Effects of Water Stress on the Volatile Compounds and Related Biosynthetic Genes Expression in‘Muscat Hamburg’Grape Berries

doi:10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2020-0450

Acta Horticulturae Sinica ›› 2021, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (5): 883-896.doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2020-0450

• Research Papers • Previous Articles Next Articles

Effects of Water Stress on the Volatile Compounds and Related Biosynthetic Genes Expression in‘Muscat Hamburg’Grape Berries

CHEN Zumin¹, XIAO Nuoya¹, ZHANG Yanxia², SHI Xiaomin¹, GUO Shuaiqi¹, GAO Hu¹, WANG Zhenping¹^,^*()

¹School of Agriculture,Ningxia University,Yinchuan 750021,China
²School of Life Sciences,Ningxia University,Yinchuan 750021,China

Received:2020-11-20 Revised:2021-02-25 Online:2021-05-25 Published:2021-06-07
Contact: WANG Zhenping E-mail:wangzhp@163.com

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to explore the effects of water stress on volatile compounds of grape berries,the 10-year-old table grape variety ‘Muscat Hamburg’ under three different water states were used as materials. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry(GC-MS)was employed to analyze volatile composition,the expression of relevant genes of the berries at different development stages were determined by qRT-PCR. The results showed that water stress could reduce 100-berry weight and the content of soluble solids,there was no significant difference on titratable acid and total phenol of berries at harvest stage. In this study,41,43 and 33 volatile compounds were detected in control,light water stress and severe water stress,respectively,in which aldehydes were the main volatile compounds,terpenes were the second,the contents of phenols and esters were at a low level. The total content of volatile compounds in light water stress was 34.74% and 36.92% higher than that in control and severe water stress at ripening stage,respectively. The content of esters,aldehydes and phenols in light water stress was the highest,while the content of alcohols was the lowest. The content of acids and alcohols of severe water stress were significantly higher than that of the other two treatments. The content of terpenes with rose scent increased with the aggravation of water stress. Water stress upregulated the expression of VvTPS of berries,but was not conducive to the expression of VvRiLinNer and VvCCD1. The expression of VvGPPS in light water stress was significantly higher than that in control,but the severe water stress decreased the expression of this gene of berries. In a word,moderate water stress can improve berries quality by increasing the content of volatile compounds of‘Muscat Hamburg’grape.

Key words: grape, water stress, water potential of leaf, volatile compounds, gene expression

CLC Number:

S663.1

CHEN Zumin, XIAO Nuoya, ZHANG Yanxia, SHI Xiaomin, GUO Shuaiqi, GAO Hu, WANG Zhenping. Effects of Water Stress on the Volatile Compounds and Related Biosynthetic Genes Expression in‘Muscat Hamburg’Grape Berries[J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2021, 48(5): 883-896.

Figures/Tables 11

References 37

[1]	Acevedo-opazo C, Ortega-farias S, Fuentes S. 2010. Effects of grapevine(Vitis vinifera L.)water status on water consumption,vegetative growth and grape quality:an irrigation scheduling application to achieve regulated deficit irrigation. Agricultural Water Management, 97(7):956-964. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2010.01.025 URL
[2]	Bindon K A, Dry P R, Loveys B R. 2007. Influence of plant water status on the production of C₁₃-norisoprenoid precursors in Vitis vinifera L. cv. Cabernet Sauvignon grape berries. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 55(11):4493-4500. doi: 10.1021/jf063331p URL
[3]	Bonghi C, Rizzini F M, Gambuti A, Moio L, Chkaiban L, Tonutti P. 2012. Phenol compound metabolism and gene expression in the skin of wine grape(Vitis vinifera L.)berries subjected to partial postharvest dehydration. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 67:102-109. doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2012.01.002 URL
[4]	Brillante L, Martínez-lüscher J, Kurtural S K. 2018. Applied water and mechanical canopy management affect berry and wine phenolic and aroma composition of grapevine(Vitis vinifera L. cv. Syrah)in Central California. Scientia Horticulturae, 227:261-271. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2017.09.048 URL
[5]	Chaves M M, Santos T P, Souza C R, Ortuño M F, Rodrigues M L, Lopes C M, Maroco J P, Pereira J S. 2007. Deficit irrigation in grapevine improves water-use efficiency while controlling vigour and production quality. Annals of Applied Biology, 150(2):237-252. doi: 10.1111/aab.2007.150.issue-2 URL
[6]	Cooper C M, Davies N W, Menary R C. 2009. Changes in some carotenoids and apocarotenoids during flower development in Boronia megastigma(Nees). Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 57(4):1513-1520. doi: 10.1021/jf802610p URL
[7]	Degenhardt J, Köllner T G, Gershenzon J. 2009. Monoterpene and sesquiterpene synthases and the origin of terpene skeletal diversity in plants. Phytochemistry, 70(15-16):1621-1637. doi: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2009.07.030 pmid: 19793600
[8]	D'onofrio C, Matarese F, Cuzzola A. 2018. Effect of methyl jasmonate on the aroma of Sangiovese grapes and wines. Food Chemistry, 242:352-361. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.09.084 URL
[9]	Edwards E J, Clingeleffer P R. 2013. Interseasonal effects of regulated deficit irrigation on growth,yield,water use,berry composition and wine attributes of Cabernet Sauvignon grapevines. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 19(2):261-276. doi: 10.1111/ajgw.12027 URL
[10]	Fenoll J, Manso A, Hellin P, Ruiz L, Flores P. 2009. Changes in the aromatic composition of the Vitis vinifera grape Muscat Hamburg during ripening. Food Chemistry, 114(2):420-428. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2008.09.060 URL
[11]	Fraga H, Malheiro A C, Moutinho P J, Santos J A. 2013. Future scenarios for viticultural zoning in Europe:ensemble projections and uncertainties. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 57(6):909-925.
[12]	Hu Hong-yuan, Wang Zhen-ping. 2017. Effects of drought stress on leaf water content and chlorophyll fluorescence parameters of Cabernet Sauvignon. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 31(4):124-130. (in Chinese)
	胡宏远, 王振平. 2017. 干旱胁迫对赤霞珠葡萄叶片水分及叶绿素荧光参数的影响. 干旱区资源与环境, 31(4):124-130.
[13]	Leeuwen C, Darriet P. 2016. The impact of climate change on viticulture and wine quality. Journal of Wine Economics, 11(1):150-167. doi: 10.1017/jwe.2015.21 URL
[14]	Liu G T, Chai F M, Wang Y, Jiang J Z, Duan W, Wang Y T, Wang F F, Li S H, Wang L J. 2018. Genome-wide identification and classification of HSF family in grape,and their transcriptional analysis under heat acclimation and heat stress. Horticultural Plant Journal, 4(4):133-143. doi: 10.1016/j.hpj.2018.06.001 URL
[15]	Lou Yu-sui, Wang Shi-ping, Miao Yu-bin, Lü Zhong-wei, Wang Peng, Xu Guang-min. 2018. Effect of different irrigation thresholds on tree growth and fruit quality in‘Kyoho’grape. Journal of Fruit Science, 35(1):46-55. (in Chinese)
	娄玉穗, 王世平, 苗玉彬, 吕中伟, 王鹏, 许广敏. 2018. 不同灌溉阈值对‘巨峰’葡萄树体生长与果实品质的影响. 果树学报, 35(1):46-55.
[16]	Luan F, Wüst M. 2002. Differential incorporation of 1-deoxy-D-xylulose into (3S)-linalool and geraniol in grape berry exocarp and mesocarp. Phytochemistry, 60(5):451-459. doi: 10.1016/S0031-9422(02)00147-4 URL
[17]	Mathieu S, Terrier N, Procureur J, Bigey F, Günata Z. 2005. A carotenoid cleavage dioxygenase from Vitis vinifera L.:functional characterization and expression during grape berry development in relation to C₁₃-norisoprenoid accumulation. Journal of Experimental Botany, 56(420):2721-2731. doi: 10.1093/jxb/eri265 URL
[18]	Niculcea M, López J, Sánchez-díaz M and Carmen A M. 2014. Involvement of berry hormonal content in the response to pre-and post-veraison water deficit in different grapevine(Vitis vinifera L.)cultivars. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 20:281-291. doi: 10.1111/ajgw.2014.20.issue-2 URL
[19]	Niu Zao-zhu, Chen Zhan, Zhao Yan-zhuo, Niu Shuai-ke, Wei Jian-guo, Yang Li-li. 2019. Analysis of aromatic components from the berries of fifteen grape varieties by GC-MS. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 34(S1):85-91.
	牛早柱, 陈展, 赵艳卓, 牛帅科, 魏建国, 杨丽丽. 2019. 15个不同葡萄品种果实香气成分的GC-MS分析. 华北农学报, 34(S1):85-91.
[20]	Pastenes C, Villalobos L, Ríos N, Reyesa F, Turgeonb R, Franck N. 2014. Carbon partitioning to berries in water stressed grapevines;the role of active transport in leaves and fruits. Environmental & Experimental Botany, 107:154-166.
[21]	Santesteban L G, Miranda C, Royo J B. 2011. Regulated deficit irrigation effects on growth,yield,grape quality and individual anthocyanin composition in Vitis vinifera L. cv.‘Tempranillo’. Agricultural Water Management, 98(7):1171-1179. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2011.02.011 URL
[22]	Sun L, Zhu B Q, Sun X R, Xu X Q, Zhang G J, Yan A L, Xu H Y. 2015. Monoterpene accumulation and its biosynthesis:gene transcript profiles of two grape cultivars during berry development. Acta Horticulturae, 1082:37-42.
[23]	Tao Yong-sheng, Liu Ji-bin, Lan Yuan-yuan, Chen Chao-qi, Li Ai-hua. 2016. Instrumental and sensory aroma analysis of noble-rot wine from artificial botrytized grapes. Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 47(2):270-279,315. (in Chinese)
	陶永胜, 刘吉彬, 兰圆圆, 陈超奇, 李爱华. 2016. 人工贵腐葡萄酒香气的仪器分析与感官评价. 农业机械学报, 47(2):270-279,315.
[24]	Wang Hui-ling, Wang Xiao-yue, Yan Ai-ling, Sun Lei, Zhang Guo-jun, Ren Jian-cheng, Xu Hai-ying. 2019. The accumulation of monoterpenes and the expression of its biosynthesis related genes in‘Aishen Meigui’grape berries cultivated in different trellis systems during ripening stage. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 52(7):1136-1149. (in Chinese)
	王慧玲, 王晓玥, 闫爱玲, 孙磊, 张国军, 任建成, 徐海英. 2019. 不同架式‘爱神玫瑰’葡萄果实成熟期间单萜积累及相关基因的表达. 中国农业科学, 52(7):1136-1149.
[25]	Wang J F, Abbey T, Kozak B, Madilao L L, Tindjau R, Nin D J, Castellarin S D. 2019. Evolution over the growing season of volatile organic compounds in Viognier(Vitis vinifera L.)grapes under three irrigation regimes. Food Research International, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2019.108512.
[26]	Wang Ji-yuan, Feng Jiao, Hou Xu-dong, Tao Jian-min. 2016. Effects of CPPU on aroma components and biosynthetic genes expression in‘Shine Muscat’grapes. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University, 39(6):915-923. (in Chinese)
	王继源, 冯娇, 侯旭东, 陶建敏. 2016. CPPU对‘阳光玫瑰’葡萄品质及香气合成相关基因表达的影响. 南京农业大学学报, 39(6):915-923.
[27]	Wang Sheng-hai, Yang Wei-wei, Rong Xin-min, Chang Fei-yan, Zhu Jing-jing, Zhang Xiao-yun, Liu Huai-feng. 2019. Effects of training system and water stress on the photosynthetic characteristics of Zixiang Seedless grape leaves based on photosynthetic models. Journal of Shihezi University(Natural Science), 37(4):452-459. (in Chinese)
	王生海, 杨伟伟, 容新民, 常飞燕, 朱敬敬, 张晓云, 刘怀锋. 2019. 整形和水分胁迫对紫香无核葡萄叶片光合特性的影响. 石河子大学学报(自然科学版), 37(4):452-459.
[28]	Wang Zhi-qun, Duan Chang-qing, Zhu Bao-qing, Wu Yu-wen, Tu Cui, Pan Qiu-hong. 2011. Relationship between(-)-α-terpineol accumulation and Vvter expression in grape berries . Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 38(11):2187-2192.
	王志群, 段长青, 朱保庆, 吴玉文, 涂崔, 潘秋红. 2011. 葡萄果实中(-)-α-萜品醇的积累与其合成酶基因Vvter表达的关系. 园艺学报, 38(11):2187-2192.
[29]	Wen Y Q, Zhong G Y, Gao Y, Lan Y B, Duan C Q, Pan Q H. 2015. Using the combined analysis of transcripts and metabolites to propose key genes for differential terpene accumulation across two regions. BMC Plant Biology, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-015-0631-1.
[30]	Wen Ya-qin. 2015. Accumulation of free and glycosidically-bound terpenes and its transcriptional regulation in wine grapes[Ph. D. Dissertation]. Beijing:China Agricultural University. (in Chinese)
	问亚琴. 2015. 酿酒葡萄果实游离态和糖苷结合态萜烯的积累及其转录调控[博士论文]. 北京:中国农业大学.
[31]	Xi Ben, Liu Qiao-zhen, Lü Dan-gui, Xu Wei-rong, Wang Zhen-ping, Dai Hong-jun. 2019. Effects of water stress on expression of genes related to resveratrol biosynthesis in grape berries. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 33(8):1490-1500. (in Chinese)
	席奔, 柳巧禛, 吕丹桂, 徐伟荣, 王振平, 代红军. 2019. 水分胁迫对葡萄果实白藜芦醇合成相关基因表达的影响. 核农学报, 33(8):1490-1500.
[32]	Yang Chang-yu, Zhang Rui, Lin Bao-jun, Wang Teng-fei, Wang Chun-hong. 2020. Review of effects of water stress on fruit quality of table grapes. Agricultural Engineering, 10(1):86-91. (in Chinese)
	杨昌钰, 张芮, 蔺宝军, 王腾飞, 王春宏. 2020. 水分胁迫对鲜食葡萄果实品质影响的研究进展. 农业工程, 10(1):86-91.
[33]	Yuan J H, Dai Z W, Zhao J Y, Li S H. 2009. Distribution of newly fixed ¹⁴C-photoassimilate under deficit irrigation and half-root stress in peach trees. Plant Science, 177(6):691-697. doi: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2009.09.006 URL
[34]	Yue Yuan, Liu Jing, Zhang Cun-zhi. 2018. Optimization of extraction conditions of volatile compounds from Muscat by HS-SPME-GC-MS. China Brewing, 37(10):171-176. (in Chinese)
	岳圆, 刘晶, 张存智. 2018. HS-SPME-GC-MS分析玫瑰香葡萄中挥发性物质的萃取条件优化. 中国酿造, 37(10):171-176.
[35]	Zhang Q Y, Feng C, Li W H, Qu Z H, Zeng M, Xi W P. 2019. Transcriptional regulatory networks controlling taste and aroma quality of apricot (Prunus armeniaca L.)fruit during ripening. BioMed Central, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-019-5424-8.
[36]	Zhou Xiao-fang, Zhang Fu-qing, Liu Jian-fu, Zhang Jun, Lü Wen, Yu Ran. 2014. Progress in research of cultivation technique of the Muscat Hamburg grape in China. Tianjin Agricultural Sciences, 20(6):97-102. (in Chinese)
	周晓芳, 张福庆, 刘建福, 张军, 吕文, 俞然. 2014. 我国玫瑰香葡萄品种栽培技术研究进展. 天津农业科学, 20(6):97-102.
[37]	Zhu B Q, Cai J, Wang Z Q, Xu X Q, Duan C Q, Pan Q H. 2014. Identification of a plastid-localized bifunctional nerolidol/linalool synthase in relation to linalool biosynthesis in young grape berries. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 15(12):21992-22010. doi: 10.3390/ijms151221992 URL

处理 Treatment	黎明前叶片水势(Ψ_b)/MPa Predawn leaf water potential
对照 Control	-0.20 ~-0.40
轻度胁迫 Light water stress	-0.40 ~-0.60
重度胁迫 Severe water stress	≤-0.60

处理 Treatment	黎明前叶片水势(Ψ_b)/MPa Predawn leaf water potential
对照 Control	-0.20 ~-0.40
轻度胁迫 Light water stress	-0.40 ~-0.60
重度胁迫 Severe water stress	≤-0.60

基因名称 Gene name	基因登录号 Accession number	引物序列(5′-3′) Sequence of primer
VvGPPS	AY351862.1	F:AACTGCGGAAGTTTCAATGTTGGC;R:ATGGCGGATGTCAGACAATGAACC
VvRiLinNer	JQ062931.1	F:AGTTGGAGAGGATACGCTGGAAGG;R:CTCACCGTGAGTGCTGGCTTTC
VvTPS	NM_001281134.1	F:GTCGGGTCAAGTCTTAGCAAGCC;R:GTTACCTCGTCCTCGGGAGTGTAG
VvCCD1	NM_001280915.1	F:TGGCACTTTCGGAGGCTGATAAAC;R:GGGTCAACCTTTGGATGAGCAGTG
VvActin	EC969944	F:CTTGCATCCCTCAGCACCTT;R:TCCTGTGGACAATGGATGGA

基因名称 Gene name	基因登录号 Accession number	引物序列(5′-3′) Sequence of primer
VvGPPS	AY351862.1	F:AACTGCGGAAGTTTCAATGTTGGC;R:ATGGCGGATGTCAGACAATGAACC
VvRiLinNer	JQ062931.1	F:AGTTGGAGAGGATACGCTGGAAGG;R:CTCACCGTGAGTGCTGGCTTTC
VvTPS	NM_001281134.1	F:GTCGGGTCAAGTCTTAGCAAGCC;R:GTTACCTCGTCCTCGGGAGTGTAG
VvCCD1	NM_001280915.1	F:TGGCACTTTCGGAGGCTGATAAAC;R:GGGTCAACCTTTGGATGAGCAGTG
VvActin	EC969944	F:CTTGCATCCCTCAGCACCTT;R:TCCTGTGGACAATGGATGGA

处理 Treatment	酸类 Acid	酯类 Ester	酮类 Ketone	醛类 Aldehyde	醇类 Alcohol	萜烯类 Terpene	酚类 Phenolic	其他类 Others	总计 Total
对照Control	8	1	8	5	7	9	1	2	41
轻度胁迫Light	7	2	8	7	3	8	1	7	43
重度胁迫Severe	5	1	6	7	4	3	1	6	33

Effects of Water Stress on the Volatile Compounds and Related Biosynthetic Genes Expression in‘Muscat Hamburg’Grape Berries

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 11

References 37

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

处理 Treatment	酸类 Acid	酯类 Ester	酮类 Ketone	醛类 Aldehyde	醇类 Alcohol
对照 Control	24.58 ± 4.39 b	3.76 ± 2.13 b	48.53 ± 11.09 a	595.41 ± 69.00 b	123.39 ± 19.82 b
轻度胁迫 Light	21.28 ± 9.10 b	5.94 ± 3.63 a	46.70 ± 17.36 a	1 054.23 ± 215.11 a	8.74 ± 1.04 c
重度胁迫 Severe	67.14 ± 16.98 a	3.16 ± 1.93 b	24.12 ± 10.60 b	446.73 ± 45.51 c	133.06 ± 30.63 a
处理 Treatment	萜烯类 Terpene	酚类 Phenolic	其他类 Others	总计 Total
对照 Control	400.48 ± 43.46 c	3.18 ± 1.59 b	13.78 ± 2.84 b	1 213.11 ± 146.02 b
轻度胁迫 Light	442.33 ± 43.07 b	10.63 ± 4.60 a	44.75 ± 7.93 a	1 634.60 ± 277.05 a
重度胁迫 Severe	497.98 ± 79.71 a	2.59 ± 0.92 b	19.07 ± 7.72 b	1 193.85 ± 187.22 b

种类 Species	化合物 Compound	处理 Treatment	不同时期相对含量 Relative content
种类 Species	化合物 Compound	处理 Treatment	55 d	65 d	75 d	85 d	95 d
醛类 Aldehyde	2-己烯醛 2-Hexenal	对照Control	132.84 ± 11.52 a	137.72 ± 11.98 b	464.06 ± 63.16 a	596.72 ± 91.84 a	509.48 ± 45.00 b
		轻度胁迫Light	132.34 ± 18.47 a	144.01 ± 27.15 b	448.62 ± 38.87 a	580.46 ± 85.53 a	896.03 ± 135.38 a
		重度胁迫Severe	111.00 ± 9.80 b	210.02 ± 18.26 a	429.79 ± 37.86 a	335.69 ± 29.11 b	262.26 ± 62.31 c
	2,4-己二烯醛 (E,E)-2,4- Hexadienal	对照Control	22.49 ± 9.17 a	21.40 ± 2.76 a	14.29 ± 2.43 a	—	—
		轻度胁迫Light	22.93 ± 2.94 a	19.01 ± 6.03 a	19.58 ± 3.65 a	—	38.73 ± 8.96 a
		重度胁迫Severe	14.01 ± 1.9 a	24.95 ± 4.34 a	13.17 ± 3.25 a	—	38.76 ± 4.13 a
	苯甲醛 Benzaldehyde	对照Control	2.35 ± 1.56 a	2.04 ± 0.66 a	3.40 ± 2.06 a	4.61 ± 1.36 a	9.00 ± 2.84 b
		轻度胁迫Light	1.80 ± 0.50 a	2.61 ± 1.82 a	—	4.16 ± 0.86 a	11.91 ± 4.09 b
		重度胁迫Severe	3.02 ± 1.01 a	2.62 ± 1.23 a	2.54 ± 0.49 a	—	27.47 ± 12.65 a
	反式-2-己烯醛 (E)-2-Hexenal	对照Control	—	41.93 ± 4.53 a	11.10 ± 2.38 a	12.92 ± 3.63 a	24.51 ± 2.35 b
		轻度胁迫Light	3.03 ± 0.83	3.84 ± 1.85 b	11.49 ± 8.51 a	12.21 ± 4.45 a	—
		重度胁迫Severe	—	5.89 ± 1.70 b	10.12 ± 5.75 a	—	43.44 ± 10.07 a
	2-甲基苯甲醛 2-methyl- Benzaldehyde	对照Control	12.91 ± 2.19 b	20.98 ± 8.63 a	15.78 ± 4.50 b	—	34.59 ± 10.50 a
		轻度胁迫Light	18.99 ± 5.85 ab	21.08 ± 4.01 a	22.51 ± 4.77 a	35.87 ± 6.66 a	—
		重度胁迫Severe	20.34 ± 1.99 a	—	22.90 ± 4.51 a	24.50 ± 3.73 a	49.33 ± 8.86 a
酯类	丁二酸二乙酯 Butanedioic acid, diethyl ester	对照Control	57.59 ± 12.28 a	6.36 ± 2.44 a	16.87 ± 2.74 a	—	—
		轻度胁迫Light	23.62 ± 2.87 b	3.09 ± 0.31 b	7.69 ± 1.77 b	1.71 ± 0.29 a	—
Ester		重度胁迫Severe	10.24 ± 2.00 c	2.68 ± 1.48b	3.14 ± 1.63 c	0.85 ± 0.10 b	—
	癸酸乙酯 Decanoic acid, ethyl ester	对照Control	5.59 ± 0.61 a	5.70 ± 0.66 a	7.84 ± 2.26 a	6.48 ± 1.04 a	—
		轻度胁迫Light	5.07 ± 1.31 a	4.34 ± 0.46 a	7.63 ± 1.80 a	5.89 ± 1.58 a	—
		重度胁迫Severe	5.11 ± 0.45 a	4.43 ± 1.41 a	6.12 ± 3.97 a	3.79 ± 0.79 a	—
	水杨酸甲酯 Methyl salicylate	对照Control	5.47 ± 1.69 a	4.18 ± 0.42 a	3.53 ± 2.67 a	4.68 ± 1.75 a	3.76 ± 0.70 a
		轻度胁迫Light	4.71 ± 1.55 a	3.62 ± 0.69 a	4.19 ± 0.55 a	4.91 ± 1.37 a	4.80 ± 1.45 a
		重度胁迫Severe	4.09 ± 3.98 a	4.16 ± 1.09 a	3.69 ± 1.80 a	3.07 ± 2.93 a	3.16 ± 0.45 a
	邻苯二甲酸二异丁酯 1,2-Benzene- dicarboxylic acid, bis(2-methylpropyl) ester	对照Control	—	0.64 ± 0.25 a	0.93 ± 0.08 a	1.88 ± 1.08 a	—
		轻度胁迫Light	—	0.71 ± 0.19 a	1.06 ± 0.74 a	1.65 ± 0.69 a	—
		重度胁迫Severe	0.72 ± 0.50	0.88 ± 0.12 a	1.11 ± 0.10 a	0.97 ± 0.82 a	—

种类 Species	化合物名 Compound name	处理 Treatment	不同时期相对含量 Relative content
种类 Species	化合物名 Compound name	处理 Treatment	55 d	65 d	75 d	85 d	95 d
酸类 Acids	乙酸 Acetic acid	对照Control	2.80 ± 2.07 a	1.77 ± 1.17 a	2.81 ± 1.10 a	3.05 ± 1.12 a	11.75 ± 1.66 b
		轻度胁迫Light	2.38 ± 0.37 a	1.69 ± 0.78 a	3.05 ± 2.05 a	3.45 ± 1.46 a	10.28 ± 0.89 b
		重度胁迫Severe	2.03 ± 0.35 a	1.88 ± 0.22 a	2.58 ± 1.51 a	1.85 ± 1.29 a	26.76 ± 3.83 a
	甲酸 Formic acid	对照Control	0.47 ± 0.40 a	—	—	—	2.02 ± 1.56 a
		轻度胁迫Light	0.54 ± 0.33 a	—	—	—	1.48 ± 0.68 a
		重度胁迫Severe	0.46 ± 0.15 a	—	—	—	1.93 ± 1.37 a
	香叶酸 Geranic acid	对照Control	1.84 ± 0.19 b	2.70 ± 0.25 a	2.91 ± 0.95 a	4.35 ± 0.81 a	1.12 ± 0.88 a
		轻度胁迫Light	3.76 ± 1.33 a	2.90 ± 0.37 a	3.22 ± 1.36 a	4.39 ± 1.65 a	1.43 ± 0.25 a
		重度胁迫Severe	—	2.51 ± 0.49 a	3.13 ± 1.63 a	3.12 ± 1.15 a	—
	癸酸 n-Decanoic acid	对照Control	5.56 ± 1.63 a	4.23 ± 0.41 a	4.61 ± 1.58 a	3.66 ± 1.77 a	—
		轻度胁迫Light	4.54 ± 0.61 a	2.75 ± 0.90 a	4.34 ± 1.61 a	2.99 ± 0.69 a	—
		重度胁迫Severe	3.76 ± 0.88 a	3.19 ± 1.83 a	3.51 ± 1.42 a	2.02 ± 0.18 a	—
	壬酸 Nonanoic acid	对照Control	0.83 ± 0.21 b	1.41 ± 0.51 a	1.24 ± 0.20 a	2.03 ± 1.40 a	0.56 ± 0.42
		轻度胁迫Light	1.14 ± 0.10 ab	1.31 ± 0.51 a	1.51 ± 0.19 a	2.06 ± 0.56 a	—
		重度胁迫Severe	1.47 ± 0.34 a	1.45 ± 0.60 a	1.59 ± 1.04 a	1.29 ± 0.30 a	—
	辛酸 Octanoic acid	对照Control	21.55 ± 4.76 a	4.55 ± 0.58 a	8.02 ± 4.02 a	2.23 ± 0.50 a	—
		轻度胁迫Light	10.47 ± 8.95 b	2.34 ± 0.42 b	4.62 ± 0.91 a	1.79 ± 1.88 a	—
		重度胁迫Severe	5.74 ± 1.48 b	1.87 ± 0.76 b	2.65 ± 0.97 a	0.94 ± 0.79 a	—
	己酸 Hexanoic acid	对照Control	—	—	—	—	—
		轻度胁迫Light	—	—	2.11 ± 0.24	—	5.93 ± 3.21 a
		重度胁迫Severe	—	—	—	—	9.57 ± 6.44 a
	苯甲酸 Benzoic acid	对照Control	—	—	—	—	8.07 ± 3.17 a
		轻度胁迫Light	—	—	—	—	—
		重度胁迫Severe	—	—	—	—	23.51 ± 16.36 a
	异辛酸 2-ethyl-Hexanoic acid	对照Control	—	—	—	—	1.06 ± 0.34 b
		轻度胁迫Light	—	—	—	—	2.16 ± 0.50 b
		重度胁迫Severe	—	—	—	—	5.37 ± 2.41 a
酮类 Ketones	大马酮 Damascone	对照Control	8.90 ± 5.34 a	19.85 ± 7.82 a	21.49 ± 7.29 a	33.92 ± 14.39 a	32.46 ± 18.95 a
		轻度胁迫Light	11.22 ± 4.91 a	31.30 ± 9.65 a	31.30 ± 9.65 a	33.29 ± 5.15 a	26.62 ± 5.76 a
		重度胁迫Severe	14.56 ± 3.60 a	24.16 ± 7.76 a	33.29 ± 4.89 a	19.38 ± 7.26 a	13.69 ± 2.65 a
	2-吡咯烷酮 2-Pyrrolidinone	对照Control	1.39 ± 0.19 a	0.94 ± 0.62 a	1.32 ± 0.33 a	1.03 ± 0.45 a	1.11 ± 0.90 b
		轻度胁迫Light	1.26 ± 0.19 a	1.29 ± 0.27 a	1.29 ± 0.19 a	1.04 ± 0.47 a	2.02 ± 1.61 b
		重度胁迫Severe	1.14 ± 0.14 a	0.57 ± 0.08 a	0.70 ± 0.17 b	0.71 ± 0.19 a	4.79 ± 0.83 a
	1-乙酰-2-吡咯烷酮 N-Acetylpyrrolidone	对照Control	2.50 ± 1.35 a	2.06 ± 1.04 a	2.60 ± 0.23 a	3.04 ± 1.71 a	5.14 ± 0.54 a
		轻度胁迫Light	2.46 ± 1.70 a	3.00 ± 1.74 a	3.00 ± 0.94 a	2.97 ± 0.82 a	7.11 ± 1.20 a
		重度胁迫Severe	2.50 ± 0.24 a	2.00 ± 1.68 a	1.92 ± 0.77 a	1.80 ± 0.29 a	—
	仲辛酮 2-Octanone	对照Control	—	—	—	—	2.54 ± 0.86 a
		轻度胁迫Light	1.87 ± 0.71 a	—	—	—	3.86 ± 0.98 a
		重度胁迫Severe	1.51 ± 0.13 a	1.59 ± 0.15	—	1.23 ± 0.41	—
	4-甲基苯戊酮 1-(4-methylphenyl)-1-Pentanone	对照Control	—	—	0.77 ± 0.33 a	1.75 ± 0.25 a	2.01 ± 0.37 a
		轻度胁迫Light	—	1.23 ± 0.18	1.23 ± 0.42 a	1.48 ± 0.41 a	2.12 ± 1.55 a
		重度胁迫Severe	—	—	0.73 ± 0.17 a	0.67 ± 0.22 b	—

[1]	WANG Xiaochen, NIE Ziye, LIU Xianju, DUAN Wei, FAN Peige, and LIANG Zhenchang, . Effects of Abscisic Acid on Monoterpene Synthesis in‘Jingxiangyu’Grape Berries [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2023, 50(2): 237-249.
[2]	ZHAI Hanhan, ZHAI Yujie, TIAN Yi, ZHANG Ye, YANG Li, WEN Zhiliang, CHEN Haijiang. Genome-wide Identification of Peach SAUR Gene Family and Characterization of PpSAUR5 Gene [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2023, 50(1): 1-14.
[3]	WANG Baoliang, LIU Fengzhi, JI Xiaohao, WANG Xiaodi, SHI Xiangbin, ZHANG Yican, LI Peng, and WANG Haibo. A New Early Ripening Grape Cultivar‘Huapu Zaoyu’for Table [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(S2): 33-34.
[4]	WANG Baoliang, WANG Haibo, JI Xiaohao, WANG Xiaodi, SHI Xiangbin, WANG Zhiqiang, WANG Xiaolong, and LIU Fengzhi. A New Middle Ripening Grape Cultivar‘Huapu Huangyu’for Table [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(S2): 35-36.
[5]	A Late-maturing Seedless Grape Cultivar‘Zilongzhu’. A Late-maturing Seedless Grape Cultivar‘Zilongzhu’ [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(S2): 37-38.
[6]	SHI Xiaoxin, DU Guoqiang, YANG Lili, QIAO Yuelian, HUANG Chengli, WANG Suyue, ZHAO Yuexin, WEI Xiaohui, WANG Li, and QI Xiangli. A Late-ripening Seedless Grape Cultivar‘Hongfeng Wuhe’ [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(S2): 39-40.
[7]	WU Yueyan, CHEN Tianchi, WANG Liru, HAN Shanqi, and FU Tao. A New Table Grape Cultivar‘Yongzaohong’ [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(S2): 41-42.
[8]	WANG Xiaoyue, YAN Ailing, ZHANG Guojun, WANG Huiling, REN Jiancheng, LIU Zhenhua, SUN Lei, and XU Haiying, . A New Grape Cultivar‘Ruidu Wanhong’ [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(S1): 29-30.
[9]	WANG Yongjian, KONG Junhua, FAN Peige, LIANG Zhenchang, JIN Xiuliang, LIU Buchun, DAI Zhanwu. Grape Phenome High-throughput Acquisition and Analysis Methods：A Review [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(8): 1815-1832.
[10]	ZHANG Qiuyue, LIU Changlai, YU Xiaojing, YANG Jiading, FENG Chaonian. Screening of Reference Genes for Differentially Expressed Genes in Pyrus betulaefolia Plant Under Salt Stress by qRT-PCR [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(7): 1557-1570.
[11]	WEI Xiaoyu, WANG Yuejin. Correlation Between Anatomical Structure and Resistance to Powdery Mildew in Chinese Wild Vitis Species [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(6): 1200-1212.
[12]	LIU Zhongjie, ZHENG Ting, ZHAO Fanggui, FU Weihong, ZHUGE Yaxian, ZHANG Zhichang, FANG Jinggui. Resistance Difference and Physiological Response Mechanism of Grape Rootstocks to Osmotic Stress [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(5): 984-994.
[13]	LIANG Chen, SUN Ruyi, XIANG Rui, SUN Yimeng, SHI Xiaoxin, DU Guoqiang, WANG Li. Genome-wide Identification of Grape GRF Family and Expression Analysis [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(5): 995-1007.
[14]	LI Shasha, YU Saisai, FU Yuheng, LUO Qiangwei, XU Yan, WANG Yuejin. The Embryo Rescue and Molecular Markers are Used to Breed New Seedless,Cold-Resistant Grapes [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(4): 723-738.
[15]	LI Yamei, MA Fuli, ZHANG Shanqi, HUANG Jinqiu, CHEN Mengting, ZHOU Junyong, SUN Qibao, SUN Jun. Optimization of Jujube Callus Transformation System and Application of ZjBRC1 in Regulating ZjYUCCA Expression [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(4): 749-757.