## 3 Discussion  
Olive oil classification (EVOO) was not affected by RDI/SDI, in agreement with results from previous studies about water deficit irrigation on olive trees [14; 18; 21; 22]. Description of water stress was not clear with all parameters measured and could affect some of the relationship proposed. Min \(\psi_{\text{stem}}\) was affected for variability within treatments and defined timely water stress, but presented a good agreement with some oil features. Although this measurement was not the most accurate for described irrigation treatments, it could be useful in order to describe oil features because of the reported extreme conditions. On the contrary, SI, though was also limited in comparison to irrigation treatments, it presented clear trends but did not influence the oil features. In the literature on irrigation, both indicators presented a good agreement with some yield components, such as fruit drop [23]. From our knowledge, there are very few works with the presented relationship between these water status parameter and oil features, probably because of these problems of variability. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline  & **SI** \\ \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{Fatty Acids} \\ \hline C17:1 _cis_ & 0.546* \\ Linoleic (C18:2 _cis_) & \(-\)0.568* \\ SFAs & \(-\)0.562* \\ \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{Volatile Compounds} \\ \hline
2-Methylbutanal & 0.657** \\
2-Methylbutan-1-ol & 0.559* \\ (Z)-Hex-3-en-1-ol & 0.670** \\ (Z)-Hex-3-enyl acetate & 0.778** \\ Hexyl acetate & 0.729** \\ (Z)-Hex-2-enyl acetate & 0.602* \\ \(\Sigma\) Aldehydes & \(-\)0.706** \\ \(\Sigma\) Esters & 0.871*** \\ \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{Descriptive Sensory Analysis} \\ \hline Green-herbs & \(-\)0.841*** \\ Almond & 0.834*** \\ Walnut & 0.811*** \\ Sweet & 0.881*** \\ Sour & \(-\)0.849*** \\ Astringent & 0.603* \\ \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{*, ** and ***, significant at \(p<0.05\), 0.01, and 0.001, respectively.} \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Pearson correlation between Stress Integral (SI) and fatty acids, volatile compounds, and descriptive sensory analysis attributes. Similar concentrations of antioxidants and TPC were reported by [PERSON] et al. [24], [PERSON], et al. [25], and [PERSON] et al. [26] on different cultivars and also in \"Arbequina\" by [PERSON] et al. [14] or [PERSON] et al. [27], among others. In the study by [PERSON] et al. [14], highest values of TPC were found when \"Arbequina\" olive trees were irrigated with 30% of control during the pit hardening stage, and the other irrigation treatments, even being more intense, did not show higher values. These results could be considered similar to those found in the current research, where a nonlinear relationship was found between phenolic compounds and the intensity of the water deficit. There is a previous hypothesis proposed by [PERSON] et al. [28]: water stress in the tree can produce an increase in free phenylalanine (phenolic compounds precursor) and, therefore, phenols synthesis could be more sensitive when moderate water stress is applied. There is contradictory information on the effect of deficit irrigation treatments on the fatty acid profile of olive oil. When stress was applied before the pit hardening stage and at the beginning of the rehydration stage, no clear effect was found neither in the study by [PERSON] et al. [29] nor in that of [PERSON] et al. [21], both with the \"Frantoio\" trees; these latter authors did not find a response to stress of fatty acids with a 46-48% deficit irrigation and 2-6% complementary irrigation. On the other hand, [PERSON] et al. [30] and [PERSON] et al. [22] found when studying \"Koroneiki\" and \"Arbequina\" cultivars, respectively, an increase of linoleic acid and a decrease of oleic acid, as the water stress increased during all the season. Results found by [PERSON] et al. [22] (30% RDI and 60% RDI treatments before pit hardening stage) and [PERSON] et al. [18] (SDI treatment with 2-3 irrigation events per week and ca.