Several physiological indicators of plant water status (stem water potential, SWP , leaf water potential, LWP and trunk growth rate , TGR,), were tested as criteria for irrigation scheduling in table grapes cv Crimson Seedless, growing, in a deep (2 m) clay loamy soil, at the Aconcagua Valley, Chile. Four irrigation treatments were applied: T1, 100% of crop evapotranspiration (Etc), T2, 75% of Etc, T3, 50% of Etc, all over the season, and T4, with a variable amount of water (between 0 to 100% of Etc) all over the season. Stem water potential (SWP) and leaf water potential (LWP) were measured at midday using a pressure chamber. Trunk growth rate (TGR) was measured continuously with an electronic dendrometer. Soil water changes were also measured. The first year results shows that TGR was most sensitive than the other two indicators, however, the interaction between plant pheno-logy and trunk growth must be considered. INTRODUCTION An inadequate water supply at any stage of the productive cycle of table grape limits the production and the quality of the fruit, particularly between flowering and veraison (Peacoock et al., 1998). Therefore, in this period it is important to detect any water deficit, even moderate, as soon as possible, to obtain higher fruit diameter at harvest. Periodic measurements of soil water status are usually conducted for detection of vine water stress (Martín et al., 1990). However, under drip irrigation, a local measure-ment of soil water content is not representative, and many measurements are needed to integrate soil moisture of the wettes zone beneath the dripper (Selles et al., 2003; Myburg, 1996; Or, 1995). Therefore, physiological indicators of plant water status have the potential to be a better water stress indicator (Selles and Berger, 1990; Goldhammer et al., 1999). Leaf Water Potential, LWP, or Stem Water Potential, SWP, (Fereres and Goldhammer, 2003; Schackel et al. 1997; Naor, 2001), measured at midday with a pressure chamber, has been proposed as a standard parameter to determine the plant water status for irrigation scheduling of fruit trees. On the other hand, a continuous recording the variations of trunks diameter was proposed as plant water stress indicator (Selles and Berger, 1990; Myburg, 1996; Michelakis, 1997; Van Louwen et al., 2000; Goldhammer and Fereres, 2001; Moriana and Fereres, 2002). In several fruit species trunk diameter variation has been shown to be sensitive to moisture availability under moderate water stress conditions (Van Louwen et al., 2000; Goldhammer and Fereres, 2001). In addition parameters based on trunk diameter changes were found to be more responsive to moisture soil availability compare with LWP or SWP (Goldhamer et al., 1999). The objective of our project was to evaluate the sensitivity of a few water stress indicators for irrigation scheduling of Crimson Seedless table grapes. The results of the first year are reported here.