Table 6.
Acetoin and volatile organic acid (µg L−1) determined in wines from Malbec plants exposed to combined UV-B, WD and ABA treatments.
| Treatments | Acetoin | Hexanoic Acid | Octanoic Acid | Palmitic Acid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UV-B | ||||
| +UV-B | 9.9 ± 1.3 | 9.8 ± 1.8 | 24.4 ± 3.6 | 0.4 ± 0.4b |
| −UV-B | 9.4 ± 2.4 | 20.3 ± 3.7 | 28.4 ± 4.1 | 5.0 ± 1.3a |
| ABA | ||||
| +ABA | 6.6 ± 1.0 | 17.1 ± 3.6 | 29.3 ± 4.0 | 1.5 ± 0.9 |
| −ABA | 12.8 ± 2.1 | 13.0 ± 2.9 | 23.5 ± 3.6 | 3.8 ± 1.4 |
| WD | ||||
| +WD | 7.6 ± 1.6 | 12.7 ± 1.6 | 18.2 ± 1.8b | 1.4 ± 1.2 |
| −WD | 11.8 ± 2.0 | 17.5 ± 4.3 | 34.6 ± 3.9a | 4.0 ± 1.1 |
| +UV-B | ||||
| +WD/+ABA | 5.9 ± 2.8bc | 18.7 ± 1.5 | 17.6 ± 4.7 | 0.00 ± 0.0 |
| −WD/+ABA | 9.7 ± 1.7bc | 7.1 ± 1.0 | 41.1 ± 3.8 | 0.00 ± 0.0 |
| +WD/−ABA | 14.1 ± 2.7ab | 9.1 ± 1.9 | 15.7 ± 4.3 | 0.00 ± 0.0 |
| −WD/−ABA | 10.0 ± 0.5bc | 4.4 ± 2.5 | 23.2 ± 5.7 | 1.47 ± 1.5 |
| −UV-B | ||||
| +WD/+ABA | 3.7 ± 1.4c | 7.4 ± 0.9 | 17.2 ± 2.2 | 0.00 ± 0.0 |
| −WD/+ABA | 6.9 ± 0.9bc | 35.3 ± 4.3 | 41.4 ± 4.6 | 6.17 ± 1.6 |
| +WD/−ABA | 6.5 ± 2.8bc | 15.5 ± 2.1 | 22.2 ± 3.2 | 5.63 ± 4.3 |
| −WD/−ABA | 20.4 ± 5.7a | 23.2 ± 8.5 | 32.8 ± 12.3 | 8.27 ± 0.5 |
| ANOVA a | ||||
| p(UV-B) | 0.8529 | 0.0100 | 0.3498 | 0.0571 |
| p(ABA) | 0.0142 | 0.2477 | 0.2276 | 0.0850 |
| p(WD) | 0.0631 | 0.0962 | 0.0231 | 0.1645 |
| p(UV-B ×ABA) | 0.3508 | 0.5440 | 0.3895 | 0.2175 |
| p(UV-B × WD) | 0.0567 | 0.0043 | 0.8461 | 0.2917 |
| p(ABA × WD) | 0.7395 | 0.3389 | 0.1350 | 0.6706 |
| p(UV-B ×ABA × WD) | 0.0460 | 0.0711 | 0.8961 | 0.3167 |
Values are means for each factor or treatment (n=3) ±SEM. Different lowercase letters within columns indicate significant differences (Fisher’s LSD, p ≤ 0.05). a p(UV-B), p(ABA) and p(WD): effects of UV-B, ABA and WD, respectively; p(UV-B ×ABA), p(UV-B × WD), p(ABA × WD), and p(UV-B ×ABA × WD): interaction effects of factors. p-values ≤ 0.05 were considered statistically significant, and are in bold.