Next Article in Journal
Development of a Multifunctional Phosphate-Solubilizing Bacterial Consortium for the Improvement of Saline–Alkali Soils
Previous Article in Journal
Risk-Oriented Evaluation of Yield Stability and Genotype × Year Interaction in Triticale Under Interannual Climatic Variability
Previous Article in Special Issue
Assessment of Future Water Stress of Winter Wheat and Olive Trees in Greece Using High-Resolution Climate Model Projections
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 16
Issue 6
10.3390/agronomy16060665
agronomy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Climate Change and Abiotic Stress in Fruit Trees: Mechanisms and Adaptive Responses

by
Sina Cosmulescu
Department of Horticulture and Food Science, Faculty of Horticulture, University of Craiova, A.I. Cuza Street, No. 13, 200585 Craiova, Romania
Agronomy 2026, 16(6), 665; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy16060665
Submission received: 27 January 2026 / Revised: 13 February 2026 / Accepted: 20 March 2026 / Published: 21 March 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Impact of Climate Variability on Horticultural Plant Growth and the Development of Agriculture)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

This paper analyses the impact of climate change on fruit species, synthesizing evidence of how abiotic stresses—such as extreme temperatures, drought, salinity, and water fluctuations—influence the physiology, metabolism, phenology, and productivity of fruit trees. It examines both direct effects on flowering, fruit set, growth, and quality, as well as indirect impacts on nutrient availability, soil health, and vulnerability to pests and diseases. The article highlights the role of hormones and secondary metabolites in mediating stress responses, alongside the critical importance of cellular and antioxidant protection mechanisms. Adaptive strategies across physiological, biochemical, molecular, and agronomic levels are discussed, including the selection of tolerant varieties and rootstocks, irrigation adjustments, microclimatic management, and the use of biotechnological approaches and biostimulants to enhance fruit resilience and quality. In conclusion, the article underscores the necessity of an integrated approach to ensure the sustainability and productivity of orchards in the face of climate change.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Climate variability and long-term climate change represent some of the most pressing challenges facing modern agriculture and horticulture. These phenomena directly influence crop productivity by altering environmental conditions and increasing plant exposure to abiotic stresses. Rising global temperatures have intensified both the frequency and severity of extreme weather events, including heatwaves, prolonged droughts, and irregular precipitation patterns. As a result, fruit trees are increasingly subjected to high temperatures, water deficits, and episodes of waterlogging, all of which adversely affect fruit development, yield stability, and quality parameters [1]. Among climate-related stressors, drought is widely recognized as one of the most severe constraints on agricultural productivity worldwide. It substantially reduces crop yields and farm incomes, with impacts varying according to geographic location, crop species, and phenological stage [2]. Climate projection models suggest that by 2050, extreme climatic events may place an additional 11–36% of the global population at risk of hunger, underscoring the urgent need for effective adaptation strategies to safeguard food security [3]. Horticultural crops, particularly fruit trees, are especially vulnerable to climate-induced stresses due to their perennial growth habit, extended production cycles, and high economic value. Climate change disrupts critical physiological and developmental processes—such as vegetative growth, flowering, fruit set, and ripening—leading to yield instability and diminished fruit quality. Furthermore, levels of vulnerability and adaptive capacity differ significantly across regions and production systems. Consequently, the identification and implementation of context-specific adaptation measures are essential to maintain sustainable fruit production and strengthen agricultural resilience under changing climatic conditions [4]. Plant reproductive processes are also affected; therefore, understanding molecular and genetic mechanisms, with the use of leveraging genomic breeding technologies, is crucial for developing resistant crops and ensuring food security [5]. Resilient approaches, which include adapted varieties, advanced water and soil management, precision technology and biotechnology, are essential for maintaining agricultural sustainability and food security [6]. Climate change also indirectly influences fruit tree productivity by altering soil health, nutrient availability, and pest and disease dynamics. Soil is a complex, living system that plays a fundamental role in sustaining plant growth through nutrient cycling, water retention, biodiversity support, and carbon sequestration [7,8]. Variations in temperature and precipitation regimes, along with land-use changes, can impair soil structure, reduce organic matter content, and disrupt nutrient cycling processes, thereby constraining root nutrient uptake and overall crop performance [9]. Reductions in soil fertility and nutrient imbalances adversely affect both fruit yield and quality, while stressed soils may intensify pest and disease pressure by weakening plant defense mechanisms. Consequently, maintaining and enhancing soil health—through practices such as crop diversification, and aiding soil microbiota—is essential to defend fruit crops from the indirect impacts of climate change [10,11]. In this context, understanding the physiological, biochemical, and molecular responses of plants to climate-induced stress is crucial for developing strategies to ensure stable yields and high-quality products [12]. Climate change is increasing the incidence and virulence of plant diseases, and their management requires integrated strategies, including adaptive monitoring, resistant crops, and precision technologies, to safeguard food security and agricultural sustainability [13]. In addition, climate variability influences not only the quantity of horticultural production, but also the nutritional content, post-harvest quality, and overall food security. Post-harvest quality depends on pre-harvest climatic conditions, which affect photosynthesis, pigment and carbohydrate synthesis, ripening, and nutritional value, and climate change can modify these characteristics positively or negatively [14]. Recent research highlights the need to integrate knowledge from plant physiology, biochemistry, and food technology to mitigate the negative effects of climate stress [3,6,14]. In the context of climate change, plants are exposed to complex combinations of stresses, and studies on their response mechanisms are essential for the development of adapted crops and for food security [15]. Extremes of temperature and its unpredictable variations reduce crop yields and amplify the risks of food insecurity, and understanding plant mechanisms and applying modern breeding techniques are essential for the development of resistant crops and maintaining a sustainable food chain [16]. Given the increasing need to understand and mitigate the effects of climate instability on fruit crops, this review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of how climatic factors influence the growth and development of fruit species, the resulting consequences on yield and fruit quality, and the range of available adaptation strategies. Moreover, it seeks to identify knowledge gaps and outline priorities for future research that can support resilient and sustainable horticultural production in the context of ongoing climate change.

2. Materials and Methods

This review was conducted using a structured approach to synthesize current knowledge on the effects of abiotic stress (heat, water, and salinity stress) on fruit species. Scientific literature was collected from the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases using relevant keyword combinations. Only peer-reviewed articles published in English were considered. The selected studies were analysed and organized thematically, and the main findings were summarized in tables.

3. Forms of Stress in Fruit Trees—Morphological, Physiological, and Molecular Responses

Horticultural plants, due to their complex physiological requirements and high economic value, are particularly sensitive to the effects of climate change. Fruit trees are exposed throughout their lives to numerous abiotic stress factors, such as extreme temperatures or frost, drought, salinity, and radiation, which can alter normal physiological functions, reduce biosynthetic capacity and even cause plant death. Climate change amplifies these stresses, and modern technologies require their prevention to ensure the quality, production, and economic value of fruits [17]. Plants have developed complex mechanisms to cope with climatic stress, and these mechanisms operate at the physiological, biochemical, and molecular levels. As reported by Xu and Wang [18], prolonged abiotic stress disrupts root morphogenesis and physiological functioning in fruit trees, ultimately reducing yield and fruit quality. Roots perceive environmental stress signals through phytohormones, reactive oxygen species (ROS), and calcium ions (Ca2+), which trigger transcriptional regulation and metabolic reprogramming processes that enhance stress tolerance. A comprehensive understanding of these root-specific signaling networks is essential for strengthening resilience in fruit crops. Manzoor et al. [19] emphasized that a wide range of phytohormones—including gibberellins, brassinosteroids, abscisic acid, salicylic acid, strigolactones, jasmonates, and melatonin—play central roles in improving abiotic stress tolerance in fruit crops by modulating growth, developmental processes, and stress-responsive signaling pathways. According to Singh et al. [20], abscisic acid (ABA) functions as a key regulatory hormone in plant responses to abiotic stresses such as drought, salinity, and low temperatures. ABA is regulating the stress tolerance through the controlling of transcription factors (WRKY, bZIP, HDAC, and NAC) and interacts synergistically or antagonistically with other phytohormones. These interactions are modulating the stomatal closure, root system architecture, leaf senescence, and fruit ripening. This complex process enables plants to integrate multiple signals and control the molecular, biochemical, and physiological responses under adverse conditions. Plants respond to episodes of combined stress by activating specific physiological and molecular responses, as well as by adjusting different metabolic pathways, to diminish the negative effects of stress on growth, development, and reproduction [21]. Table 1 summarizes the major climatic stress factors and the corresponding plant adaptive responses, highlighting key physiological, biochemical, and molecular mechanisms reported in recent studies. At the biochemical level, plants activate antioxidant enzymes such as superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), and peroxidase (POD), produce heat shock proteins and photoprotective pigments (carotenoids and flavonoids) to protect cells against reactive oxygen species (ROS) which are among the most common early responses to various abiotic stresses [22]. In this context, the tightly controlled production of ROS not only triggers the plant’s defense mechanisms but also interacts with other signalling agents, such as Ca2+ and phytohormones, thereby modulating stress responses. Transcription factors and secondary metabolites are regulated to maintain redox homeostasis and protect crop productivity [23]. Phytohormones regulate plant responses to environmental stress, participating in biochemical, physiological, and signalling processes under abiotic stress conditions [24]. Among them, abscisic acid (ABA) is the main hormone that induces endogenous stress tolerance [25].
Table 1. Climate Stress Factors and Plant Responses.
Table 1. Climate Stress Factors and Plant Responses.
Climate Stress FactorPlant Responses (Physiological, Biochemical, Molecular)References
High Temperature (Heat stress)
-
Accelerates biochemical reactions, alters phenology, reduces flowering and fruit set, increases respiration and transpiration.
-
Protein denaturation, membrane instability, photosynthesis inhibition.
-
Production of HSPs, antioxidants enzymes, ROS detoxification.
[26,27,28,29]
Low Temperature (Cold/Frost)
-
Ice crystal formation damages membranes and tissues.
-
Reduced pollination, flower, and fruit damage.
-
ABA-mediated stomatal closure, ROS signalling, protective proteins.
[30,31,32,33]
Water Deficit (Drought)
-
Stomatal closure, reduced photosynthesis, carbohydrate limitation.
-
Leaf morphological changes (smaller stomata, thicker cuticle).
-
Osmolyte accumulation, antioxidant activation.
-
Varietal tolerance differences (‘Fuji’ > ‘Hongro’).
[34,35,36,37]
Waterlogging/Hypoxia
-
Reduced respiration, nutrient uptake inhibition.
-
Morphological adaptations (aerenchyma, adventitious roots).
-
Hormonal regulation (ethylene, ABA, gibberellins).
-
Transcription factors ERF-VII, NO, MAP kinases in signalling.
[38,39,40]
Salinity Stress
-
Osmotic stress, ionic toxicity (Na+, Cl−), reduced water availability.
-
Growth inhibition, premature senescence.
-
Ion homeostasis (K+/Na+ balance), antioxidant enzymes.
-
Rootstock tolerance (M. halliana ‘9-1-6’ > M. baccata).
[41,42,43,44]
UV Radiation & Ozone
-
Chlorophyll and carotenoid degradation, reduced photosynthesis.
-
ROS accumulation, membrane damage, reduced biomass.
-
Induction of antioxidants (SOD, CAT, POD), flavonoids, phenolics compounds.
-
Agriculture antioxidant strategies (genetic engineering, exogenous antioxidants, microbes).
[23,45]
Combined Stress (e.g., heat + drought)
-
Synergistic negative effects on growth and reproduction.
-
Complex cross-talk of hormonal pathways (ABA, jasmonic acid, salicylic acid, ethylene).
-
Adjustment of metabolic and antioxidant responses.
[21,24]
At the molecular level, the transcription factors ERF-VII, MYB, WRKY and NAC, together with MAP and Ca2+-dependent kinases, coordinate responses to hypoxia and other stresses by regulating gene expression and hormonal signalling (ABA, ethylene, gibberellins, jasmonates, salicylic acid) [46]. In addition, plants adjust photosynthetic metabolism, activate anaerobic pathways under hypoxia, accumulate secondary metabolites, and can benefit from modern technologies, such as genetic engineering, the use of biochar, crop rotation, and mycorrhizae, to develop increased stress tolerance [47,48]. The integration of these mechanisms allows the prediction of plant performance under adverse environmental conditions and supports the design of interventions to reduce the negative impact of climate change on crops. The concept of “antioxidant agriculture” proposed by Sun et al. [45] provides an integrated strategy for increasing plant tolerance to stress, using genetic engineering, exogenous application of antioxidants, inoculation with microorganisms and agronomic practices to reduce oxidative stress and improve crop productivity. Under current climatic conditions, these stresses often occur simultaneously (e.g., drought combined with high temperatures), which amplifies the negative effects and complicates the plant response. Understanding the individual and combined mechanisms is essential for developing effective adaptation and mitigation strategies. The degree of tolerance varies significantly across species, varieties, and rootstocks, reflecting inherent differences in physiological plasticity, root system architecture, and stress-response capacity (Table 2). Fruit trees are affected by climate-related abiotic stresses, which impact yield and fruit quality depending on species, cultivar, and rootstock. Apple (Malus domestica): highly sensitive to heat and drought. However, dwarfing rootstocks—specifically M.9, B.9, and the Geneva series—exhibit notable resilience. Under high stress, fruit size, firmness, and soluble solid content are frequently compromised [10,49]. Peach (Prunus persica): susceptible to drought, heat, and waterlogging. Tolerant cultivar-rootstock combinations maintain higher water-use efficiency; notably, while drought may reduce overall yield, it often leads to increased sugar concentration. Conversely, heat and waterlogging generally degrade fruit quality [50,51,52]. Pear (Pyrus communis) and plum (Prunus domestica): these species display variable tolerance levels. Drought and elevated root-zone temperatures typically hinder vegetative growth and fruit development. Nevertheless, specific rootstock combinations have demonstrated the ability to sustain productivity under moderate stress conditions [53,54,55,56,57].
To better understand how climate change affects horticultural crops, it is useful to synthesize the main types of abiotic stresses and the complex responses developed by plants. Climatic factors, such as extreme temperatures, water deficit or excess, salinity, UV radiation or ozone pollution, affect the physiological, biochemical, and molecular processes of fruit trees, directly influencing fruit productivity and quality. In conclusion, an integrated understanding of the morphological, physiological, biochemical, and molecular mechanisms by which fruit trees respond to different forms of abiotic stress is the basis for developing effective adaptation strategies, indispensable for maintaining orchard productivity and resilience in the context of climate change.

3.1. Heat Stress and Its Effects on Fruit Tree Development

Among the various abiotic stresses affecting fruit production, temperature extremes represent one of the most significant challenges, as both high and low temperatures can severely impact plant growth and development. Heat stress, in particular, affects fruit trees at the morphological, physiological, and molecular levels [26], accelerating biochemical reactions that can extend the growing season and alter the sequence of phenological phases [27]. This stress induces a wide range of effects, including morphological, physiological, molecular, and cellular changes, as well as phenological alterations and imbalances in the soil–plant relationship (Table 3). Air temperature influences plant growth through biochemical processes such as nutrition, photosynthesis, and respiration, being an essential factor, together with water availability, in the choice of varieties and the estimation of their development and yield.
At the physiological level, the study carried out by Viljevac Vuletić et al. [58] showed that the leaf of the traditional plum cultivar ‘Bistrica’ responds more efficiently to short-term thermal stress than the improved cultivar ‘Toptaste’, by accumulating proline, phenols, and photosynthetic pigments, better maintaining homeostasis and photosynthesis, which recommends the cultivar ‘Bistrica’ as a source of heat tolerance in breeding programs. At the phenological level, pollination, a sensitive phenological stage, is particularly affected by air temperature [60,61,62], with thermal variations affecting pollen viability, the duration of stigma receptivity and the timing of flowering, which can lead to a reduction in the fruit setting rate and, implicitly, production. High temperatures can reduce flowering intensity, cause premature fruit drop, fruit deformation, and slow down their growth [26]. It has been observed that the variety and climatic conditions of each year influence the development of vegetation phenophases, with differences between varieties being determined by the variable accumulation of temperatures necessary for the progress of each phenophase, depending on the specific requirements of the variety [63]. In addition, the increase in average temperature and atmospheric CO2 concentration negatively affects the cold requirements, dormancy, and phenology of temperate fruit species, especially in regions with mild winters, where the cold deficit limits the resumption of growth in spring [64]. On the other hand, thermal stress caused by low temperatures can affect early flowering fruit species, causing cold injuries and production losses [30]. Atmospheric temperature influences soil temperature, affecting biochemical processes such as organic matter decomposition, evaporation, and soil salinity. High temperatures accelerate the decomposition of organic matter and the release of nutrients, but increase evaporation, reducing the water available to roots and increasing salinity at the soil surface, which can negatively affect crops. High temperatures can denature proteins, perturb the photosynthesis, and increase transpiration, while freezing causes the formation of ice crystals that disrupt cellular integrity; according to Charrier et al. [31] low temperatures can lead to extracellular ice crystals, and high temperatures can affect membrane integrity. In contrast, Waraich et al. [28] emphasize that they cause protein denaturation and aggregation, as well as increased fluidity of membrane lipids, influencing plant metabolism, reproduction and productivity, and their physiological, biochemical, and molecular responses can be supported by biotechnological approaches [59]. Overall, temperature is a fundamental determinant of plant development, simultaneously influencing morphological, physiological, phenological and molecular processes, and in the context of climate change, understanding and managing the effects of thermal stress become essential for adapting varieties, optimizing crop technologies, and maintaining the productivity of agroecosystems.

3.2. Water Stress and Its Effects on Fruit Trees

Water stress, caused by soil water deficit or excessive evaporation due to high temperatures and wind, is one of the most important limiting factors for the growth and productivity of fruit trees. It affects both physiological processes and plant structure, directly influencing growth, photosynthesis, flowering, and fruiting (Table 4). Water scarcity affects fruit species at all levels—physiological, biochemical, and morphological—with direct effects on vegetative development, flowering, fruiting, and fruit quality. Water is essential for plant physiological processes, influencing nutrient transport, metabolism, and cell growth; water deficit or lack causes significant physiological changes that affect crop development, photosynthesis, and productivity. At the physiological level, plants respond to stress by regulating stomatal opening, adjusting water transport through roots, stems, and leaves, as well as by modifying photosynthesis to reduce oxidative damage. Under conditions of submersion or saturated soil, they develop specific morphological and anatomical adaptations [29].
The decrease in cellular water potential causes a reduction in turgescence, which leads to stomatal closure and limiting photosynthesis, with a direct effect on the synthesis of carbohydrates necessary for growth and fruit formation. According to the literature, abscisic acid plays a central role in the regulation of stomatal closure [66], contributing to the protection of plants against both water deficit and pathogens. This effect is achieved through complex interactions with other hormones. The response is initially rapid, being mediated by secondary messengers such as ROS (reactive oxygen species), NO (nitric oxide) and Ca2+, but it can also trigger long-term adaptive mechanisms, such as the accumulation of osmolytes, the regulation of the expression of genes involved in stress and the initiation of programmed cell death, thus contributing to the increase in plant resistance to abiotic and biotic stress [32,33]. Although the roots respond first to drought, the difficulty of observation in the soil has led researchers to study the aerial part more. Water stress modifies the architecture and ultrastructure of leaves, reducing the size and density of stomata, reinforcing cell walls, promoting cuticle formation and premature senescence, and the root/wood ratio increases, improving water absorption and osmotic balance [68]. The response to water stress is different from one species to another and differs with the cultivar. Studies show differences in tolerance between cultivars, such as ‘Fuji’, which is more drought-resistant than ‘Hongro’ [34], or traditional apple (Malus domestica) cultivars, which are more tolerant than commercial ones [29,35]. Water stress affects multiple biological processes in fruit crops, prompting plants to develop complex adaptive mechanisms, including physiological and hormonal adjustments as well as genetic and epigenetic changes, expressed through reduced leaf water potential, lower turgor pressure, stomatal closure, alterations in root xylem formation, and activation of antioxidant systems [36]. At the phenological level, water deficit can delay flowering, reduce fruit setting, and promote premature fruit drop. A study by Boini et al. [37] show that although the daily rate of fruit growth does not correlate as closely with stem water potential as leaf gas exchange, its monitoring can be a useful physiological indicator for irrigation scheduling, by establishing specific growth thresholds that signal the onset of water stress.
Water stress disrupts plant morphology and physiology by reducing germination, root and leaf growth, photosynthesis, and water and nutrient use efficiency, with plants responding through osmotic regulation, antioxidant activity, osmolyte accumulation, and hormonal signalling to enhance tolerance and survival [41,48,65]. Flooding and saturated soils are another abiotic stressor and these cause hypoxia and anoxia, affecting growth, respiration, and nutrient uptake, and plants respond through morphological adaptations as well as biochemical and hormonal responses [29,38,39,69]. Climate change makes hypoxia a major abiotic stress for plants, affecting agriculture and food security, and research has highlighted oxygen perception and signalling networks, involving ERF-VII transcription factors, energy metabolism, NO, lipids, and phytohormones, but many aspects of these mechanisms remain unclear [46]. Plants adapt by increasing ABA levels, accumulating amino acids, sugars, carbohydrates, protective proteins, and antioxidants, as well as by accumulating proline, contributing to the protection of cell membranes, and reducing the effects of oxidative stress [67]. Overall, water stress profoundly influences all levels of plant organization, and in the context of increasingly pronounced climate variability, understanding the physiological, biochemical, and morphological mechanisms of adaptation becomes essential for the selection of tolerant varieties, optimizing irrigation strategies and maintaining the productivity and quality of fruit crops.

3.3. Salt Stress and Its Effects on Fruit Trees

Among the various abiotic stresses that threaten fruit production, salinity is particularly detrimental due to its widespread occurrence and lasting impact on plant health. Salt stress affects fruit plants by reducing water availability and causing the accumulation of toxic ions, leading to decreased photosynthesis, loss of cell turgor, premature senescence, and reduced growth. As a major abiotic factor limiting fruit productivity, salt stress disrupts physiological, biochemical, and structural processes while triggering complex adaptation mechanisms at both the cellular and hormonal levels (Table 5). On a global scale, salinity reduces plant growth and economic yield, but the application of appropriate agronomic practices—such as the use of tolerant rootstocks and varieties, optimized planting techniques, balanced nutrition, and drip irrigation—can mitigate the effects of stress and allow fruit cultivation on salinity-affected lands [70]. Although these practices are effective, their implementation can be limited by cost and infrastructure, which reduces large-scale applicability. Salinity problems can be reduced by developing salt-tolerant cultivars, but this process is slow. A more effective strategy is to manage mineral nutrition, which stimulates growth, fruit production, and plant defense mechanisms by increasing antioxidant enzymes, reducing H2O2, and preventing membrane damage, thereby increasing the tolerance of fruit species to salinity [42]. However, the effectiveness of this approach can vary significantly depending on species and soil conditions, requiring local adaptation of strategies. Tolerance to salt stress varies significantly between species and cultivars, an example being strawberry, where cultivars such as ‘Albion’, ‘Benicia’ and ‘Monterey’ show greater resistance to salinity, maintaining better yields, fruit quality and plant biomass, compared to other more sensitive cultivars such as ‘Ventana’ and ‘San Andreas’ [29].
The high resistance of some cultivars does not guarantee uniform performance on all salinity-affected land, and local selection remains essential. Rootstocks are an essential component in the adaptation of fruit species to salt stress, as the selection of genotypes with high salt tolerance can improve water and nutrient uptake, maintain ionic balance and support tree productivity under degraded soil or variable climatic conditions [71]. Under salt stress, the apple rootstock M. halliana ‘9-1-6’ exhibits superior adaptive mechanisms compared to M. baccata, by increasing the proportion of root biomass, maintaining thicker leaves with protective anatomical structures, lower accumulation of Na+ and higher accumulation of K+ in the stem and leaves, as well as the ability of roots and leaves to reject and secrete Na+, thus maintaining a high K+/Na+ ratio and demonstrating high tolerance to salinity [43]. Under salt stress, plants increase endogenous levels of abscisic acid and modify their gene expression, while excessive accumulation of Na+ and Cl− ions causes ionic toxicity by disrupting homeostasis and unavailability of essential nutrients. Adaptation to salinity involves the regulation of ionic homeostasis, activation of osmotic stress pathways, hormonal signalling, modification of the cytoskeleton and cell wall composition, and tolerance can be supported by using growth-promoting bacteria, phytohormones, organic acids, and by adjusting agricultural practices [44]. Although the molecular mechanisms are well documented, their practical application in the field depends on the effective integration of multiple strategies simultaneously, which can be difficult for farmers. In conclusion, the tolerance of fruit species to salinity depends on a complex interaction between physiological, biochemical, anatomical, and ionic mechanisms, and the integration of breeding strategies, nutritional management, and the use of adapted rootstocks is the key to maintaining fruit production and quality in agroecosystems exposed to salt accumulation.

4. Impacts on Crop Yield and Food Quality

4.1. Effects on Crop Productivity

Climate change poses a major threat to global crop production, as rising average temperatures, more frequent extreme weather events, and shrinking agricultural land can significantly compromise productivity [72]. Given the global threats that climate change poses to crop production, orchards are particularly at risk due to their long-term growth cycles and sensitivity to environmental fluctuations. Rising temperatures, extreme weather events, and water scarcity not only affect yield but also fruit quality and nutritional value, highlighting the need for proactive strategies. As a result of climate change, orchards face unprecedented challenges in terms of production, fruit quality, and water management, requiring a shift from conventional techniques to integrated adaptation and resilience strategies, including selection of varieties compatible with new conditions, efficient irrigation, monitoring through modern technologies, and pest management, all within a framework of cooperation between farmers, researchers, authorities, and the international community [73]. Rapid variability in land surface temperature significantly influences heat fluxes and crop evapotranspiration, which highlights the need for frequent acquisition of thermal images and instantaneous meteorological data to correct calculations and effectively apply precision irrigation [74]. Drought, extreme temperatures, floods, and excessive solar radiation disrupt essential physiological and metabolic processes such as photosynthesis, respiration, water transport, and nutrient uptake, leading to reduced vegetative and reproductive biomass [29,69]. Climatic stress directly affects plant growth and development, which is reflected in reduced agronomic yield. High temperatures negatively affect photosynthesis, carbon assimilation, and reproductive organ formation, and when combined with other abiotic factors, damage is amplified, and production is reduced [75]. Extreme temperatures also affect pollination and fruit set, and high thermal stress can reduce pollen fertility and viability, leading to substantial economic losses [31]. On the other hand, drought is a major concern for global agriculture, affecting fruit growth and yield, and horticultural, biochemical, and molecular strategies are being used to improve the response of temperate crops to water stress, including seedling selection, controlled irrigation, rainwater harvesting, anti-stress materials, genetic engineering, and the influence of the microbiome. Prolonged drought leads to reduced leaf size, slowed root development, and reduced flower and fruit number, thus affecting both the quantity and uniformity of crops [32]. The study by Wang et al. [40] shows that moderate and mild water stress can improve the quality of ‘Gala’ apple (M. domestica) fruits by increasing the content of soluble sugars and reducing acidity, and the impact on fruit weight depends on the stage of application, with mild stress being recommended only in the late stages of development to optimize quality and production. In the case of flooding and hypoxia, the accumulation of toxins in roots and the limitation of aerobic respiration reduce plant growth and can cause significant production losses, especially in sensitive crops [39,46]. The main effects of climate change on orchard crop productivity and the associated adaptation strategies are summarized in Figure 1.
In conclusion, climate change and extreme weather events exert multiple pressures on orchards and fruit crops, affecting physiology, photosynthesis, growth and yield, which requires the adoption of integrated adaptation and resilience strategies, including the selection of tolerant varieties and rootstocks, optimal water management, precise monitoring through modern technologies and the application of biochemical, molecular and agronomic measures to ensure fruit production and quality under conditions of variable abiotic stress.

4.2. Changes in Nutritional and Post-Harvest Quality

Abiotic and biotic factors play a crucial role in fruit development and quality; however, climate change induces complex and difficult-to-predict responses that directly affect fruit crop productivity. In this context, the adoption of modern technologies, such as genetic editing, canopy management, and the conservation of pollinators, becomes essential for the adaptation and sustainability of fruit production [76,77]. At the global scale, climate change undermines the stability of food systems by reducing food security and diet quality, effects that are further intensified by the emergence of pandemics. Therefore, the development of sustainable food systems and climate-smart agriculture is indispensable for ensuring adequate diets and protecting human health [78]. In parallel, the decline in the nutritional quality of foods over recent decades—driven by intensive agricultural practices, the use of high-yielding varieties, imbalanced fertilization, and rising CO2 concentrations—has contributed to reduced consumption of traditional nutrient-rich crops and to increased malnutrition, particularly in developing countries. Consequently, improving soil fertility and biodiversity, along with promoting sustainable agriculture, represents key strategies for enhancing the nutritional quality of crops and safeguarding the health of future generations [79,80]. Climate change affects fruit quality by modifying the nutritional composition (sugar, acids, vitamins, secondary metabolites) and physical and aesthetic characteristics (size, colour, texture, shelf life), influencing both nutritional value and commercial attractiveness, which highlights the need to adapt horticultural practices and develop varieties resistant to climate stress [81]. Fruit colour, mainly determined by carotenoids and anthocyanins, is essential for their attractiveness and quality, and pigment production, influenced by hormones and environmental conditions such as light, temperature and water, can be adjusted by moderate stresses to improve fruit quality [82]. To counteract the effects of this stress on agricultural production, it is essential to implement adaptation and mitigation strategies, such as microclimatic management, modern cultivation techniques, and selection of tolerant varieties, to ensure both the quantity and quality of harvests [83]. Moderate exposure to abiotic stresses such as water deficit, salinity and high temperatures can stimulate the synthesis of ABA and secondary metabolites in fruits, increasing sugar, anthocyanins, and others phenolic compounds, which improves the quality, antioxidant value, and health potential of fruits, although the final quality depends on the balance between productivity, defense, and stress intensity [84]. Drought and extreme temperatures can alter the chemical composition of fruits, cereals, and vegetables, affecting the content of carbohydrates, proteins, lipids, vitamins, and essential micronutrients [47]. Heat stress and drought alter the metabolism of sugars and organic acids in fruits such as jujube, affecting the sugar–acid ratio and the profile of anthocyanins and flavonoids, resulting in significant changes in the chemical composition and nutritional quality of the fruits [85,86]. Water stress, for example, causes the accumulation of secondary compounds such as phenols and flavonoids, which can increase antioxidant capacity but can also reduce the taste and texture of products [23,87,88]. In addition, stress conditions affect shelf life and susceptibility to post-harvest deterioration, as changes in plant metabolism can lead to reduced pigment stability, water loss, and increased susceptibility to pathogen attack and mechanical damage. Exposure to high temperatures during ripening can accelerate starch degradation and reduce protein content in grains, and stress through hypoxia or flooding can alter the composition of sugars and organic acids in fruits and vegetables, influencing taste and nutritional quality [45,69]. Excessively high temperatures negatively affect the development and quality of Shiranuhi mandarin fruits by altering sugar and acid composition, rind coloration, and key biochemical parameters [89]. Therefore, the effects of climate stress on crops are not limited to yield reduction, but also affect nutritional value and food safety, making it essential to integrate genetic improvement strategies, agronomic management, and post-harvest techniques to protect both the quantity and quality of agricultural production. Figure 2 illustrates the complex interplay between abiotic (temperature, humidity, light) and biotic (pathogens, microbes, pollinators) factors, alongside the overarching influence of climate change on fruit nutritional quality and post-harvest longevity. It also highlights various adaptation strategies—such as the use of tolerant varieties, optimized irrigation management, and biological protection—along with modern technological interventions, including controlled cooling, modified atmosphere packaging (MAP), nano-packaging, and real-time monitoring sensors. Together, these elements underscore the critical interactions between environmental drivers and management practices essential for sustaining both crop yield and quality.
An integrated framework for maintaining productive orchards in the context of climate change, combining four complementary strategies, is presented in Figure 3. It combines four complementary strategies: (i) Genetic Approaches—breeding and genomics to develop climate-resilient varieties; (ii) Physiological Strategies—enhancing tree stress tolerance and optimizing water and nutrient use; (iii) Agronomic Practices—soil and water management, pruning, canopy control, and sustainable farming; and (iv) Technological Solutions—precision agriculture, smart irrigation, and environmental monitoring. Together, these approaches aim to mitigate climate stress and ensure sustainable orchard productivity.
Fruit farmers have adopted and plan to implement a range of agronomic, technological, and financial measures, including planting drought- and disease-resistant varieties, using protective nets, and improving irrigation systems to address anticipated water scarcity and extreme weather events. However, the adoption of adaptive measures is often limited by economic barriers, highlighting the need for specific actions to facilitate their implementation [90,91]. The literature shows that even when crop varieties are resistant to abiotic stress, adoption rates remain variable, influenced by access to agricultural extension services, education level, availability of inputs, and the socio-economic conditions of farmers, especially at small and medium scales [92,93,94]. Therefore, targeted interventions that provide financial support, access to early warning systems, and agricultural education are crucial for increasing the uptake of adaptive practices among small and medium-scale farmers, helping to overcome socio-economic and informational barriers to adoption [95,96]. This strategy not only helps maintain yield but also preserves nutritional quality and food safety, highlighting the multidimensional impact of climate change on agricultural production.

5. Conclusions

Climate change and abiotic stresses, such as extreme temperatures, drought and salinity, have profound effects on the physiology, metabolism, and phenology of fruit trees, affecting both the quantity and quality of fruits. Plant responses to stress involve complex mechanisms at the cellular, biochemical, hormonal, and molecular levels, including the synthesis of ABA, secondary metabolites, and the activation of antioxidant systems. Adaptation of trees to climatic stresses requires the integration of genetic and agronomic strategies, such as the selection of tolerant varieties and rootstocks, optimal water and nutrient management, adjustment of planting techniques and microclimatic monitoring. The use of modern technologies, biostimulants, and biotechnologies can support the resilience of orchards and the maintenance of fruit quality under abiotic stress conditions. An integrated approach, combining physiological, genetic, technological, and agronomic measures, is essential for the sustainability and productivity of orchards in the context of global climate change. In conclusion, major knowledge gaps include understanding the genetic and physiological mechanisms of stress tolerance and the lack of long-term data on cultivar performance, while future priorities involve developing resilient cultivars, optimizing agronomic and technological practices, and long-term orchard monitoring to enhance fruit production resilience and sustainability.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Acknowledgments

The authors used a language-editing tool based on AI to improve grammar and clarity. No AI tool was used to generate scientific content. No other software was used for translation, editing, or polishing.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Yang, L.T.; Chen, L.S. Stress physiology and molecular biology of fruit crops. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Schmitt, J.; Offermann, F.; Söder, M.; Frühauf, C.; Finger, R. Extreme weather events cause significant crop yield losses at the farm level in German agriculture. Food Policy 2022, 112, 102359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Hasegawa, T.; Sakurai, G.; Fujimori, S.; Takahashi, K.; Hijioka, Y.; Masui, T. Extreme climate events increase risk of global food insecurity and adaptation needs. Nat. Food 2021, 2, 587–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Chachar, M.; Ahmed, S.; Murtazac, G.; Jillanib, P.; Balocha, H.; Hakroa, R.A. The impact of climate change on horticulture: A global perspective and adaptation strategies. Glob. Res. Environ. Sustain. 2023, 1, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Peer, L.A.; Mir, B.A.; Maqbool, T. Genetic and molecular mechanisms of plant reproduction in response to climate change. Bot. Rev. 2025, 91, 331–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Jain, S.; Lamo, K.; Walling, S.; Imchen, A.; Tirkey, J.F.; Singh, A. Climate-resilient horticulture: Adapting to climate change through innovative practices and technologies. Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change 2024, 14, 219–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lal, R. Managing soils and ecosystems for mitigating anthropogenic car-bon emissions and advancing global food security. BioScience 2010, 60, 708–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Koch, A.; McBratney, A.; Adams, M.; Field, D.; Hill, R.; Crawford, J.; Minasny, B.; Lal, R.; Abbott, L.; O’Donnell, A.; et al. Soil security: Solving the global soil crisis. Glob. Policy 2013, 4, 434–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Srivastava, A.K.; Ngullie, E. Integrated nutrient management: Theory and practice. Dyn. Soil Dyn. Plant 2009, 3, 1–30. [Google Scholar]
  10. Tagliavini, M.; Tonon, G.; Scandellari, F.; Quinones, A.; Palmieri, S.; Menarbin, G.; Gioacchini, P.; Masia, A. Nutrient recycling during the decomposition of apple leaves (Malus domestica) and mowed grasses in an orchard. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2007, 118, 191–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Srivastava, A.K.; Wu, Q.S.; Mousavi, S.M.; Hota, D. Integrated soil fertility management in fruit crops: An overview. Int. J. Fruit Sci. 2021, 21, 413–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Dutta, P.; Chakraborti, S.; Chaudhuri, K.M.; Mondal, S.; Dutta, P.; Chakraborti, S.; Chaudhuri, K.M.; Mondal, S. Physiological responses and resilience of plants to climate change. In New Frontiers in Stress Management for Durable Agriculture; Rakshit, A., Singh, H., Singh, A., Singh, U., Fraceto, L., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Hossain, M.M.; Sultana, F.; Mostafa, M.; Ferdus, H.; Rahman, M.; Rana, J.A.; Al Sabbir, M.A. Plant disease dynamics in a changing climate: Impacts, molecular mechanisms, and climate-informed strategies for sustainable management. Discov. Agric. 2024, 2, 132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Prasad, K.; Singh, S.K.; Bhattocharjee, P.; Rudrapaul, J.; Kumar, U.; Yadav, S.K.; Mani, A. Impact of climate change on postharvest quality of vegetables. In Advances in Research on Vegetable Production Under a Changing Climate; Solankey, S.S., Kumari, M., Eds.; Advances in Olericulture; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; Volume 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Jing, Z.; Liu, N.; Zhang, Z.; Hou, X. Research progress on plant responses to stress combinations in the context of climate change. Plants 2024, 13, 469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Lee, Z.; Lim, J.A.; Harikrishna, J.A.; Islam, T.; Abd Rahim, M.H.; Yaacob, J.S. Regulation of plant responses to temperature stress: A key factor in food security and for mitigating effects of climate change. Int. J. Plant Prod. 2024, 18, 141–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Doğan, B.D.; Ak, B.E.; Kenzhebaev, S.; Yaqubi, Q. Effects of Some Abiotic Stress Factors on Fruit Trees in Global Climate Change. In Proceedings Book 5th International Agriculture Congress. 2022; pp. 71–78. Available online: https://utak.azimder.org.tr/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/UTAK2022-Proceedings-Book.pdf (accessed on 26 January 2026).
  18. Xu, L.; Wang, X. Root-Specific Signal Modules Mediating Abiotic Stress Tolerance in Fruit Crops. Plants 2026, 15, 363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Manzoor, M.A.; Xu, Y.; Xu, J.; Wang, Y.; Sun, W.; Liu, X.; Zhang, C. Fruit crop abiotic stress management: A comprehensive review of plant hor-mones mediated responses. Fruit Res. 2023, 3, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Singh, A.; Roychoudhury, A. Abscisic acid in plants under abiotic stress: Crosstalk with major phytohormones. Plant Cell Rep. 2023, 42, 961–974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zandalinas, S.I.; Balfagón, D.; Gómez-Cadenas, A.; Mittler, R. Plant responses to climate change: Metabolic changes under combined abiotic stresses. J. Exp. Bot. 2022, 73, 3339–3354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hasanuzzaman, M.; Nahar, K.; Alam, M.M.; Roychowdhury, R.; Fujita, M. Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinery in abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2020, 48, 909–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Rao, M.J.; Duan, M.; Ikram, M.; Zheng, B. ROS regulation and antioxidant responses in plants under air pollution: Molecular signaling, metabolic adaptation, and biotechnological solutions. Antioxidants 2025, 14, 907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Sharma, A.; Shahzad, B.; Kumar, V.; Kohli, S.K.; Sidhu, G.P.S.; Bali, A.S.; Handa, N.; Kapoor, D.; Bhardwaj, R.; Zheng, B. Phytohormones regulate accumulation of osmolytes under abiotic stress. Biomolecules 2019, 9, 285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Kuromori, T.; Seo, M.; Shinozaki, K. ABA transport and plant water stress responses. Trends Plant. Sci. 2018, 23, 513–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Li, S.; Chen, H.; Yu, H.; Li, Y.; Wang, L. Responses and adaptations of fruit trees to high temperatures. Fruit Res. 2023, 3, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Chmielewski, F.M.; Müller, A.; Bruns, E. Climate changes and trends in phenology of fruit trees and field crops in Germany, 1961–2000. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2004, 121, 69–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Waraich, E.A.; Ahmad, R.; Halim, A.; Aziz, T. Alleviation of temperature stress by nutrient management in crop plants: A review. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2012, 12, 221–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Zahra, N.; Hafeez, M.B.; Shaukat, K.; Wahid, A.; Hussain, S.; Naseer, R.; Farooq, M. Hypoxia and anoxia stress: Plant responses and tolerance mechanisms. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 2021, 207, 249–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Francini, A.; Sebastiani, L. Abiotic stress effects on performance of horticultural crops. Horticulturae 2019, 5, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Charrier, G.; Ngao, J.; Saudreau, M.; Améglio, T. Effects of environmental factors and management practices on microclimate, winter physiology, and frost resistance in trees. Front. Plant Sci. 2015, 6, 259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Bharath, P.; Gahir, S.; Raghavendra, A.S. Abscisic acid-induced stomatal closure: An important component of plant defense against abiotic and biotic stress. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 615114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ye, W.; Munemasa, S.; Shinya, T.; Wu, W.; Ma, T.; Lu, J. Stomatal immunity against fungal invasion comprises not only chitin-induced stomatal closure but also chitosan-induced guard cell death. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2020, 117, 20932–20942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Bhusal, N.; Han, S.G.; Yoon, T.M. Impact of drought stress on photosynthetic response, leaf water potential, and stem sap flow in two cultivars of bi-leader apple trees (Malus × domestica Borkh.). Sci. Hortic. 2019, 246, 535–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mihaljević, I.; Viljevac Vuletić, M.; Šimić, D.; Tomaš, V.; Horvat, D.; Josipović, M.; Vuković, D. Comparative study of drought stress effects on traditional and modern apple cultivars. Plants 2021, 10, 561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Bonnin, M.; Diop, K.; Cavelier, G.; Crastes, M.; Groenewald, R.; Nguyen, H.T.; Pontvianne, F. Physiologic, genetic and epigenetic determinants of water deficit tolerance in fruit trees. Plants 2025, 14, 1769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Boini, A.; Manfrini, L.; Bortolotti, G.; Corelli-Grappadelli, L.; Morandi, B. Monitoring fruit daily growth indicates the onset of mild drought stress in apple. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 256, 108520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Nasrullah Ali, S.; Umar, M.; Sun, L.; Naeem, M.; Yasmin, H.; Khan, N. Flooding tolerance in plants: From physiological and molecular perspectives. Braz. J. Bot. 2022, 45, 1161–1176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Umathe, T.; Matikhaye, S.; John, S.A.; Misra, P.; Ramteke, P.W.; Shukla, P.K. Molecular mechanism of plants’ responses to hypoxia/anoxia caused by flooding. In Plant Flooding. Plant in Challenging Environments; Riyazuddin, R., Gupta, R., Ramteke, P.W., Sayyed, R., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2025; Volume 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wang, Y.; Liu, L.; Wang, Y.; Tao, H.; Fan, J.; Zhao, Z.; Guo, Y. Effects of soil water stress on fruit yield, quality and their relationship with sugar metabolism in ‘Gala’ apple. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 258, 108753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wahab, A.; Abdi, G.; Saleem, M.H.; Ali, B.; Ullah, S.; Shah, W.; Marc, R.A. Plants’ physio-biochemical and phyto-hormonal responses to alleviate the adverse effects of drought stress: A comprehensive review. Plants 2022, 11, 1620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Ahmad, R.; Anjum, M.A. Mineral nutrition management in fruit trees under salt stress: A review. Erwerbs-Obstbau 2023, 65, 397–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Zhang, D.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, Y. Effects of salt stress on salt-repellent and salt-secreting characteristics of two apple rootstocks. Plants 2024, 13, 1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Hasanuzzaman, M.; Fujita, M. Plant responses and tolerance to salt stress: Physiological and molecular interventions. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 4810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Sun, Y.; Xie, X.; Jiang, C.J. Antioxidant agriculture for stress-resilient crop production: Field practice. Antioxidants 2024, 13, 164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Wang, L.N.; Wang, W.C.; Liao, K.; Xu, L.J.; Xie, D.X.; Xie, R.H.; Xiao, S. Survival mechanisms of plants under hypoxic stress: Physiological acclimation and molecular regulation. J. Integr. Plant. Biol. 2025, 67, 440–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Chada, S.; Asiedu, S.; Ofoe, R. An overview of plant morpho-physiology, biochemicals, and metabolic pathways under water stress. Horticult. Int. J. 2023, 7, 115–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Ghadirnezhad Shiade, S.R.; Fathi, A.; Taghavi Ghasemkheili, F.; Amiri, E.; Pessarakli, M. Plants’ responses under drought stress conditions: Effects of strategic management approaches—A review. J. Plant Nutr. 2023, 46, 2198–2230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Ali, U. Dwarf apple rootstock stress responses: A key to climate-resilient apple cultivation amidst abiotic and biotic challenges. Turk. J. Agric.-Food Sci. Technol. 2025, 13, 2553–2560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhang, B.; Du, H.; Yang, S.; Wu, X.; Liu, W.; Guo, J.; Peng, F. Physiological and transcriptomic analyses of the effects of exogenous lauric acid on drought resistance in peach (Prunus persica (L.) Batsch). Plants 2023, 12, 1492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Tsiupka, V.; Tsiupka, S.; Plugatar, Y.; Bulavin, I.; Komar-Tyomnaya, L. Assessment of the drought-tolerance criteria for screening peach cultivars. Horticulturae 2023, 9, 1045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Guizani, M.; Maatallah, S.; Ltifi, A. Influence of water stress on the nutritional quality of peach fruits. J. Oasis Agric. Sustain. Dev. 2022, 4, 140–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Babaei, L.; Sharifani, M.M.; Darvishzadeh, R.; Abbaspour, N.; Henareh, M. Biochemical and gene expression profiling of five pear species under drought stress conditions. BMC Plant Biol. 2025, 25, 397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Mezrioui, K.; Lodolini, E.M.; Giorgi, V.; Neri, D. Effects of high root-zone temperature on the physiology and growth of pear (Pyrus communis L., cv. Bartlett) and quince (Cydonia oblonga Mill., cv. BA29) plants. Horticulturae 2025, 11, 1337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Mihaljević, I.; Viljevac Vuletić, M.; Tomaš, V.; Vuković, D.; Zdunić, Z. Drought tolerance screening of plum rootstocks based on physiological and biochemical traits. Plant Soil Environ. 2025, 71, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Hamdani, A.; Charafi, J.; Bouda, S.; Hssaini, L.; Adiba, A.; Razouk, R. Screening for water stress tolerance in eleven plum (Prunus salicina L.) cultivars using agronomic and physiological traits. Sci. Hortic. 2021, 281, 109992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Dimitrova, S.; Krumov, S.; Sotirov, D.; Kolev, M. Response of some plum cultivars to abiotic stress. Acta Hortic. 2021, 1322, 201–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Viljevac Vuletić, M.; Mihaljević, I.; Tomaš, V. Physiological response to short-term heat stress in the leaves of traditional and modern plum (Prunus domestica L.) cultivars. Horticulturae 2022, 8, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Zahra, N.; Shaukat, K.; Hafeez, M.B.; Raza, A.; Hussain, S.; Chaudhary, M.T.; Wahid, A. Physiological and molecular responses to high, chilling, and freezing temperature in plant growth and production: Consequences and mitigation possibilities. In Harsh Environment and Plant Resilience; Husen, A., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Dinu, M.D.; Mazilu, I.E.; Cosmulescu, S. Influence of climatic factors on the phenology of chokeberry cultivars planted in the pedoclimatic conditions of southern Romania. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Cosmulescu, S.; Calusaru, F.G. Influence of temperature on blackthorn (Prunus spinosa L.) phenophases in spring season. J. Agric. Meteorol. 2020, 76, 53–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Cosmulescu, S.; Ștefănescu, D.; Stoenescu, A.M. Variability of phenological behaviours of wild fruit tree species based on discriminant analysis. Plants 2021, 11, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Cosmulescu, S.; Laies, M.M.; Sărățeanu, V. The influence of variety and climatic year on the phenology of blueberry grown in the Banat area, Romania. Agronomy 2022, 12, 2605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Salama, A.M.; Ezzat, A.; El-Ramady, H.; Alam-Eldein, S.M.; Okba, S.K.; Elmenofy, H.M.; Holb, I.J. Temperate fruit trees under climate change: Challenges for dormancy and chilling requirements in warm winter regions. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Bhattacharya, A. Low temperature stress and plant-water relationship: A review. In Physiological Processes in Plants Under Low Temperature Stress; Springer: Singapore, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Sharma, A.; Gupta, A.; Ramakrishnan, M.; Van Ha, C.; Zheng, B.; Bhardwaj, M.; Tran, L.S.P. Roles of abscisic acid and auxin in plants during drought: A molecular point of view. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2023, 204, 108129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Al-Janabia, A.M.I.; Al-Dulaimy, A.F.; Sekhi, Y.S.; Almohammedi, O.H.; Al-Taey, D.K. Effect of salt stress on growth and yield of plants: A Review. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2024, 1371, 042028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. El Bey, N.; Maazoun, A.; Nahdi, O.; Krima, N.B.; Aounallah, M.K. Water stress indicators in citrus, olive and apple trees: A review. J. Appl. Hortic. 2024, 26, 3–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Aslam, A.; Mahmood, A.; Ur-Rehman, H.; Li, C.; Liang, X.; Shao, J.; Negm, S.; Moustafa, M.; Aamer, M.; Hassan, M.U. Plant adaptation to flooding stress under changing climate conditions: Ongoing breakthroughs and future challenges. Plants 2023, 12, 3824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Gupta, S.K.; Goyal, M.R.; Singh, A. (Eds.) Engineering Practices for Management of Soil Salinity: Agricultural, Physiological, and Adaptive Approaches, 1st ed.; Apple Academic Press: Waretown, NJ, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Dhurve, L.; Mathew, D.; Kumar, A.; Joseph, A.V.; Mehara, H. Rootstocks: Importance in fruit crop improvement. Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change 2023, 13, 4479–4490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Zhao, C.; Liu, B.; Piao, S.; Wang, X.; Lobell, D.B.; Huang, Y.; Huang, M.T.; Yao, Y.T.; Bassu, S.; Ciais, P.; et al. Temperature increase reduces global yields of major crops in four independent estimates. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 9326–9331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Abasi, F.; Hussain, S.; Raja, N.I. Orchards management under changing climate. In Challenges and Solutions of Climate Impact on Agriculture; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2025; pp. 145–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Ramírez-Cuesta, J.M.; Consoli, S.; Longo, D.; Longo-Minnolo, G.; Intrigliolo, D.S.; Vanella, D. Influence of short-term surface temperature dynamics on tree orchards energy balance fluxes. Precision Agric. 2022, 23, 1394–1412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Szymańska, R.; Ślesak, I.; Orzechowska, A.; Kruk, J. Physiological and biochemical responses to high light and temperature stress in plants. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2017, 139, 165–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Bacelar, E.; Pinto, T.; Anjos, R.; Morais, M.C.; Oliveira, I.; Vilela, A.; Cosme, F. Impacts of climate change and mitigation strategies for some abiotic and biotic constraints influencing fruit growth and quality. Plants 2024, 13, 1942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Kaya, Ç. Vulnerability of fruit cultivation to climate change and suggested solutions: Modern biotechnological approaches (CRISPR/Cas9 and RNAi). Anadolu 2025, 35, 131–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Owino, V.; Kumwenda, C.; Ekesa, B.; Parker, M.E.; Ewoldt, L.; Roos, N.; Tome, D. The impact of climate change on food systems, diet quality, nutrition, and health outcomes: A narrative review. Front. Clim. 2022, 4, 941842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Bhardwaj, R.L.; Parashar, A.; Parewa, H.P.; Vyas, L. An alarming decline in the nutritional quality of foods: The biggest challenge for future generations’ health. Foods 2024, 13, 877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Tittonell, P.; El Mujtar, V.; Felix, G.; Kebede, Y.; Laborda, L.; Luján Soto, R.; de Vente, J. Regenerative agriculture—Agroecology without politics? Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2022, 6, 844261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Deori, M.; Manasa, S.; Kakade, P.B.; Saikanth, D.R.K.; Ranganna, G.; Deshmukh, R.N.; Prasad, L. A comprehensive review on the impact of climate change on fruit yield and quality in modern horticultural practices. Int. J. Plant Soil Sci. 2024, 36, 177–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Espley, R.V.; Jaakola, L. The role of environmental stress in fruit pigmentation. Plant Cell Environ. 2023, 46, 3663–3679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Ameen, M.; Mahmood, A.; Ahmad, M.; Mansoor Javaid, M.; Nadeem, M.A.; Asif, M.; Balal, R.M.; Khan, B.A. Impacts of Climate Change on Fruit Physiology and Quality. In Climate-Resilient Agriculture; Hasanuzzaman, M., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; Volume 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Kishor, P.K.; Guddimalli, R.; Kulkarni, J.; Singam, P.; Somanaboina, A.K.; Nandimandalam, T.; Penna, S. Impact of climate change on altered fruit quality with organoleptic, health benefit, and nutritional attributes. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2023, 71, 17510–17527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Jiang, W.; Li, N.; Zhang, D.; Meinhardt, L.; Cao, B.; Li, Y.; Song, L. Elevated temperature and drought stress significantly affect fruit quality and activity of anthocyanin-related enzymes in jujube (Ziziphus jujuba Mill. cv.‘Lingwuchangzao’). PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0241491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Duan, Y.; Liu, S.; Zhu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Yan, F.; Liu, Z.; Liu, M. The influences of soil and meteorological factors on the growth and fruit quality of Chinese Jujube (Ziziphus jujuba Mill.). Plants 2023, 12, 4107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Toumi, I.; Zarrouk, O.; Ghrab, M.; Nagaz, K. Improving peach fruit quality traits using deficit irrigation strategies in southern Tunisia arid area. Plants 2022, 11, 1656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Rao, M.J.; Feng, B.; Ahmad, M.H.; Tahir ul Qamar, M.; Aslam, M.Z.; Khalid, M.F.; Wang, L. LC-MS/MS-based metabolomics approach identified novel antioxidant flavonoids associated with drought tolerance in citrus species. Front. Plant Sci. 2023, 14, 1150854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Kim, M.; Kang, S.B.; Yun, S.K.; Kim, S.S.; Joa, J.; Park, Y. Influence of excessively high temperatures on the fruit growth and physicochemical properties of Shiranuhi mandarin in plastic-film greenhouse cultivation. Plants 2021, 10, 1525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Pechan, P.M.; Bohle, H.; Obster, F. Reducing vulnerability of fruit orchards to climate change. Agric. Syst. 2023, 210, 103713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Calatrava, J.; Martinez-Granados, D.; Zornoza, R.; Gonzalez-Rosado, M.; Lozano-Garcia, B.; Vega-Zamora, M.; Gómez-López, M.D. Barriers and opportunities for the implementation of sustainable farming practices in Mediterranean tree orchards. Agronomy 2021, 11, 821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Acevedo, M.; Pixley, K.; Zinyengere, N.; Meng, S.; Tufan, H.; Cichy, K.; Porciello, J. A scoping review of adoption of climate-resilient crops by small-scale producers in low-and middle-income countries. Nat. Plants 2020, 6, 1231–1241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Hassan, K.S.; Islam, M.N.; Billah, M.M.; Islam, M.M.; Jahan, M.S. Effective extension and access to education drive optimal adoption of climate-smart agriculture interventions in affected tidal floodplains: A case study. Heliyon 2024, 10, e31616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Tabe-Ojong, M.P.J.; Lokossou, J.C.; Gebrekidan, B.; Affognon, H.D. Adoption of climate-resilient groundnut varieties increases agricultural production, consumption, and smallholder commercialization in West Africa. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 5175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Wens, M.L.; Van Loon, A.F.; Veldkamp, T.I.; Aerts, J.C. Education, financial aid, and awareness can reduce smallholder farmers’ vulnerability to drought under climate change. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2022, 22, 1201–1232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Gashure, S. Adaptation strategies of smallholder farmers to climate variability and change in Konso, Ethiopia. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 19203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agronomy 16 00665 g001
Figure 1. Climate stressors and adaptation strategies in orchards.
Figure 1. Climate stressors and adaptation strategies in orchards.
Agronomy 16 00665 g001
Agronomy 16 00665 g002
Figure 2. Strategies and technologies for maintaining fruit quality.
Figure 2. Strategies and technologies for maintaining fruit quality.
Agronomy 16 00665 g002
Agronomy 16 00665 g003
Figure 3. An integrated approach for orchard sustainability.
Figure 3. An integrated approach for orchard sustainability.
Agronomy 16 00665 g003
Table 2. Vulnerability of selected fruit tree species to major climate-related abiotic stresses.
Table 2. Vulnerability of selected fruit tree species to major climate-related abiotic stresses.
Fruit Tree SpeciesMajor Climate-Related Abiotic StressCultivar/Rootstock DependenceEffects on Yield and Fruit QualityReferences
Apple (Malus domestica)Heat stress, drought, water deficitHigh variability among cultivars; dwarfing rootstocks (particularly M.9, B.9, and the Geneva series), exhibit enhanced resilience.Reduced fruit size, sunburn, lower firmness and soluble solids[10,49]
Peach (Prunus persica)Drought, heat stress, waterloggingRootstock and cultivar strongly influence stress response; tolerant cultivars/rootstocks show better water use efficiency and physiological balanceDrought often decreases fruit weight and yield but may increase sugar content; waterlogging and heat stress can reduce quality and cause leaf/fruit drop[50,51,52]
Pear (Pyrus communis)Drought, high root zone/heat stress, water deficitTolerance varies among cultivars; drought tolerant rootstocks show better physiological performance under water deficitWater deficit typically reduces vegetative growth and fruit development, leading to lower yield; severe root zone heat can cause root/shoot damage, limiting productivity[53,54]
Plum (Prunus domestica)Drought, heat stress, water variabilityTolerance varies among cultivars; drought-tolerant rootstocks can maintain performance under moderate stressWater stress often leads to reduced yield and fruit weight, though some dwarfing rootstock combinations can maintain yield and quality under moderate stress[55,56,57]
Table 3. The effects of heat stress on plants—synthesis by categories.
Table 3. The effects of heat stress on plants—synthesis by categories.
Category of EffectsEffects of Heat StressReferences
MorphologicalReduced flowering, premature fruit fall, fruit deformation, growth retardation, cold-affected lesions, and tissues.[26,30]
PhysiologicalPerturbing the photosynthesis and respiration, increasing sweating, disrupting pollination, changing cold and dormant requirements.[26,27,58]
Molecular/CellularDenaturation of proteins, increased fluidity of membranes, damage to cell integrity, formation of ice crystals at low temperatures. Production of protective proteins, hormonal shifts.[28,31,59]
PhenologicalAlteration of the sequence of phenophases, prolongation, or disruption of the growing season, delays, or advances in the development phases.[27,60,61,62,63,64]
Table 4. The effects of water stress on plants—synthesis by categories.
Table 4. The effects of water stress on plants—synthesis by categories.
AspectCharacteristicsReferences
Physiological responsesClosure of the stomata, reduction in photosynthesis, regulation of water transport, hormonal role (abscisic acid).[36,41,48,58,65]
Hormonal mechanismAbscisic acid regulates the closure of the stomata; interacts with other hormones. It involves secondary messengers (ROS, oxid nitric, Ca2+) and long-term mechanisms (osmolytes, gene expression, programmed cell death).[32,33,66,67]
Structural changesSmaller leaves, reduced stomata density, thicker cell walls; root/wood ratio increased.[29,34,35,36]
Phenological effectsDelayed flowering, reduced fruit binding, premature fall.[37,41,65]
Table 5. The effects of salt stress on fruit species and their adaptation mechanisms.
Table 5. The effects of salt stress on fruit species and their adaptation mechanisms.
CategoryEffects/Mechanisms in Salt Stress ConditionsReferences
Physiological impactReduced water availability, decreased photosynthesis, loss of turgidity, premature senescence, reduced growth.[29,44,70]
Ionic toxicityExcessive accumulation of Na+ and Cl−, disruption of ionic homeostasis, reduced availability of essential nutrients.[42,43,44]
Hormonal responsesIncreased ABA levels, changes in hormone signalling, and gene expression.[42,44]
Structural adaptive mechanismThickening of leaves, protective anatomical changes, adjustment of root structure, and biomass ratio.[29,43,71]
Ionic mechanismsLimiting Na+ accumulation, maintaining a high K+/Na+ ratio, rejection, and secretion of toxic ions (e.g., M. halliana rootstock ‘9-1-6’).[43,71]
Osmotic and biochemical responseActivation of osmotic stress pathways, accumulation of osmolytes, increase of antioxidant enzymes, reduction of H2O2 and protection of membranes.[42,44]
Tolerance factorsInfluenced by species, variety, and rootstock; Tolerant cultivars exhibit ionic regulation mechanisms, and anatomical adaptations.[29,43,71]
Management agronomicManagement of mineral nutrition, use of growth-promoting bacteria, phyto-hormones, organic acids, and adjustment of culture technologies.[42,44,70]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Cosmulescu, S. Climate Change and Abiotic Stress in Fruit Trees: Mechanisms and Adaptive Responses. Agronomy 2026, 16, 665. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy16060665

AMA Style

Cosmulescu S. Climate Change and Abiotic Stress in Fruit Trees: Mechanisms and Adaptive Responses. Agronomy. 2026; 16(6):665. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy16060665

Chicago/Turabian Style

Cosmulescu, Sina. 2026. "Climate Change and Abiotic Stress in Fruit Trees: Mechanisms and Adaptive Responses" Agronomy 16, no. 6: 665. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy16060665

APA Style

Cosmulescu, S. (2026). Climate Change and Abiotic Stress in Fruit Trees: Mechanisms and Adaptive Responses. Agronomy, 16(6), 665. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy16060665

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop