Post on 29-Jan-2021
Phenotypic deconstruction of dormant bud winter hardiness
XII International Conference on Grapevine
Breeding and Genetics
Université de Bordeaux
7/15/2018-7/20/2018
Jason P. Londo and Alisson P. Kovaleski
Cold Hardiness: phenotyping 6-8 months of non-visual physiology
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
Nov-13 Dec-13 Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Apr-14
Key Aspects:
Cane, Trunk, Phloem, Xylem, Cambium, Compound Bud
Cold Hardiness: minimum temperatures do not breach bud’s defenses. Buds track temperature.
Dormancy is critical: must be induced to gain cold hardiness, maintained to prevent damage.
Timing is everything.
MaximumHardiness
0°C
11°CChilling hour accumulation
Endodormancy Ecodormancy
Tem
pe
ratu
re °
C
Full Chilling Insufficient Chilling
Phenotyping dormant bud cold hardiness
0.E+00
1.E-04
2.E-04
3.E-04
4.E-04
5.E-04
6.E-04
1.9
-2.1
-6.1
-10
.2-1
4.3
-18
.4-2
2.4
-26
.5-3
0.5
-34
.6
Vo
ltag
e (V
)
Temperature (°C)
Low Temperature
Exotherm (LTE)
HTE
Tracking Bud Survival
-35.00
-25.00
-15.00
-5.00
5.00
15.007-Nov 7-Dec 6-Jan 5-Feb 7-Mar 6-Apr
2012-2013
-35.00
-25.00
-15.00
-5.00
5.00
15.0012-Nov 12-Dec 11-Jan 10-Feb 12-Mar 11-Apr
2013-2014
-35.00
-25.00
-15.00
-5.00
5.00
15.0012-Nov 12-Dec 11-Jan 10-Feb 12-Mar
2014-2015
V. ripariaV. amurensisV. vinifera
• The type of winter determines bud cold hardiness: strong environmental component
• Buds do not gain maximum hardiness unless the winter conditions are severe.
• Phenotyping the entire winter is logistically challenging, we need to deconstruct the
responses.
De
gre
es
C°
σ T – Changes in LTE based on mean and oscillation.
Starting LTE: ~ - 12°C
Mean 7°C0°C oscillation
Mean 7°C3°C oscillation (4 to 10°C)
Mean 7°C5°C oscillation (2 to 12°C)
Mean 2°C0°C oscillation
Mean 2°C5°C oscillation (-3 to 7°C)
LTE: ~ - 12°C
LTE: ~ - 12°C
LTE: ~ - 17°C
LTE: ~ - 15°C
LTE: ~ - 20°C
Starting LTE: ~ - 12°C3°C
5°C
5°C
8°C
0°C
Acclimation:Gaining Cold Hardiness
Londo and Kovaleski 2017
σ T – Changes in LTE based on mean and oscillation.
Acclimation:Gaining Cold Hardiness
Londo and Kovaleski 2017
V. amurensis
V. ripariaV. labruscaV. cinerea
V. rupestrisV. aestivalisV. vulpina
Strong
Weak
V. vinifera
Response
σ T - Significantly different between species.
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
4-Aug 3-Sep 3-Oct 2-Nov 2-Dec 1-Jan 31-Jan 2-Mar 1-Apr 1-May31-May
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
03-Oct 2-Nov 2-Dec 1-Jan 31-Jan 2-Mar 1-Apr 1-May
Me
as
ure
d L
TE v
alu
es
°C
2013-2014
43 different Vitis riparia
σ T
Comparing cold hardiness response with statistics based models
No genotype effect Genotype effect
LTE
°C
All V. riparia respond to temperature fluctuations in the same way. Dormancy induction may modulate max LTE?
Londo and Kovaleski 2018: in review
Deacclimation:Chilling and Losing Cold Hardiness
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
17-Sep 17-Oct 16-Nov 16-Dec 15-Jan 14-Feb 16-Mar 15-Apr 15-May
LTE
°C
−30
−25
−20
−15
−10
−5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Time (day)
LT
E (
°C
)360
860
1580
10 °C
−30
−25
−20
−15
−10
−5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Time (day)
LT
E (
°C
)
360
860
1580
22 °C
−30
−25
−20
−15
−10
−5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Time (day)
LT
E (
°C
)360
860
1580
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Days
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Days
Endodormancy Ecodormancy Chilling accumulation increases rate of deacclimation
Chilling accumulates
Kovaleski, Reisch and Londo 2018: in review
−25
−20
−15
−10
−5
0
0 50 100 150
Time (Day)
LT
E (
°C)
Temperature (°C)
2
4
7
8
10
11
22
0
25
50
75
100
0 400 800 1200 1600
Accumulated Chill
Ra
te (
%)
4
22
0
25
50
75
100
0 400 800 1200 1600
Accumulated Chill
Ra
te (
%)
4
22
Deacclimation and Chilling
Chill Accumulation
~
De
acc
lim
ati
on
po
ten
tia
l
Endodormancy
Ecodormancy
−25
−20
−15
−10
−5
0
0 50 100 150
Time (Day)
LT
E (
°C)
Temperature (°C)
2
4
7
8
10
11
22
−25
−20
−15
−10
−5
0
0 50 100 150
Time (Day)
LT
E (
°C
)
Temperature (°C)
2
4
7
8
10
11
22
Full speeddepends on the airplane
Rate of deacclimationdepends on the temperature
Ψdeacc
Deacclimation rates at different chilling and temperatures
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
0 4 8 12 16 22 30
Temperature (°C)
kd
ea
cc (
°C
/day)
1580 (97 %)
1030 (60 %)
860 (30 %)
360 ( 0 %)
0
1
2
3
0 4 8 12 16 22 30
Temperature (°C)
kd
ea
cc (
°C
day
-1 )
860
1440
1580
Kovaleski, Reisch and Londo 2018: in review
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500
Cab. Sauv. 10°C
Riesling 10°C
Riesling 22°C
V. riparia 22°C
De
acc
lim
ati
on
rate
, °C
/da
y
Chill Accumulation
V. amurensis 22°C
V. amurensis 10°C
V. riparia 10°C
Cab. Sauv. 22°C
What does this have to do with phenotyping?
Deacclimation potential is driven by chilling
Deacclimation rate is temperature specific
New high-throughput phenotypes for mapping populations
Slope: Dormancy transition speed
and
Inflection Point: 50% Deacclimating potential
Rate/Ratio
Deacclimation rate in 4 mapping families at 15°C
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
V. riparia
V. amurensis
V. cinerea
V. vulpina
V. viniferaX
LTE
°C
Days in 15 °C
T0 T4 T11 T21
Rate of loss °C/day
0.57
0.51
0.30
0.29
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
2/5 2/10 2/15 2/20 2/25
V. riparia family
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
2/5 2/10 2/15 2/20 2/25
V. vulpina family
15°C0.29 °C/Day
15°C0.57 °C/Day
4°C0.07 °C/Day
4°C0.04 °C/Day
LTE
°C
LTE
°C
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
Aug-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Jan-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 Jun-17
Phenotypes in action: Integration of σ Tand Σdeac predict cold hardiness
σ T Σdeac
Outcome: Breaking the curve into two portions identifies separate phenotypes:
1) Response potential: variation at species level = σ T
2) Dormancy/deacclimation resistance: variation at genotype level = Σdeac
Combining these two traits increases prediction ability and can be used to help map the traits.
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
Aug-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Jan-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 Jun-17
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
Aug-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Jan-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 Jun-17
Phenotypes in action: Integration of σ Tand Σdeac predict cold hardiness
σ T Σdeac
Outcome: Breaking the curve into two portions identifies separate phenotypes:
1) Response potential: variation at species level = σ T
2) Dormancy/deacclimation resistance: variation at genotype level = Σdeac
Combining these two traits increases prediction ability and can be used to help map the traits.
Summary
• Understanding the complexity of the cold hardiness trait:
• Temperature variation is a strong contributor to acclimation ability - species level trait.
• Dormancy induction may determine max potential LTE - new phenotype goal.
• Deacclimation rate and potential is key to predicting frost risk and budbreak – genotype level trait.
• Development of high(er)-throughput phenotyping for cold hardiness
• Ongoing development of a model for predicting behavior
Thank you for your attention. Questions?
Research GeneticistJason Londo
Kathleen DeysHanna MartensBill SrmackJohn KeetonBob MartensGreg Noden
Bruce ReischBill WilseyTim MartinsonLynn Johnson
Ravines Wine CellarsAnthony Road Wine Co.
Anne Fennell – SDSUKrista Shelli – USDA, Parma
PhD CandidateAlisson Kovaleski