A large proportion of vineyards are located in regions with seasonal drought (e.g. Mediterranean-type climates) where soil and atmospheric water deficits, together with high temperatures, exert large constraints on yield and quality. The increasing demand for vineyard irrigation requires an improvement in the efficiency of water use. Deficit irrigation has emerged as a potential strategy to allow crops to withstand mild water stress with little or no decreases of yield, and potentially a positive impact on fruit quality. Understanding the physiological and molecular bases of grapevine responses to mild to moderate water deficits is fundamental to optimize deficit irrigation management and identify the most suitable varieties to those conditions. How the whole plant acclimatizes to water scarcity and how short- and long-distance chemical and hydraulic signals intervene are reviewed. Chemical compounds synthesized in drying roots are shown to act as long-distance signals inducing leaf stomatal closure and/or restricting leaf growth. This explains why some plants endure soil drying without significant changes in shoot water status. The control of plant water potential by stomatal aperture via feed-forward mechanisms is associated with ‘isohydric’ behaviour in contrast to ‘anysohydric’ behaviour in which lower plant water potentials are attained. This review discusses differences in this respect between grapevines varieties and experimental conditions. Mild water deficits also exert direct and/or indirect (via the light environment around grape clusters) effects on berry development and composition; a higher content of skin-based constituents (e.g. tannins and anthocyanins) has generally being reported. Regulation under water deficit of genes and proteins of the various metabolic pathways responsible for berry composition and therefore wine quality are reviewed.

Grapevine irrigation is becoming an important practice to guarantee wine quality or even plant survival in regions affected by seasonal drought. Nevertheless, irrigation has to be controlled to optimise source to sink balance and avoid excessive vigour. The results we present here in two grapevine varieties (Moscatel and Castelão) during 3 years, indicate that we can decrease the amount of water applied by 50% (as in deficit irrigation, DI, and in partial root drying, PRD) in relation to full crop’s evapotranspiration (ETc) [full irrigated (FI) vines] with no negative effects on production and even get some gains of quality (in the case of PRD). We report that in non‐irrigated and in several cases in PRD vines exhibit higher concentrations of berry skin anthocyanins and total phenols than those presented by DI and FI vines. We showed that these effects on quality were mediated by a reduction in vigour, leading to an increase on light interception in the cluster zone. Because plant water status during most of the dates along the season was not significantly different between PRD and DI, and when different, PRD even exhibited a higher leaf water potential than DI vines, we conclude that growth inhibition in PRD was not a result of a hydraulic control. The gain in crop water use in DI and PRD was accompanied by an increase of the δ¹³C values in the berries in DI and PRD as compared to FI, suggesting that we can use this methodology to assess the integrated water‐use efficiency over the growing season.

A study to assess the effects of the Partial Rootzone Drying (PRD) irrigation strategy in comparison to other irrigation systems was carried out in southern Portugal in two field-grown grapevines varieties, Moscatel and Castelão. We addressed the question of whether by regulating growth and plant water use, the PRD system would enable an equilibrated vegetative development, leading to a favourable capture of solar radiation for photoassimilate production and, at the same time to provide an optimum environment for fruit maturation. Three irrigation schemes were applied in addition to the non-irrigated (NI) vines: partial root drying (PRD), 50% of crop evapotranspiration (ETc), supplied to only one side of the root system while the other one was allowed to dry, alternating sides every 15 days; deficit irrigated (DI), 50% ETc supplied, half to each side of the root system and full irrigated (FI, 100% ETc). During the whole season FI plants of both varieties exhibited a high leaf predawn water potential (?pd , ca –0.2 MPa) while a progressive decline was observed in NI plants, reaching ?pd values near –0.7 MPa at the end of August. PRD and DI presented intermediate values. PRD vines exhibited a stronger control over vegetative growth as compared with DI and FI plants. This was expressed by lower values of total leaf area at harvest, leaf layer number, canopy wideness and water shoots number, allowing a higher light interception at the cluster zone that induced an improvement in some berry quality characteristics. Watering had no significant effects on sugar accumulation in the berries but led to a favourable increase in the must titratable acidity, mainly in Castelão. Whereas in DI and FI treatments berry skin anthocyanins and phenols content were always lower than in NI, in PRD there was either no reduction or the reduction was much lower than in the other irrigation treatments. Water use efficiency (WUE) was increased by about 80% in PRD and DI when compared with FI, as a result of almost similar yields in the three treatments. Yield gains of irrigated plants in relation to NI were modest, explained by the rainy spring in both years.