## 3 Results and Discussion  
### Canopy Microclimate and Photosynthesis Index under Four Training System  
The training system is an essential factor to manage the canopy, which plays a fundamental role in light energy capture via photosynthesis, as it regulates transpiration and microclimate of ripening grapes, thus affecting yield and quality [21]. So, we measured the temperature, humidity, Pn, and Tr of the canopy after sampling. The temperature and humidity could reflect the degree of exposure; as reported in Table 1, the temperature and humidity under CK were always kept lowest and highest, basically. The Ningxia traditional vertical trunk training system is caused by pursuing the high yield which usually causes the canopy to close. This aggravated the frequent occurrence of pests and diseases and low-quality grape berries. Relatively speaking, the T2 and T3 treatments could retain a higher temperature and lower humidity; this shows that this training system could receive more light so as to biosynthesize more metabolisms.  
Net photosynthesis rate (Pn) and transpiration rate (Tr) on behalf of the leaf photosynthesis ability and stomatal conductance. As shown in Table 2, the Pn under CK treatment is obviously lower than the other training systems. Accordingly, the Tr under T2 treatment acts out the lowest value, thus leading to an overall reduction in water consumption. Thus, the results are consistent with previous studies, which is the lower number of nodes along the cane and their better spatial and light distribution [9].  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c} \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Temperature (‘C)} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Humidity (\%)} \\ \hline  & **50** & **65** & **70** & **90** & **120** & **50** & **65** & **70** & **90** & **120** \\ \hline CK & 21.53 \(\pm\) 1.27 d & 25.42 \(\pm\) 21.2 d & 23.77 \(\pm\) 14.8 d & 24.03 \(\pm\) 14.6 d & 23.14 \(\pm\) 1.63 c & 38.1 \(\pm\) 0.8 a & 34.8 \(\pm\) 1.6 a & 35.4 \(\pm\) 1.2 a & 37.2 \(\pm\) 1.6 a & 36.2 \(\pm\) 2.1 a \\ T1 & 22.18 \(\pm\) 15.3 c & 25.77 \(\pm\) 1.76 c & 23.89 \(\pm\) 1.23 c & 24.71 \(\pm\) 21.11 c & 22.07 \(\pm\) 1.68 d & 36.4 \(\pm\) 1.3 c & 33.2 \(\pm\) 0.8 c & 32.4 \(\pm\) 0.7 b & 36.5 \(\pm\) 0.5 b & 34.1 \(\pm\) 1.3 c \\ T2 & 22.42 \(\pm\) 20.5 s & 26.97 \(\pm\) 2.83 b & 24.82 \(\pm\) 21.44 & 25.24 \(\pm\) 1.35 a & 24.19 \(\pm\) 1.43 b & 37.2 \(\pm\) 0.9 b & 33.7 \(\pm\) 1.4 b & 32.1 \(\pm\) 1.7 b & 35.8 \(\pm\) 1.0 c & 34.6 \(\pm\) 1.8 b \\ T3 & 22.37 \(\pm\) 1.88 b & 27.15 \(\pm\) 23.5 a & 24.18 \(\pm\) 3.26 b & 25.12 \(\pm\) 1.52 b & 24.34 \(\pm\) 1.67 a & 33.8 \(\pm\) 1.1 d & 31.3 \(\pm\) 0.7 d & 30.7 \(\pm\) 1.5 c & 34.7 \(\pm\) 0.4 d & 33.6 \(\pm\) 0.9 d \\ \hline \end{tabular} Note: All data were measured at 11 \(\%\) clock after sampling data represent the average (\(\pm\)std) of a 3 biological replicates, each with three technical repetitions. Small letters represent the significant differences at \(\tau\leq 0.05\).  
\end{table}
Table 1: The temperature and humidity under four training systems.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c} \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Pm (umol CO\({}^{2}\)-\({}^{2}\)-\({}^{3}\)-1)} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Tm (In\({}_{3}\)O=\({}^{2}\)-2.5\({}^{3}\)-1)} \\ \hline  & **50** & **65** & **70** & **90** & **120** & **50** & **65** & **70** & **90** & **120** \\ \hline CK & 6.45 \(\pm\) 0.58 c & 6.97 \(\pm\) 0.83 d & 7.05 \(\pm\) 0.43 d & 6.7