C., and Metay A., 2017, The trade-off between grape yield and grapevine susceptibility to powdery mildew and grey mould depends on inter-annual variations in water stress, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 234: 203-211.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AGRFORMET.2016.12.023

Gupta N., Brar K., Gill M., and Arora N., 2015, Studies on variability, correlation and path analysis of traits contributing to fruit yield in grapes, Indian Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 28: 317-320.

https://doi.org/10.5958/0976-1926.2015.00042.x

Hillis V., Lubell M., Kaplan J., Doll D., and Baumgartner K., 2016, The role of pest control advisers in preventative management of grapevine trunk diseases, Phytopathology, 106(4): 339-347.

https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-10-15-0250-R

Howell C., and Conradie W., 2016, Comparison of three different fertigation strategies for drip irrigated table grapes - Part II. soil and grapevine nutrient status, South African Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 34: 10-20.

https://doi.org/10.21548/34-1-1024

James A., Mahinda A., Mwamahonje A., Rweyemamu E., Mrema E., Aloys K., Swai E., Mpore F., and Massawe C., 2022, A review on the influence of fertilizers application on grape yield and quality in the tropics, Journal of Plant Nutrition, 46: 2936-2957.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2022.2160761

Keller M., 2010, Managing grapevines to optimise fruit development in a challenging environment: a climate change primer for viticulturists, Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 16: 56-69.

https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1755-0238.2009.00077.X

Kızıldeniz T., Pascual I., Irigoyen J., and Morales F., 2017, Using fruit-bearing cuttings of grapevine and temperature gradient greenhouses to evaluate effects of climate change (elevated CO₂ and temperature, and water deficit) on the cv. red and white Tempranillo, yield and must quality in three consecutive growing seasons (2013-2015), Agricultural Water Management, 202: 299-310.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AGWAT.2017.12.001

Kuhn N., Guan L., Dai Z., Wu B., Lauvergeat V., Gomès E., Li S., Godoy F., Arce-Johnson P., and Delrot S., 2013, Berry ripening: recently heard through the grapevine, Journal of Experimental Botany, 65(16): 4543-4559.

https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ert395

Kurtural S., Wessner L., and Dervishian G., 2013, Vegetative compensation response of a procumbent grapevine (Vitis vinifera cv. Syrah) cultivar under mechanical canopy management, Hortscience, 48(5): 576-583.

https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.48.5.576

Leão P., and Oliveira C., 2023, Agronomic performance of table grape cultivars affected by rootstocks in semi-arid conditions, Bragantia, 82: e20220176.

https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4499.20220176

Ma X., Sanguinet K., and Jacoby P., 2020, Direct root-zone irrigation outperforms surface drip irrigation for grape yield and crop water use efficiency while restricting root growth, Agricultural Water Management, 231: 105993.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2019.105993

Merot A., Metay A., Smits N., and Thiollet-Scholtus M., 2022, Adaptation of the regional agronomic diagnosis for grapevine yield analysis, OENO One, 56(1): 87-99.

https://doi.org/10.20870/oeno-one.2022.56.1.4568

Muhammed M., Qayyum M., Alotaibi F., and Alharbi S., 2023, Organic nitrogen fertilization minimizes requirement of inorganic fertilizers and improves growth and yield attributes of superior grapevines, Journal of Plant Nutrition, 46: 4171-4187.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2023.2222148

Naulleau A., Gary C., Prévot L., and Hossard L., 2021, Evaluating strategies for adaptation to climate change in grapevine production-a systematic review, Frontiers in Plant Science, 11: 607859.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.607859

Nboyine J., Boyer S., Saville D., and Wratten S., 2018, Agroecological management of a soil-dwelling orthopteran pest in vineyards, Insect Science, 25(3): 475-486.

https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7917.12425

Oliveira M., Freitas V., and Sousa T., 2012, Water use efficiency and must quality of irrigated grapevines of north-eastern Portugal, Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 58: 871-886.

https://doi.org/10.1080/03650340.2011.551875

Pirrello C., Magon G., Palumbo F., Farinati S., Lucchin M., Barcaccia G., and Vannozzi A., 2022, Past, present and future of genetic strategies to control tolerance to the main fungal and oomycete pathogens in grapevine, Journal of Experimental Botany, 74(5): 1309-1330.

https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erac487

Pushpavathi Y., Satisha J., Satisha G., and Reddy M., 2021, Influence of potassium fertilization on yield, petiole and soil nutrient status of table grape cv. Sharad seedless, Journal of Plant Nutrition, 44: 2218-2227.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2021.1889595

Rashad Y., El-Sharkawy H., Belal B., Razik E., and Galilah D., 2021, Silica nanoparticles as a probable anti-oomycete compound against downy mildew, and yield and quality enhancer in grapevines: field evaluation, molecular, physiological, ultrastructural, and toxicity investigations, Frontiers in Plant Science, 12: 763365.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.763365

Rossmann S., Richter R., Sun H., Schneeberger K., Töpfer R., Zyprian E., and Theres K., 2020, Mutations in the miR396 binding site of the growth-regulating factor gene VvGRF4 modulate inflorescence architecture in grapevine, The Plant Journal, 101(5): 1234-1248.

https://doi.org/10.1111/tpj.14588

Salvi L., Cataldo E., and Mattii G., 2017, Grapevine quality characteristics as affected by the training system, 1188: 113-120.

https://doi.org/10.17660/ACTAHORTIC.2017.1188.15

Schultz H., 2016, Global climate change, sustainability, and some challenges for grape and wine production, Journal of Wine Economics, 11: 181-200.

https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2015.31

Silva J., Rodrigues W., Ferreira L., Bernado W., Paixão J., Patterson A., Ruas K., Viana L., Sousa E., Bressan-Smith R., Poni S., Griffin K., and Campostrini E., 2018, Deficit irrigation and transparent plastic covers can save water and improve grapevine cultivation in the tropics, Agricultural Water Management, 202: 66-80.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AGWAT.2018.02.013

Silvestroni O., Lanari V., Lattanzi T., Palliotti A., and Sabbatini P., 2016, Impact of crop control strategies on performance of high-yielding Sangiovese grapevines, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 67: 407-418.

https://doi.org/10.5344/ajev.2016.15093

Wang X.M., Zong C.M., Qi Y.X., Sun G.H., Liu C.Y., and Wang Y.P., 2024, Translational genomics in legumes: enhancing crop resilience and yield, Legume Genomics and Genetics, 15(5): 244-256.

https://doi.org/10.5376/lgg.2024.15.0024

Wang X., Bei R., Fuentes S., and Collins C., 2019, Influence of canopy management practices on canopy architecture and reproductive performance of Semillon and Shiraz grapevines in a hot climate, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 70: 360-372.

https://doi.org/10.5344/ajev.2019.19007

Wodzicki L., Madden L., Long E., Zhu H., and Ivey M., 2023, Evaluation of a laser-guided intelligent sprayer for disease and insect management on grapes, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 74(2): 0740024.

https://doi.org/10.5344/ajev.2023.23013

Zhang Q., Wang S., Li L., Inoue M., Xiang J., Qiu G., and Jin W., 2014, Effects of mulching and sub-surface irrigation on vine growth, berry sugar content and water use of grapevines, Agricultural Water Management, 143: 1-8.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AGWAT.2014.05.015

Zhang X., Wu Y., Li Z., Song C., and Wang X., 2021, Advancements in plant regeneration and genetic transformation of grapevine (Vitis spp.), Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 20: 1407-1434.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(20)63586-9

Zhu Q., Zhang X.L., Ni Naing N.N.Z., Li J.Q., Chen L.J., and Lee D.S., 2024, Strategies for rice improvement: utilizing genetic resources from wild and cultivated Oryza species, Rice Genomics and Genetics, 15(3): 106-120.

Zhu J., Fraysse R., Trought M., Raw V., Yang L., Greven M., Martin D., and Agnew R., 2020, Quantifying the seasonal variations in grapevine yield components based on pre- and post-flowering weather conditions, OENO One, 54(2): 213-230.

https://doi.org/10.20870/oeno-one.2020.54.2.2926

Zhu Q., Xie X., and Xu Y., 2022, Fertilization regulates grape yield and quality in by altering soil nutrients and the microbial community, Sustainability, 14(17): 10857.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su141710857

Zinelabidine L., Torres-Pérez R., Grimplet J., Baroja E., Ibáñez S., Carbonell-Bejerano P., Martínez-Zapater J., Ibáñez J., and Tello J., 2021, Genetic variation and association analyses identify genes linked to fruit set-related traits in grapevine, Plant Science, 306: 110875.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2021.110875