Next Article in Journal
Interaction of Preventive, Cultural, and Direct Methods for Integrated Weed Management in Winter Wheat
Next Article in Special Issue
Vineyard Variability Analysis through UAV-Based Vigour Maps to Assess Climate Change Impacts
Previous Article in Journal
The Confirmation of a Ploidy Periclinal Chimera of the Meiwa Kumquat (Fortunella crassifolia Swingle) Induced by Colchicine Treatment to Nucellar Embryos and Its Morphological Characteristics
Previous Article in Special Issue
An Update on the Impact of Climate Change in Viticulture and Potential Adaptations
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 9
Issue 9
10.3390/agronomy9090563
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 thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Genetical, Morphological and Physicochemical Characterization of the Autochthonous Cultivar ‘Uva Rey’ (Vitis vinifera L.)

by
Pau Sancho-Galán
,
Antonio Amores-Arrocha
*,
Víctor Palacios
and
Ana Jiménez-Cantizano
Department of Chemical Engineering and Food Technology, Vegetal Production Area, University of Cadiz, Agrifood Campus of International Excellence (ceiA3), IVAGRO, P.O. Box 40, 11510 Puerto Real, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2019, 9(9), 563; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9090563
Submission received: 31 July 2019 / Revised: 11 September 2019 / Accepted: 12 September 2019 / Published: 18 September 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Viticulture and Winemaking under Climate Change)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
’Uva Rey’ is considered an Andalusian (Spain) ancient autochthonous cultivar with hard white grapes used for the production of wine and raisins and also for raw consumption. Currently, this cultivar is not included in the official register of Spanish grapevine varieties and there is neither a description nor a characterization that could facilitate its insertion in this register. In order to study this genetic resource, a genetic and morphological characterization of ’Uva Rey’ has been carried out in comparison with ’Palomino Fino’, the main cultivar in Andalusia (Spain). Additionally, grape must physicochemical characterization and grape berry texture profile analyses were performed. Genetically, ’Uva Rey’ was synonymous with the cultivar ’De Rey’. ’Uva Rey’ grape must physicochemical results showed a lower sugar concentration and a higher malic acid content compared to ’Palomino Fino’ must, while the analysis of the grape berry texture profile proved to be more consistent and cohesive. These results can be attributed to the longer phenological cycle presented by ’Uva Rey’. All these facts could lead to consideration of ’Uva Rey’ as a cultivar for the production of white wines in warm climate regions.

1. Introduction

Grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) is one of the most ancient and important fruit crops worldwide [1]. Around 12,500 cultivars have been registered in the Vitis International Variety Catalogue [2]. However, based on their DNA profiles, the number of grapevine varieties is estimated at around 5000, many of them closely related [3,4].
Nowadays, 7.4 mHa of the Earth area is covered by grapevines, with Spain being the first country in terms of cultivated land extension. Spanish vineyards cover thousands of hectares and produce approximately 44.4 mHL of wine per year [5]. For that reason, viticulture could be considered as one of the most important socioeconomic sectors in the Spanish agro-industrial network. Grapevine cultivation throughout the country, and the significance over time, have led to a grapevine heritage of great magnitude. Spain’s varietal heritage had continuously increased from its origin until the arrival of diseases and pathogens from America (mildews and Phylloxera) [6]. According to García de los Salmones [7], the first Phylloxera outbreak in Spain was detected in Malaga (Andalusia) in 1876. From that moment on, this pathogen spread throughout the whole country and destroyed more than 1,000,000 ha, which caused serious damages to the Spanish native germplasm [8]. In order to preserve the maximum number of Vitis vinifera genetic diversity, a number of germplasm banks were created. ’El Encín’, the most important germplasm bank in Spain, was established in 1914 in Alcalá de Henares (Madrid, Spain) [9]. Later on, the currently germplasm bank known as ’Rancho de la Merced’, was created in 1940, with the first collection of grapevines in Jerez de la Frontera (Andalusia, Spain) [10].
From then on, the prospection, collection and conservation of different grapevine cultivars as a genetic resource have been the subject of numerous studies that intend to preserve those cultivars considered as autochthonous [7,8,9,10,11]. For the identification of that genetic material, molecular characterization using Simple Sequence Repeats (SSR) markers [12], ampelographic [4] and physicochemical [13] techniques have been used. Grapevine genotypes are highly heterozygous and the relevance of near-homozygous lines was not considered until recently due to the need to generate high quality reference sequences [14], and has been maintained in cultivated plants through vegetative propagation [15].
Modern wine industries only use a limited number of Vitis vinifera cultivars [16]. In Spain, by virtue of the Spanish Royal-Decree-Law (RD) 1338/2018, only those varieties that have been properly registered can be planted [17]. However, there is a current trend towards the production of genuine and characteristic wines [18]. Currently, the changing climate is expected to impose new challenges to varietal selection. Since grapevine varietal suitability is strongly linked to regional environmental conditions, growers are prone to select varieties that are best suited to these changing agroclimatic factors [19].
As a result, autochthonous cultivars, such as ’Uva Rey’ would require to be identified and characterized, since they were already used for wine making in the 19th century in southwestern regions in Andalusia [20]. Roxas Clemente [21] included this variety in Tribe III of the First Section and indicated that it was cultivated under different denominations in different districts within Cadiz and Seville provinces in Andalusia. Regarding its grapes, this author described them as very large, round, somewhat golden and with a long cycle. With regards to its winemaking potential, Abela [22] confirmed that this grape variety was able to produce fine wines with plenty of mouth-feel and acidity.
The main objective of this research work is to complete the characterization of the cultivar ’Uva Rey’ as currently kept in a specific vineyard located in Andalusia (Spain). For this purpose, the genetic identification, the ampelographic characterization, the grape berry texture profile analysis and the physicochemical characterization of the grape musts have been carried out.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plant Material and Experimental Design

A total of 10 plants of ’Uva Rey’ from a vineyard in the town of Chiclana de la Frontera municipal district (Andalusia, Spain) were selected (lat. 36°27′30.6″ N; long. 6°05′46.2″ W; 69 m above sea level). In addition, ’Palomino Fino’ was used as a reference cultivar for all the studies, as it is the most widespread variety in the southwest of Andalusia [23]. Both cultivars were 15 years old and had been grown with the same vine spacing (2.30 × 1.15 m) as well as trained according to the ’Vara y Pulgar’ (stick and thumb) system. Additional Figures S1a–c and S2a–c show the temperature, humidity, radiation and rainfall during the period from July (veraison) to September (harvest) for 2016 and 2017 respectively. For the genetic characterization of the cultivar, four varieties: ’Cabernet Sauvignon’, ’Chardonnay’, ’Muscat a Petits Grains Blancs’ and ’Pinot Noir’ were included as reference to compare their genotype databases and confirm the new cultivar accession identity (Table 1).
The morphological description and the texture profile analysis (TPA) of the berries as well as the grape must characterization were carried out for ’Uva Rey’ and ’Palomino Fino’ cultivars from the same vineyard and in two consecutive years (2016 and 2017) in order to study the vintage effect on the different cultivars. Both cultivars were grown at the same vineyard and under the same agroclimatic conditions, the cultural practices and were harvested in the same period (first week in September). In order to minimize variability due to grapevine sampling, Santesteban et al. [24] criterion was applied. For this purpose, the trunk cross sectional area (TCSA) of a total of 50 vines were measured at 30 cm height using a digital Verner calliper Maurer 93,110 (Padova, Italy). Of all the vines measured, 10 were selected and marked as their TCSA value was the closest to the TCSA average ± 10%.

2.2. Microsatellite Analysis

Two young fresh leaves from each accession were collected at the vineyard and kept at –80 °C until analysis. DNA extraction was carried out using a DNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). Varietal identification was performed using 22 nuclear microsatellite loci. The first set of 20 microsatellite loci located in the 19 linkage groups of grapevine genome (VMC1B11 (GeneBank, Accession Number BV681754), VMC4F3-1 [25]; VVMD5, VVMD7, VVMD21, VVMD24, VVMD25, VVMD27, VVMD28, VVMD28, VVMD32 [26,27]; VVS2 [28]; VV1B01, VVIH54, VVIN16, VVIN73, VVIP31, VVIP 60, VVIQ52, VVIV37, VVIV67 [29]) were analysed as described by Vargas et al. [30], using two multiplex Polimerase Chain Reactions (PCR). An additional set of two microsatellite loci (VrZAG62 and VRZAG79) [31] were analyed following the conditions described in detail by Jiménez-Cantizano et al. [32], in order to complete the list of loci authorized by the International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV). PCR amplifications were performed using a 9700 thermocycler and the amplified products were separated by capillary electrophoresis using an automated sequencer ABI Prism 3130 (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA). Fluorescent labelled fragments (6-FAM, VIC, PET and NED) were detected and sized using GeneMapper v. 3.7 and fragment lengths were assessed with the help of internal standards GeneScan-500 LIZTM (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA). The microsatellite genotypes obtained after the analysis were compared with the genetic profiles provided by Lacombe et al. [33] and the data contained in the microsatellite databases Vitis International Variety Catalogue [34], Rancho de la Merced Germplasm Bank genotype database [35] and the Vitis Germplasm Bank at Finca el Encín [25,36,37]. The SSR profiles obtained were compared using the microsatellite toolkit v. 9.0 software [38].

2.3. Morphological Characterization

For the morphological analysis, Benito et al. [39] criterion was followed. A total of 10 young shoots, young and mature leaves, flowers, bunches and berries from each accession were analysed using 34 descriptors from the Organisation Internationale de la Vigne et du Vin descriptor list [40]. Each accession from two different vintages was described by five ampelographers and the modal value was selected as the final description.

2.4. Physicochemical Characterization of Grape Berries and Musts

Grapevine berries (n = 50) were evaluated using a texture-meter (Lloyd Material Testing Machine, West Sussex, UK) fitted with a 2 mm cylindrical flat probe at 1 mm/s. The results regarding consistency, firmness, work of penetration (WoP) and cohesiveness were calculated as the average values for 50 berries.
Once harvested, 5 kg of berries of each cultivar (500 g from each vine) were destemmed, grounded and pressed. pH determinations were carried out using a Crisson-2001 digital pH-meter (Loveland, CO, USA). Sugar concentration (°Bé) was determined using a calibrated Dujardin-Salleron hydrometer (Laboratories Dujardin-Salleron, Arcueil Cedex, France). Total acidity (TA) was calculated according to the official methods of analysis [41]. Ripening index (RI) was calculated following the equation proposed by Hidalgo [42]. Yeast assimilable nitrogen (YAN) was determined according to Aerny [43]. Citric, tartaric and malic acids were assessed following the methodology proposed by Sancho-Galán et al [44]. Organic acids concentrations were obtained by ionic chromatography using a Metrohm 930 compact IC Flex ionic chromatographer equipped with a conductimetric detector on a Metrosep Organic Acids column-250/7.8 (Herisau, Switzerland). Organic acids separation was performed using as eluent H2SO4 0.4 mM in a 12% acetone solution with an isocratic 0.4 mL/min flow. All the physicochemical measurements were destructive analysis and were conducted in triplicate to ensure statistical significance.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

Means and standard deviations were calculated using Microsoft Office Excel 2016 for Windows 10. Significant differences were evaluated by two-way ANOVA and Bonferroni’s multiple range (BSD) test; p < 0.05 was considered significant (GraphPad Prism version 6.01 for Windows, GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Microsatellite Analysis

The allele profiles obtained for ’Uva Rey’ and the five reference cultivars at 22 microsatellite loci are shown in Table 1. The genotype obtained for ’Uva Rey’ was compared with the Rancho de la Merced Germplasm Bank genotype database [14,35], the Vitis Germplasm Bank at the Finca El Encín [30,36,37] and European databases [33,34]. ’Uva Rey’ showed the same genotype as ’Mantuo de Pilas’ kept in Rancho de la Merced Germplasm Bank at 22 SSR loci and ’De Rey’ at Finca El Encín at 20 SSR loci.

3.2. Morphological Characterization

Modal values for the ampelographic descriptions of ’Uva Rey’ cultivar corresponding to years 2016 and 2017 are shown in Table 2 compared to the reference cultivar ’Palomino Fino’.
A total of 34 descriptors were studied, eight of which correspond to shoots, 17 to leaves, one to inflorescence, four to bunches and four to berries. In regard to the density of prostate hairs between the main veins on lower side of blade (OIV 053), ’Uva Rey’ showed very high density while ’Palomino Fino’ prostate hair density was medium. Also, the density of erect hairs on the main veins on the lower side of tthe blade (OIV 087) was high for ’Uva Rey’ and non-existent or low for ’Palomino Fino’ cultivar. Finally, grape berries were green yellow in both cases (OIV 225), but their shapes differed (OIV 223), being ovoid for ’Uva Rey’ and globose for ’Palomino Fino’.

3.3. Physicochemical Characterization of Grapes and Musts

’Uva Rey’ and ’Palomino Fino’ grape must physicochemical characterizations and berry texture profile analyses (TPA) from two vintages (2016 and 2017) are displayed in Table 3.
The main differences between ’Uva Rey’ and ’Palomino Fino’ cultivars grape musts were related to the physicochemical parameters sugar (°Bé), YAN (mg/L), malic acid (g/L) and TPA consistency (Nmm) and cohesiveness. The pH values obtained for both cultivars as well as for the two vintages were all similar. However, both cultivars exhibited very similar acidity in both vintages, with slightly higher values in 2017 (ANOVA p-adjust < 0.05). Regarding grape sugar content, it was significantly higher in ’Palomino Fino’ grapes than in ’Uva Rey’ from the two vintages studied (ANOVA p-adjust < 0.05). Again, greater sugar values (°Bé) as well as total acidity were measured in 2016 grapes from both cultivars (Table 3). Consequently, Ripening Index (RI) values obtained were significantly greater in ’Palomino Fino’ than in ’Uva Rey’. However, very different content levels in both cultivars were obtained for YAN, where ’Palomino Fino’ showed significantly higher concentrations of YAN than ’Uva Rey’ (ANOVA p-adjust < 0.05), which yielded the same content level in the two vintages under study (Table 3).
Regarding organic acids content, it could be observed that tartaric acid represents over 75% of their total acidity. It can be seen that this particular acid content follows the same trend as the total acidity of the grapes. With respect to citric acid concentration, it was significantly lower in ’Palomino Fino’ than in ’Uva Rey’ cultivar and did not exceed 150 mg/L in either case. However, ’Uva Rey’ showed a significantly higher content of malic acid than ’Palomino Fino’ in both of the vintages studied (ANOVA p-adjust < 0.05).
With respect to the results obtained from the TPA, ’Uva Rey’ obtained higher values for consistency, WoP and cohesiveness than ’Palomino Fino’ in both vintages (ANOVA p-adjust < 0.05). However, no differences were observed between cultivars or vintages with regards to grape berry hardness.

4. Discussion

To identify grapevine cultivars, nuclear microsatellite markers are the most widely used tool, as was demonstrated by the European projects GENRES 081 and GrapeGen06. Regardless of the high degree of heterozygosity existing in the grapevine, the genotype with six microsatellite loci (VVMD5, VVMD7, VVMD27, VVS2, VrZAG62 and VrZAG79) is enough to establish the identity of a variety [6], with the exception of the peculiar case of closely related varieties [35] which requires analysis of more loci. For this reason, as a result of the GrapeGen06 project, an international consensus was established to increase the number of microsatellite loci to 20, located in different binding groups for correct identification. In this study, the analysis was extended to 22 microsatellite loci. It is very important to use the same microsatellite loci in different studies in order to be able to compare genotypes later. The identification of ’Uva Rey’ genotype allowed us to confirm the synonyms of this cultivar with both ’De Rey’ and ’Mantúo de Pilas’, which have already been registered in the Vitis International Variety Catalogue (VIVC) at seven loci SSR [34]. The genetic profile for 15 additional loci is presented in this study and the synonymy between ’De Rey’ and ’Uva Rey’ is confirmed for the first time with the analysis at 22 microsatellite loci. Along with the cultivar genetic identification and, according to the recommendation for the adequate characterisation of Vitis genetic material, an ampelographic description was carried out [45]. Such morphological description has been the method previously used by different countries to have a particular cultivar included in the official lists [45]. The phenotype obtained for the cultivar ’Uva Rey’ showed some differences with ’Mantuo de Pilas’ as described by García de Luján et al. [46]. Some differences were found in OIV 007, OIV 008, OIV 051, OIV 053, OIV 070, OIV 074, OIV 075, OIV 087, OIV 202 and OIV 221 descriptors. It is worth mentioning, the differences in erect hairs density on main veins on lower side of blade in mature leaves (OIV 087). ’Uva Rey’ showed a very high density unlike ’Mantuo de Pilas’ with a very low one. Similar phenotypic differences have been found between other cultivars such as ’Garnacha’ and ’Garnacha Peluda’ [47], both considered as somatic variants.
Due to the high temperatures associated to the current global warming, the period during which the minimal temperatures required for the physiological activities of vines is reached is longer than it used to be, and hence, there is an increment in metabolic rates that have an impact on metabolite accumulation [48,49]. In the last 10–30 years, some major changes have been observed in grape development and ripening patterns, such as premature budbreak, flowering and fruit maturity due to agroclimatic changes [50]
The differences between the two cultivars with regards to pH and total acidity can be attributed to climate variations between the two years studied, as such differences can be found in both cultivars (Figures S1 and S2). RI values confirm the above-mentioned differences between cultivars (ANOVA p-adjust < 0.05), with significant differences between both cultivars regardless of the vintage analysed. The variations of these parameters associated to grape ripening processes may be related with each cultivar’s phenological stages. ’Uva Rey’ is, unlike ’Palomino Fino’ a long cycle cultivar [51]. For this reason, grape ripening stages are not reached at the same time.
Organic acids content in each cultivar could be due to their phenological cycle differences [51]. With regard to tartaric acid content, the values remained similar except for ’Palomino Fino’ cultivar in the 2016 year. During the grape ripening process, the production of malic acid decreases [52] since this carboxylic acid is also used by the plant at this stage for energy production [53]. In this way, the different malic acid content levels in each cultivar could be explained by their aforementioned asynchronous phenological cycles. Such difference in malic acid content levels could be relevant to prospective winemaking process, where malolactic fermentation (MLF) could result in wines with a greater microbiological stability and sensory complexity [54]. Some authors argue that higher weather temperatures due to global warming may lead to grape musts with a higher pH, which in turn may promote oxidation reactions [50,55]. In this sense, grapevine cultivars with similar characteristics to those presented by ’Mantúo de Pilas’ could lead to the production of wines through oxidative ageing.
The YAN values that have been observed in ’Palomino Fino’ musts were higher than those observed in ’Uva Rey’ for both vintages. Such differences between the two cultivars may be related to the variations observed in their ripening processes, since YAN content increases in grape berries when ripening [56]. In any case, YAN values remained at a sufficient level for a proper alcoholic fermentation (AF) [57]. Yeast assimilable nitrogen (YAN) is a fundamental element for the correct AF of grape musts; since nitrogen is essential for the completion of some yeasts, its presence is compulsory for yeasts to develop in normal conditions during this biological process [58].
According to the TPA, the two vintages of ’Uva Rey’ in the study had a higher consistency, hardness, WoP and cohesiveness. It should be noted that cohesiveness depends on the strength of the pulp internal bonds of the grape berries. This parameter is highly related to the OIV 235 descriptor [40], which is employed for the sensory evaluation of grapes during their ripening process. The results obtained from the TPA could be explained by the lack of synchrony between both cultivars phenological cycles. ’Uva Rey’ berries, with a longer cycle, were less ripe and therefore presented a greater turgidity at the time of analysis. Such superior berry turgidity plus its higher consistency and WoP could contribute to protect grape berries from dehydration under Andalusian warm weather conditions (SW Spain). When these results are compared to those obtained by Giacosa et al. [59], it can be observed that ’Palomino Fino’ presents similar cohesiveness to ’Perle von Csaba’ cultivar (Hungarian white vinification grape). Nonetheless, ’Uva Rey’ showed a higher degree of similarity with the cultivar ’Sultanina’ (a Turkish white table grape). In view of its grape berry TPA, ’Uva Rey’ could be considered as a cultivar with a greater resistance than ’Palomino Fino’, mainly because of its greater pulp cohesiveness and consistency. These results might be influenced by the phenological cycle differences observed between the two cultivars studied, where the higher values correspond to less ripe berries. In this sense, these phenotypical traits could increase the cultivar’s resistance to drought and to high temperatures, which would make it a more appropriate cultivar for warm dry areas and for global warming conditions.

5. Conclusions

Microsatellite analysis confirmed that ’Uva Rey’ is a synonym of ’De Rey’ cultivar and a somatic variant of ’Mantuo de Pilas’. With respect to the physicochemical grape must characterization, major differences were found in YAN and malic acid concentration. The TPA showed that ’Uva Rey’ grape berries are more cohesive and consistent than ’Palomino Fino’ ones. In this sense, ’Uva Rey’ can be stated as an autochthonous grapevine cultivar with a long phenological cycle. This study recognizes Uva Rey as a somatic variant of ’Mantuo de Pilas’ and as such, supports any actions towards its recovery. According to the results obtained from the different analysis that have been completed on ’Uva Rey’ grape berries and musts from two consecutive vintages, this autochthonous cultivar should be further studied and included in the Spanish official register to allow is cultivation.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4395/9/9/563/s1, Figure S1. (a) Temperature (°C) (Tª_max, Tª_min, Tª_avg), (b) humidity (%) (H_max, H_min, H_avg) and (c) radiation (W/m2) and rainfall (L/m2) between July and September 2016. Figure S2. (a) Temperature (°C) (Tª_max, Tª_min, Tª_avg), (b) humidity (%) (H_max, H_min, H_avg) and (c) radiation (W/m2) and rainfall (L/m2) between July and September 2017.

Author Contributions

P.S.-G., A.A.-A., V.P. and A.J.-C. conceived and designed the experiments. P.S.-G. and A.J.-C. performed the experiments. All authors analysed the data and wrote the paper.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

The authors want to thank the private winery from Chiclana de la Frontera (Cádiz) for grape support.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Dzhambazova, T.; Tsvetkov, I.; Atanassov, I.; Rusanos, K.; Martínez Zapater, J.M.; Atanassov, A.; Hvarleva, T. Genetic diversity in native Bulgarian grapevine germplasm (Vitis vinifera L.) based on nuclear and chloroplast microsatellite polymorphisms. Vitis 2009, 48, 115–121. [Google Scholar]
  2. Marsal, G.; Mateo-Sanz, J.M.; Canals, J.M.; Zamora, F.; Fort, F. SSR analysis of 338 Accessions Planted in Penedes (Spain) Reveals 28 Unreported Molecular Profiles of Vitis vinifera L. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 2016, 67, 466–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Santana, J.C.; Heuertz, M.; Arranz, C.; Rubio, J.A.; Martínez-Zapater, J.M.; Hidalgo, E. Genetic structure, origins, and relationships of grapevine cultivars from the Castilian Plateau of Spain. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 2010, 61, 214–224. [Google Scholar]
  4. Jiménez-Cantizano, A.; Amores-Arrocha, A.; Gutiérrez-Escobar, R.; Palacios, V. Identification and relationship of the autochthonous ’Romé’ and ’Rome Tinto’ grapevine cultivars. Span. J. Agric. Res. 2018, 16, e07SC02. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV). State of the Vitiviniculture World Market: State of the Sector in 2018. Available online: http://www.oiv.int/public/medias/6679/en-oiv-state-of-the-vitiviniculture-world-market-2019.pdf (accessed on 9 July 2019).
  6. This, P.; Lacombe, T.; Thomas, M.R. Historical origins and genetic diversity of wine grapes. Trends Genet. 2006, 22, 511–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. De los Salmones, G. La Invasión Filoxérica en España y las Cepas Americanas, 1st ed.; Tipolitografía de Luis Tasso: Barcelona, Spain, 1893. [Google Scholar]
  8. Buhner-Zaharieva, T.; Moussaoui, S.; Lorente, M.; Andreu, J.; Núñez, R.; Ortiz, J.M.; Gorgocena, Y. Preservation and molecular characterization of ancient varieties in Spanish grapevine germplasm collections. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 2010, 61, 557–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Balda, P.; Ibáñez, J.; Sancha, C.; Martínez de Toda, F. Characterization and identification of minority red grape varieties recovered in Rioja, Spain. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 2014, 65, 148–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. García de Luján, A.; Lara, M. La Colección de Vides del Rancho de la Merced, 1st ed.; Consejería de Agricultura y Pesca, Junta de Andalucía: Seville, Spain, 1997; pp. 7–13. [Google Scholar]
  11. Fernández-González, M.; Mena, A.; Izquierdo, P.; Martínez, J. Genetic characterization of grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) cultivars from Castilla la Mancha (Spain) using microsatellite markers. Vitis 2007, 46, 126–130. [Google Scholar]
  12. González-Andrés, F.; Martín, J.P.; Yuste, J.; Rubio, J.A.; Arranz, C.; Ortiz, J.M. Identification and molecular biodiversity of autochthonous grapevine cultivars in the “Comarca del Bierzo”, León, Spain. Vitis 2007, 46, 71–76. [Google Scholar]
  13. Iorizzo, M.; Vicenzo, M.; Testa, B.; Lombardi, S.J.; De Leonardis, A. Physicochemical and sensory characteristics of red wines from the rediscovered autochthonous Tintilia grapevine grown in the Molise región (Italy). Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2014, 238, 1037–1048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Jaillon, O.; Aury, J.M.; Noel, B.; Policriti, A.; Clepet, C.; Casagrande, A.; Choisne, N.; Aubourg, S.; Vitulo, N.; Jubin, C.; et al. The grapevine genome sequence suggests ancestral hexaploidization in major angiosperm phyla. Nature 2007, 449, 463–468. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  15. Martínez-Zapater, J.M.; Carmona, M.J.; Díaz-Riquelme, J.; Fernández, L.; Lijavetzky, D. Grapevine genetics after the genome sequence: Challenges and limitations. Aust. J. Grape Wine R. 2010, 16, 33–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Wolkovich, E.M.; García de Cortázar-Atauri, I.; Morales-Castilla, I.; Nicholas, K.A.; Lacombe, T. From Pinot to Xinomavro in the world’s future wine-growing regions. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2018, 8, 29–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Real Decreto 1338/2018 Boletín Oficial del Estado (BOE). Available online: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/rd/2018/10/29/1338 (accessed on 4 July 2019).
  18. Intrigliolo, D.S.; Llacer, A.; Revert, J.; Esteve, M.D.; Climent, M.D.; Palau, D.; Gómez, I. Early defoliation reduces cluster compactness and improves grape composition in Mandó, an autochthonous cultivar of Vitis vinifera from southeastern Spain. Sci. Hortic. 2014, 167, 71–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Fraga, H.; Santos, J.A.; Malheiro, A.C.; Oliveira, A.A.; Moutinho-Pereira, J.; Jones, G.V. Climatic suitability of Portuguese grapevine varieties and climate change adaptation. Int. J. Climatol. 2016, 36, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Alonso de Herrera, G. Agricultura General, 1st ed.; Editorial Real Sociedad Económica Matritense: Madrid, Spain, 1819. [Google Scholar]
  21. Roxas Clemente, S. Ensayo Sobre las Variedades de vid que Vegetan en Andalucía, 1st ed.; Imprenta de Villapando: Madrid, Spain, 1807; pp. 111–113. [Google Scholar]
  22. Abela y Sainz de Andino, E.J. El Libro del Viticultor, 1st ed.; Editorial Maxtor: Valladolid, Spain, 1805; pp. 256–265. [Google Scholar]
  23. Jiménez-Povedano, M.V.; Cantos-Villar, E.; Jiménez-Hierro, M.J.; Casas, J.A.; Trillo, L.M.; Guimera, S.; Puertas, B. Influence of Soil on the Characteristics of Musts, Wines and Distillates from cv L Palomino fino. In Proceedings of the XII Terroir International Congress, Zaragoza, Spain, 18–22 June 2018. [Google Scholar]
  24. Santesteban, L.G.; Miranda, C.; Royo, J.B. Vegetative Growth, Reproductive Development and Vineyard Balance. In Methodologies and Results in Grapevine Research, 1st ed.; Delrot, S., Medrano, H., Or, E., Bavaresco, L., Grando, S., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2010; pp. 45–56. [Google Scholar]
  25. Di Gaspero, G.; Peterlunger, E.; Testolin, R.; Edwards, K.J.; Cipriani, G. Conservation of microsatellite loci within the genus Vitis. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2000, 101, 301–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Bowers, J.E.; Dangl, G.S.; Vignani, R.; Meredith, C.P. Isolation and characterization of new polymorphic simple sequence repeat loci in grape (Vitis vinifera L.). Genome 1996, 39, 628–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Bowers, J.E.; Dangl, G.S.; Meredith, C.P. Development and characterization of additional microsatellite markers for grape. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 1999, 50, 243–246. [Google Scholar]
  28. Thomas, M.R.; Scott, N.S. Microsatellite repeats in grapevine reveal DNA polymorphisms when analyzed as sequence-tagged sites (STSs). Theor. Appl. Genet. 1993, 86, 985–990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Merdinoglu, S.; Coste, P.; Dumas, V.; Haetty, S.; Butterlin, G.; Greif, C.; Adam-Blondon, A.-F.; Bouquet, A.; Pauquet, J. Genetic analysis of downy mildew resistance derived from Muscadinia rotundifolia. Acta Hortic. 2003, 603, 451–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Vargas, A.M.; Velez, M.D.; de Andrés, M.T.; Laucou, V.; Lacombe, T.; Bourisquot, J.M.; Borrego, J.; Ibáñez, J. Corinto bianco: A seedless mutant of Pedro Ximenes. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 2007, 58, 540–543. [Google Scholar]
  31. Sefc, K.M.; Regner, F.; Tureschek, E.; Glössl, J.; Steinkellner, H. Identification of microsatellite sequences in Vitis riparia and their application for genotyping of different Vitis species. Genome 1999, 42, 367–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Jiménez-Cantizano, A.; García de Lujan, A.; Arroyo-García, R. Molecular characterization of table grape varieties preserved in the Rancho de la Merced Grapevine Germplasm Bank. Vitis 2018, 57, 93–101. [Google Scholar]
  33. Lacombe, T.; Audeguin, L.; Boselli, M.; Bucchetti, B.; Cabello, F.; Chatelet, P.; Crespan, M.; D’onofrio, C.; Eiras-Dias, J.; Ercisli, S.; et al. Grapevine European Catalogue: Towards a comprehensive list. Vitis 2011, 50, 65–68. [Google Scholar]
  34. Vitis International Variety Catalogue. Available online: www.vivc.de (accessed on 13 June 2019).
  35. Jiménez-Cantizano, A. Caracterización Molecular del Banco de Germoplasma de vid del Rancho de la Merced. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidad de Cadiz, Cadiz, Spain, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  36. Ibáñez, J.; Vargas, M.A.; Palancar, M.; Borrego, J.; de Andrés, M.T. Genetic relationships among table-grape varieties. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 2009, 60, 35–47. [Google Scholar]
  37. De Andrés, M.T.; Benito, A.; Pérez-Rivera, G.; Ocete, R.; López, M.A.; Gaforio, L.; Muñoz, G.; Cabello, F.; Martínez-Zapater, J.M.; Arroyo-García, R. Genetic diversity of wild grapevine populations in Spain and its genetic relationships with cultivated grapevines. Mol. Ecol. 2012, 21, 800–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Park, S.D.E. Trypanotolerance in West African Cattle and the Population Genetic Effects of Selection. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  39. Benito, A.; Muñoz-Organero, G.; de Andrés, M.T.; Ocete, R.; García-Muñoz, S.; López, M.A.; Arroyo-García, R.; Cabello, F. Ex situ ampelographical characterisation of wild Vitis vinifera from fifty-one Spanish populations. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 2017, 23, 143–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Organisation Internationale de la Vigne et du Vin (OIV). OIV Descriptor List for Grape Varieties and Vitis Species, 2nd ed.; OIV: Paris, France, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  41. Recuéil des Méthodes Internationales D’analyse des vins et des Moûts; OIV Office International de la Vigne et du Vin: Paris, France, 2014.
  42. Hidalgo, J. Vendimia. Recepción de Uva en la Bodega. Índices de maduración químicos. In Tratado de Enología, 3rd ed.; Hernández-Úbeda, I., Ed.; Editorial Mundi-Prensa: Madrid, Spain, 2018; Volume I, pp. 238–240. [Google Scholar]
  43. Aerny, J. Composés azotés des moûts et des vins. Rev. Suisse Vitic. Arboric. Hortic. 1997, 28, 161–168. [Google Scholar]
  44. Sancho-Galán, P.; Amores-Arrocha, A.; Jiménez-Cantizano, A.; Palacios, V. Use of Multiflora Bee Pollen as a Flor Velum Yeast Growth Activator in Biological Aging Wines. Molecules 2019, 24, 1763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. García-Muñoz, S.; Muñoz-Organero, G.; De Andrés, M.T.; Cabello, F. Ampelography: An old technique with future uses, the case of minor varieties of Vitis vinifera L. from the Balearic Islands. J. Int. Sci. Vigne Vin 2011, 45, 125–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. García de Luján, A.; Puertas, B.; Lara, M. Variedades de vid en Andalucía, 1st ed.; Consejería de Agricultura y Pesca, Junta de Andalucía: Seville, Spain, 1990; pp. 69–76. [Google Scholar]
  47. Carbonell-Bejerano, P.; Royo, C.; Mauri, N.; Ibáñez, J.; Martínez-Zapater, J.M. Somatic Variation and Cultivar Innovaion in Grapevine. In Advances in Grape and Wine Biotechnology, 1st ed.; Morata, A., Loira, I., Eds.; Intechopen: London, UK, 2016; p. 8. [Google Scholar]
  48. Coombe, B. Influence of temperature on composition and quality of grapes. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Grapevine Canopy and Vigor Management, Davis, CA, USA, 11 August 1986. [Google Scholar]
  49. Winkler, A.J.; Cook, J.A.; Kliewer, W.M.; Lider, L.A. General Viticulture; University California Press: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1974. [Google Scholar]
  50. Mira de Orduña, R. Climate change associate effects on grape and wine quality and production. Food Res. Intl. 2010, 43, 1844–1855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Cabello, F.; Ortiz, J.M.; Muñoz, G.; Rodríguez, I.; Benito, A.; Rubio, C.; García, S.; Saiz, R. Variedades de vid en España, 1st ed.; Editorial Agrícola Española, S.A: Madrid, Spain, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  52. Lakso, A.N.; Kliewer, W.M. The influence on malic acid metabolism in grape berries. Temperature responses of net dark CO2 fixation and malic acids pools. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 1978, 29, 145–148. [Google Scholar]
  53. Mullins, M.G.; Bouquet, A.; Williams, L.E. The Biology of the Grapevine, 1st ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2008; pp. 80–146. [Google Scholar]
  54. Palacios, V.; Roldan, A.; Jiménez-Cantizano, A.; Amores-Arrocha, A. Physicochemical and microbiological characterization of the sensory deviation responsable for the origin of the special sherry wines “palo cortado” type. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0208330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Boulton, R.B.; Singleton, V.L.; Bisson, L.F.; Kunkee, R.E. Principles and Practices of Winemaking; Chapman and Hall: New York, NY, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  56. Belle, S.J. The Effect of Nitrogen Fertilisation on the Growth Yield and Juice Composition of Vitis vinifera cv. Cabernet Sauvignon Grapevines. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  57. Ribéreau-Gayon, P.; Dubourdieu, D.; Donéche, B.; Donéche, B.; Lonvaud, A.; Glories, Y.; Maugean, A. Traité D’oenologie: Microbiologie du vin. Vinifications, 3rd ed.; Dunod Editions: Paris, France, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  58. Tesnière, C.; Brice, C.; Blondin, B. Responses of Saccharomyces cerevisiae to nitrogen starvation in wine alcoholic fermentation. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2015, 99, 7025–7034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Giacosa, S.; Torchio, F.; Rio-Segade, S.; Giust, M.; Tomasi, D.; Gerbi, V.; Rolle, L. Selection of a Mechanical Property for Flesh Firmness of Table Grapes in Accordance with an OIV Ampelographic Descriptor. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 2014, 65, 206–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Genetic profiles of ’Uva Rey’ and reference cultivars at 22 microsatellite loci. Alleles sizes are given in base pairs.
Table 1. Genetic profiles of ’Uva Rey’ and reference cultivars at 22 microsatellite loci. Alleles sizes are given in base pairs.
Locus’Uva Rey’’Palomino Fino’ a’Cabernet Sauvignon’ a’Chardonnay’ a’Muscat a Petits Grains Blancs’ a’Pinot Noir’ a
VVIB01307307291307291291289295291295289295
VMC1b11184188184188184184166184184188166172
VMC4F31184190176206174178174180168206174180
VVMD5224232226238228238232236226324226236
VVMD7244246236246236236236240323246236240
VVMD21243249243249249257249249249265249249
VVMD24209209209209209217209217213217215217
VVMD25238252240240238246238252240246238246
VVMD27180182186194176190182190180194186190
VVMD28246248238250236238220230248270220238
VVMD32270270254256238238238270262270238270
VVIH54166168166166166182164168166166164168
VVIN16151153151151153153151151149149151159
VVIN73264264256264264268264266264264264266
VVIP31176190188190188188180184184188180180
VVIP60318326318322306314318322318318318320
VVIQ52858985858389838983838989
VVS2131142131144137151135142131131135151
VVIV37161161163167163163153163163165153163
VVIV67372375364366364372364372364375364372
VrZAG62187193187193187193187195185195187193
VrZAG79242248250260246246242244250254238244
Variety b’De Rey’
a Reference cultivars. b Prime names according to Vitis International Variety Catalogue (VIVC).
Table
Table 2. Ampelographic description of ’Uva Rey’ and ’Palomino Fino’ cultivars using the International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV) descriptors.
Table 2. Ampelographic description of ’Uva Rey’ and ’Palomino Fino’ cultivars using the International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV) descriptors.
CodeDescriptor’Uva Rey’’Palomino Fino’
OIV 001Young shoot: opening of the shoot tip. 1 closed, 3 half open, 5 fully open.55
OIV 003Young shoot: intensity of anthocyanin coloration on prostrate hairs of the shoot tip. 1 none or very low, 3 low, 5 medium, 7 high, 9 very high.35
OIV 004Young shoot: density of prostrate hairs on the shoot tip. 1 none or very low, 3 low, 5 medium, 7 high, 9 very high.75
OIV 006Shoot: attitude (before tying). 1 erect, 3 semi-erect, 5 horizontal, 7 semi-drooping, 9 drooping.33
OIV 007Shoot: colour of the dorsal side of internodes. 1 green, 2 green and red, 3 red.12
OIV 008Shoot: colour of the ventral side of internodes. 1 green, 2 green and red, 3 red.12
OIV 015-1Shoot: distribution of anthocyanin coloration on the bud scales. 1 absent, 2 basal, 3 up to 3/4 of bud scale, 4 almost on the whole bud scale.13
OIV 016Shoot: number of consecutive tendrils. 1 two or less, 2 three or more.11
OIV 051Young leaf: colour of upper side of blade (4th leaf). 1 green, 2 yellow, 3 bronze, 4 copper-reddish.33
OIV 053Young leaf: density of prostrate hairs between main veins on lower side of blade (4th leaf). 1 none or very low, 3 low, 5, medium, 7 high, 9 very high.95
OIV 065Mature leaf: size of blade. 1 very small, 3, small, 5 medium, 7 large, 9 very large.77
OIV 067Mature leaf: shape of blade. 1 cordate, 3 wedge-shaped, 3 pentagonal, 4 circular, 5 kidney-shaped.33
OIV 068Mature leaf: number of lobes. 1 one, 2 three, 3 five, 4 seven, 5 more than seven.33
OIV 070Mature leaf: area of anthocyanin coloration of main veins on upper side of blade. 1 absent, 2 only at the petiolar point, 3 up to the 1st bifurcation, 4 up to the 2nd bifurcation, 5 beyond the 2nd bifurcation.13
OIV 072Mature leaf: goffering of blade. 1 absent or very weak, 3 weak, 5 medium, 7 strong, 9 very strong.75
OIV 074Mature leaf: profile of blade in cross section. 1 flat, 2 V-shaped, 3 involute, 4 revolute, 5 twisted.54
OIV 075Mature leaf: blistering of upper side of blade. 1 absent or very weak, 2 weak, 3 medium, 4 strong, 9 very strong.53
OIV 076Mature leaf: shape of teeth. 1 both sides concave, 2 both sides straight, 3 both sides convex, 4 one side concave on side convex, 5 mixture between both sides straight and both sides convex.23
OIV 079Mature leaf: degree of opening/overlapping of petiole sinus. 1 very wide open, 3 open, 5 closed, 7 overlapped, 9 strongly overlapped.35
OIV 080Mature leaf: shape of base petiole sinus. 1 U-shaped, 2 brace-shaped, 3 V-shaped.33
OIV 081-1Mature leaf: teeth in the petiole sinus. 1 none, 9 present.11
OIV 081-2Mature leaf: petiole sinus base limited by vein. 1 not limited, 3 on one side, 3 on both sides.11
OIV 083-2Mature leaf: teeth in the upper lateral sinuses. 1 none, 9 present.11
OIV 084Mature leaf: density of prostrate hairs between main veins on lower side of blade. 1 none or very low, 3 low, 5 medium, 7 high, 9 very high.77
OIV 087Mature leaf: density of erect hairs on main veins on lower side of blade. 1 none or very low, 3 low, 5 medium, 7 high, 9 very high.91
OIV 151Flower: sexual organs. 1 fully developed stamens and no gynoecium, 2 fully developed stamens and reduced gynoecium, 3 fully developed stamens and fully developed gynoecium, 4 reflexed stamens and fully developed gynoecium.33
OIV 202Bunch: length (peduncle excluded). 1 very short, 3 short, 5 medium, 7 long, 9 very long.57
OIV 203Bunch: width. 1 very narrow, 3 narrow, 5 medium, 7 wide, 9 very wide.55
OIV 204Bunch: density. 1 very loose, 3 loose, 5 medium, 7 dense, 9 very dense.55
OIV 206Bunch: length of peduncle of primary bunch. 1 very short, 3 short, 5 medium, 7 long, 9 very long.31
OIV 220Berry: length. 1 very short, 3 short, 5 medium, 7 long, 9 very long.53
OIV 221Berry: width. 1very narrow, 3 narrow, 5 medium, 7 wide, 9 very wide.53
OIV 223Berry: shape. 1 obloid, 2 globose, 3 broad ellipsoid, 4 narrow ellipsoid, 5 cylindrical, 6 obtuse ovoid, 7 ovoid, 8 obovoid, 9 horn shaped, 10 finger shaped.72
OIV 225Berry: colour of skin. 1 green yellow, 2 rose, 3 red, 4, grey, 5 dark red violet, 6 blue black.11
Table
Table 3. ’Uva Rey’ and ’Palomino Fino’ grape berry texture profile analysis (TPA) and must characterization.
Table 3. ’Uva Rey’ and ’Palomino Fino’ grape berry texture profile analysis (TPA) and must characterization.
20162017
’Palomino Fino’’Uva Rey’’Palomino Fino’’Uva Rey
Physicochemical Parameters
pH3.93 ± 0.01 a3.87 ± 0.07 a4.02 ± 0.03 a3.97 ± 0.02 a
Total Acidity (g/L TH2)3.74 ± 0.05 a3.51 ± 0.07 a3.15 ± 0.08 b3.25 ± 0.21 b
Sugar (°Bé)12.85 ± 0.01 a8.45 ± 0.02 b11.70 ± 0.02 c7.40 ± 0.06 d
Ripening Index (RI)3.44 ± 0.02 a2.41 ± 0.01 b3.71 ± 0.02 a2.28 ± 0.01 b
YAN (mg/L)200.00 ± 2.00 a140.00 ± 2.00 b161.00 ± 6.00 c140.00 ± 3.00 b
Tartaric Acid (g/L)3.140 ± 0.050 a2.720 ± 0.008 b2. 470 ± 0.100 b2.600 ± 0.200 b
Citric Acid (g/L)0.030 ± 0.005 a0.100 ± 0.001 b0.030 ± 0.010 a0.150 ± 0.002 c
Malic acid (g/L)0.420 ± 0.020 a0.650 ± 0.003 b0.100 ± 0.020 c0.600 ± 0.010 d
TPA
Consistency (Nmm)89.58 ± 1.59 a138.24 ± 8.47 b93.66 ± 2.27 a152.42 ± 11.18 c
Hardness (Nmm)237.57 ± 4.58 a239.20 ± 7.56 a237.29 ± 5.18 a245.05 ± 12.08 a
WoP (Nmm)260.47 ± 12.87 a351.35 ± 14.98 b280.13 ± 16.70 a409.93 ± 23.70 c
Cohesiveness0.21 ± 0.02 a0.41 ± 0.02 b0.23 ± 0.02 a0.40 ± 0.03 b
Different superscript letters mean statistically significant differences between samples at p-adjust < 0.05 obtained by two-way ANOVA and Bonferroni’s multiple range (BSD) test. Results are the means ± SD of three repetitions.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sancho-Galán, P.; Amores-Arrocha, A.; Palacios, V.; Jiménez-Cantizano, A. Genetical, Morphological and Physicochemical Characterization of the Autochthonous Cultivar ‘Uva Rey’ (Vitis vinifera L.). Agronomy 2019, 9, 563. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9090563

AMA Style

Sancho-Galán P, Amores-Arrocha A, Palacios V, Jiménez-Cantizano A. Genetical, Morphological and Physicochemical Characterization of the Autochthonous Cultivar ‘Uva Rey’ (Vitis vinifera L.). Agronomy. 2019; 9(9):563. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9090563

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sancho-Galán, Pau, Antonio Amores-Arrocha, Víctor Palacios, and Ana Jiménez-Cantizano. 2019. "Genetical, Morphological and Physicochemical Characterization of the Autochthonous Cultivar ‘Uva Rey’ (Vitis vinifera L.)" Agronomy 9, no. 9: 563. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9090563

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