The Effects of Different Substrates with Chemical and Organic Fertilizer Applications on Vitamins, Mineral, and Amino Acid Content of Grape Berries from Soilless Culture
Due to its advantages, soilless cultivation has been used for both early- and late-maturing grape varieties. High nutritional and energy value is one of the strongest features that make the grape an effective component of agriculture and the human diet. Therefore, it was thought that it would be use...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book Chapter |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
IntechOpen
2022
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/81017 |
| Tags: |
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Due to its advantages, soilless cultivation has been used for both early- and late-maturing grape varieties. High nutritional and energy value is one of the strongest features that make the grape an effective component of agriculture and the human diet. Therefore, it was thought that it would be useful to determine the nutrient content of the berries in a soilless culture study carried out on the Early Cardinal grape variety. One-year-old vines were trained to a guyot system and grown in 32-liter plastic pots containing four different solid growing media, namely, zeolite, cocopeat, and zeolite+cocopeat (Z + C) (1:1 and 1:2, v:v). A total of three different nutrient solutions (Hoagland, Hoagland A (adapted to the vine) and organic liquid worm fertilizer (OLWF)) were applied to the plants. Grapevines were given different solutions starting from the bud burst. Z + C (1:1) substrate mixture giving the highest values of 14 amino acids, vitamins, and most macro- and microelements. Hoagland and Modified Hoagland nutrient solutions mostly gave higher values than OLWF for the properties studied. In general, it was observed that there were no significant losses in terms of mineral, vitamin, and amino acid composition in soilless grape cultivation. |
|---|---|
| ISBN: | 978-1-80355-168-5 |
| DOI: | 10.5772/intechopen.102345 |