RESUMEN
Fundamental questions in bud dormancy remain, including what temperatures fulfill dormancy requirements (i.e., chill accumulation). Recent studies demonstrate freezing temperatures promote chill accumulation and cold hardiness influences time to budbreak - the phenotype used for dormancy evaluations. Here we evaluated bud cold hardiness (CH) and budbreak responses of grapevines (Vitis hybrids) throughout chill accumulation under three treatments: constant (5 °C), fluctuating (-3.5 to 6.5 °C daily), and field conditions (Madison, WI, USA). Chill treatments experiencing lower temperatures promoted greater gains in cold hardiness (CHfield>CHfluctuating>CHconstant). All treatments decreased observed time to budbreak with increased chill accumulation. However, perceived treatment effectiveness changed when time to budbreak was adjusted to remove cold acclimation effects. Among three classic chill models (North Carolina, Utah, and Dynamic), none were able to correctly describe adjusted time to budbreak responses to chill accumulation. Thus, a new model is proposed that expands the range of chill accumulation temperatures to include freezing temperatures and enhances chill accumulation under fluctuating temperature conditions. Most importantly, our analysis demonstrates adjustments for uneven acclimation change the perceived effectiveness of chill treatments. Therefore, future work in bud dormancy would benefit from simultaneously evaluating cold hardiness.
RESUMEN
Accurate and real-time monitoring of grapevine freezing tolerance is crucial for the sustainability of the grape industry in cool climate viticultural regions. However, on-site data are limited due to the complexity of measurement. Current prediction models underperform under diverse climate conditions, which limits the large-scale deployment of these methods. We combined grapevine freezing tolerance data from multiple regions in North America and generated a predictive model based on hourly temperature-derived features and cultivar features using AutoGluon, an automated machine learning engine. Feature importance was quantified by AutoGluon and SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) value. The final model was evaluated and compared with previous models for its performance under different climate conditions. The final model achieved an overall 1.36°C root-mean-square error during model testing and outperformed two previous models using three test cultivars at all testing regions. Two feature importance quantification methods identified five shared essential features. Detailed analysis of the features indicates that the model has adequately extracted some biological mechanisms during training. The final model, named NYUS.2, was deployed along with two previous models as an R shiny-based application in the 2022-23 dormancy season, enabling large-scale and real-time simulation of grapevine freezing tolerance in North America for the first time.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Dormancy of buds is an important phase in the life cycle of perennial plants growing in environments where unsuitable growth conditions occur seasonally. In regions where low temperature defines these unsuitable conditions, the attainment of cold hardiness is also required for survival. The end of the dormant period culminates in budbreak and flower emergence, or spring phenology, one of the most appreciated and studied phenological events - a time also understood to be most sensitive to low-temperature damage. Despite this, we have a limited physiological and molecular understanding of dormancy, which has negatively affected our ability to model budbreak. This is also true for cold hardiness. SCOPE: Here we highlight the importance of including cold hardiness in dormancy studies that typically only characterize time to budbreak. We show how different temperature treatments may lead to increases in cold hardiness, and by doing so also (potentially inadvertently) increase time to budbreak. CONCLUSIONS: We present a theory that describes evaluation of cold hardiness as being key to clarifying physiological changes throughout the dormant period, delineating dormancy statuses, and improving both chill and phenology models. Erroneous interpretations of budbreak datasets are possible by not phenotyping cold hardiness. Changes in cold hardiness were very probably present in previous experiments that studied dormancy, especially when those included below-freezing temperature treatments. Separating the effects between chilling accumulation and cold acclimation in future studies will be essential for increasing our understanding of dormancy and spring phenology in plants.