Vol. 63 No. 1 (2024)
Articles

Grapevine pruning strategy affects trunk disease symptoms, wood pathobiome and mycobiome

PDF PDF Suppl.
  • Leticia MEZA,
  • Elizabeth DEYETT,
  • Jessica VALLANCE,
  • Lucille GENDRE,
  • Jadran F. GARCIA,
  • Dario CANTU,
  • Patrice REY,
  • Pascal LECOMTE,
  • Philippe E. ROLSHAUSEN
Leticia MEZA
Department of Botany and Plant Sciences, University of California, Riverside, 92521
Elizabeth DEYETT
Department of Botany and Plant Sciences, University of California, Riverside, 92521
Jessica VALLANCE
INRAE, UMR 1065 SAVE, Université de Bordeaux, ISVV, CS20032, 33882 Villenave d’Ornon
Lucille GENDRE
Bordeaux Sciences Agro, UMR 1065 SAVE, Université de Bordeaux, ISVV, CS20032, 33882 Villenave d’Ornon
Jadran F. GARCIA
Department of Viticulture and Enology, University of California, Davis, CA
Dario CANTU
Department of Viticulture and Enology, University of California, Davis, CA
Patrice REY
Bordeaux Sciences Agro, UMR 1065 SAVE, Université de Bordeaux, ISVV, CS20032, 33882 Villenave d’Ornon
Pascal LECOMTE
INRAE, UMR 1065 SAVE, Université de Bordeaux, ISVV, CS20032, 33882 Villenave d’Ornon
Philippe E. ROLSHAUSEN
Department of Botany and Plant Sciences, University of California, Riverside, 92521
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/phyto-14778
Categories

Published 2024-04-30

Keywords

  • Botryosphaeria canker,
  • esca,
  • disease management,
  • microbiome

How to Cite

[1]
L. MEZA, “Grapevine pruning strategy affects trunk disease symptoms, wood pathobiome and mycobiome”, Phytopathol. Mediterr., vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 91–102, Apr. 2024.

Copyright (c) 2024 Leticia MEZA, Elizabeth DEYETT, Jessica VALLANCE, Lucille GENDRE, Jadran F. GARCIA, Dario CANTU, Patrice REY, Pascal LECOMTE, Philippe E. ROLSHAUSEN

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

Vine training and pruning are cultural strategies that can be deployed to manage grapevine trunk diseases (GTDs). Forty-year-old commercial vineyards in the Cognac region, France, trained to either Guyot-Arcure (severe pruning) or Guyot-Poussard (minimal pruning), were studied to determine how the two systems affected trunk disease symptomatology. Effects of pruning practices on the pathobiome and mycobiome of asymptomatic grapevines were also assessed, using culture- and amplicon-based Illumina sequencing approaches. The hypothesis examined was that severe pruning of Guyot-Arcure increases trunk diseases incidence and severity, and causes higher pathogen load and microbial diversity, compared to Guyot-Poussard. Numbers of symptomatic and asymptomatic vines for the two training systems were recorded over 3 years, including numbers of vines with esca foliar symptoms, and partially unproductive and dead vines. Six asymptomatic vines from each pruning method were selected, and culturing and sequencing data were obtained from 27 samples per vine. Fungi in the Phaeomoniellaceae, Togniniaceae, and Botryosphaeriaceae were the most frequently identified. The data indicated that severe pruning increased risk of pathogen infections, with Phaeomoniella chlamydospora, Phaeoacremonium minimum and Diplodia sp. being the most commonly identified fungi. Greater numbers of dead or dying vines were recorded in the severely pruned vineyard, indicating that this strategy shortens vine longevity. Results also showed that severe pruning increased endophytic microbial diversity, and that the pruning methods influenced mycobiome community composition. This knowledge will improve recommendations to growers for practical and cost-effective ways to manage GTDs.

PDF PDF Suppl.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  1. Alston J., Sambucci O. 2019. Grapes in the word economy. Pages 1-24 in: The Grape Genome. Springer Cham, Springer Nature, Switzerland. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-18601-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18601-2_1
  2. Bertsch C., Ramirez-Suero M., Magnin-Robert M., Larignon P., Chong J., … Fontaine F. 2013. Grapevine trunk diseases: complex and still poorly understood. Plant Pathology 62: 243–265. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3059.2012.02674.x
  3. Bois B., Zito S., Calonnec A. 2017. Climate vs grapevine pests and diseases worldwide : the first results of a global survey. Oeno One 51: 133-139. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20870/oeno-one.2017.51.2.1780
  4. Bruez E., Lecomte P., Grosman J., Doublet B., Bertsch C., … Rey P. 2013. Overview of grapevine trunk diseases in France in the 2000s. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 52: 262–275.
  5. Bruez E., Vallance J., Gerbore J., Lecomte P., Da Costa J. P., … Rey P. 2014. Analyses of the temporal dynamics of fungal communities colonizing the healthy wood tissues of esca leaf-symptomatic and asymptomatic vines. Plos One 9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0095928
  6. Bruez E., Larignon P., Bertsch C., Robert-Siegwald G., Lebrun M., … Fontaine F. 2021. Impacts of Sodium Arsenite on Wood Microbiota of Esca-Diseased Grapevines. Journal of Fungi 7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jof7070498
  7. Callahan B.J., McMurdie P.J., Rosen M.J., Han A.W., Johnson A.J.A., Holmes S.P. 2016. DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nature Methods 13: 581-583. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.3869
  8. Calzarano F., Osti F., Baránek M., Di Marco S. 2018. Rainfall and temperature influence expression of foliar symptoms of grapevine leaf stripe disease (esca complex) in vineyards. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 57: 488–505.
  9. Casolani N., D’Eusanio M., Liberatore L., Raggi A., Petti L. 2022. Life cycle assessment in the wine sector: A review on inventory phase. Journal of Cleaner Production 379. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134404
  10. Chaverri P., Salgado C., Hirooka Y., Rossman A., Samuels G. 2011. Delimitation of Neonectria and Cylindrocarpon (Nectriaceae, Hypocreales, Ascomycota) and related genera with Cylindrocarpon-like anamorphs. Studies in Mycology 68: 57–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3114/sim.2011.68.03
  11. Chen Q., Bakhshi M., Balci Y., Broders K., Cheewangkoon R., … Crous P. 2022. Genera of phytopathogenic fungi: GOPHY 4. Studies in Mycology 101: 417–564. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3114/sim.2022.101.06
  12. Cholet C., Bruez É., Lecomte P., Barsacq A., Martignon T., … Gény L. 2021. Plant resilience and physiological modifications induced by curettage of Esca-diseased grapevines. Oeno One 55: 153–169. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20870/oeno-one.2021.55.1.4478
  13. Del Frari G., Gobbi A., Aggerbeck M.R., Oliveira H., Hansen L.H., Ferreira R.B. 2019. Characterization of the wood mycobiome of Vitis vinifera in a vineyard affected by esca. Spatial distribution of fungal communities and their putative relation with leaf symptoms. Frontiers in Plant Science 10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.00910
  14. Dewasme C., Mary S., Darrieutort G., Roby J., Gambetta G. 2022. Long-term esca monitoring reveals disease impacts on fruit yield and wine quality. Plant Disease 106: 3076–3082. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-11-21-2454-RE
  15. Deyett E., Rolshausen P. 2020. Endophytic microbial assemblage in grapevine. Fems Microbiology Ecology 96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fiaa053
  16. Di Marco S., Metruccio E., Moretti S., Nocentini M., Carella G., … Mugnai L. 2022. Activity of Trichoderma asperellum strain ICC 012 and Trichoderma gamsii strain ICC 080 toward diseases of esca complex and associated pathogens. Frontiers in Microbiology 12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.813410
  17. Eskalen A., Feliciano A.J., Gubler W.A. 2007. Susceptibility of grapevine pruning wounds and symptom development in response to infection by Phaeoacremonium aleophilum and Phaeomoniella chlamydospora. Plant Disease 91: 1100–1104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-91-9-1100
  18. Fischer M., Edwards J., Cunnington J., Pascoe I. 2005. Basidiomycetous pathogens on grapevine: a new species from Australia - Fomitiporia australiensis. Mycotaxon 92: 85–96.
  19. Fox J. 2005. The R commander: A basic-statistics graphical user interface to R. Journal of Statistical Software 14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v014.i09
  20. Fussler L., Kobes N., Bertrand F., Mauray M., Grosman J., Savary S. 2008. A characterization of grapevine trunk diseases in France from data generated by the National Grapevine Wood Diseases Survey. Phytopathology 98: 571–579. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-98-5-0571
  21. Geiger A., Karacsony Z., Golen R., Vaczy K., Geml J. 2022. The compositional turnover of grapevine-associated plant pathogenic fungal communities Is greater among intraindividual microhabitats and terroirs than among healthy and esca-diseased plants. Phytopathology 112: 1029–1035. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-05-21-0190-R
  22. Gispert C., Kaplan J.D., Deyett E., Rolshausen P.E. 2020. Long-term benefits of protecting table grape vineyards against trunk diseases in the California desert. Agronomy 10: 1895. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10121895
  23. Grafenhan T., Schroers H., Nirenberg H., Seifert K. 2011. An overview of the taxonomy, phylogeny, and typification of nectriaceous fungi in Cosmospora, Acremonium, Fusarium, Stilbella, and Volutella. Studies in Mycology 68: 79–113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3114/sim.2011.68.04
  24. Gramaje D., Mostert L., Groenewald J., Crous P. 2015. Phaeoacremonium: from esca disease to phaeohyphomycosis. Fungal Biology 119: 759–783. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.funbio.2015.06.004
  25. Gramaje D., Urbez-Torres J.R., Sosnowski M.R. 2018. Managing grapevine trunk diseases with respect to etiology and epidemiology: current strategies and future prospects. Plant Disease 102: 12–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-04-17-0512-FE
  26. Gu S., Cochran R., Du G., Hakim A., Fugelsang K., … Verdegaal P. 2005. Effect of training-pruning regimes on Eutypa dieback and performance of ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ grapevines. Journal of Horticultural Science & Biotechnology 80: 313–318. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2005.11511936
  27. Guerin-Dubrana L., Fontaine F., Mugnai L. 2019. Grapevine trunk disease in European and Mediterranean vineyards: occurrence, distribution and associated disease-affecting cultural factors. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 58: 49–71.
  28. Hawksworth D., Gibson I., Gams W. 1976. Phialophora parasitica associated with disease conditions in various trees. Transactions of the British Mycological Society 66: 427–431. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-1536(76)80212-4
  29. Henderson B., Sosnowski M.R., McCarthy M.G., Scott E.S. 2021. Incidence and severity of Eutypa dieback in grapevines are related to total surface area of pruning wounds. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research 27: 87–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajgw.12465
  30. Hillis V., Lubell M., Kaplan J., Baumgartner K. 2017. Preventative disease management and grower decision making: a case study of California wine-grape growers. Phytopathology 107: 704–710. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-07-16-0274-R
  31. Kaplan J., Travadon R., Cooper M., Hillis V., Lubell M., Baumgartner K. 2016. Identifying economic hurdles to early adoption of preventative practices: the case of trunk diseases in California winegrape vineyards. Wine Economics and Policy 5: 127–141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wep.2016.11.001
  32. Kraus C., Voegele R., Fischer M. 2019. The esca complex in German vineyards: does the training system influence occurrence of GLSD symptoms? European Journal of Plant Pathology 155: 265–279. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10658-019-01769-0
  33. Kraus C., Rauch C., Kalvelage E., Behrens F., D’Aguiar D., … Fischer M. 2022. Minimal versus intensive: how the pruning intensity affects occurrence of grapevine leaf stripe disease, wood integrity, and the mycobiome in grapevine trunks. Journal of Fungi 8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8030247
  34. Lafon R. 1921. L’apoplexie: traitement préventif (Méthode Poussard), traitement curatif. Pages 35–44 in: Modifications à apporter à la taille de la vigne dans les Charentes : taille Guyot-Poussard mixte et double. Imprimerie Roumégous et Déhan, Montpellier, France.
  35. Larach A., Torres C., Riquelme N., Valenzuela M., Salgado E., … Besoain X. 2020. Yield loss estimation and pathogen identification from Botryosphaeria dieback in vineyards of Central Chile over two growing seasons. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 59: 537–548.
  36. Lecomte P., Darrieutort G., Liminana J.M., Comont G., Muruamendiaraz A., … Fermaud M. 2012. New insights into esca of grapevine: the development of foliar symptoms and their association with xylem discoloration. Plant Disease 96: 924–934. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-09-11-0776-RE
  37. Lecomte P., Diarra B., Carbonneau A., Rey P., Chevrier C. 2018. Esca of grapevine and training practices in France: results of a 10-year survey. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 57: 472–487.
  38. Maher N., Piot J., Bastien S., Vallance J., Rey P., Guérin-Dubrana L. 2012. Wood necrosis in esca-affected vines: types, relationships and possible links with foliar symptom expression. Journal International Des Sciences De La Vigne Et Du Vin 46: 15–27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20870/oeno-one.2012.46.1.1507
  39. Martinez-Diz M., Eichmeier A., Spetik M., Bujanda R., Diaz-Fernandez A., … Gramaje D. 2020. Grapevine pruning time affects natural wound colonization by wood-invading fungi. Fungal Ecology 48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.funeco.2020.100994
  40. McMurdie P.J., Holmes S. 2013. phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PLoS One 8: e61217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0061217
  41. Morales-Cruz A., Figueroa-Balderas R., Garcia J.F., Tran E., Rolshausen P.E., … Cantu D. 2018. Profiling grapevine trunk pathogens in planta: a case for community-targeted DNA metabarcoding. BMC Microbiology 18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12866-018-1343-0
  42. Mugnai L., Graniti A., Surico G. 1999. Esca (Black measles) and brown wood-streaking: Two old and elusive diseases of grapevines. Plant Disease 83: 404–418. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS.1999.83.5.404
  43. Munkvold G.P., Marois J.J. 1995. Factors associated with variation in susceptibility of grapevine pruning wounds to infection by Eutypa lata. Phytopathology 85: 249–256. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1094/Phyto-85-249
  44. Niem J., Billones-Baaijens R., Stodart B., Savocchia S. 2020. Diversity profiling of grapevine microbial endosphere and antagonistic potential of endophytic Pseudomonas against grapevine trunk diseases. Frontiers in Microbiology 11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.00477
  45. Pacetti A., Moretti S., Pinto C., Compant S., Farine S., … Mugnai L. 2021. Trunk surgery as a tool to reduce foliar symptoms in diseases of the esca complex and its influence on vine wood microbiota. Journal of Fungi 7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jof7070521
  46. Phillips A.J., Alves A., Abdollahzadeh J., Slippers B., Wingfield M.J., … Crous P.W. 2013. The Botryosphaeriaceae: genera and species known from culture. Stud Mycol 76: 51–167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3114/sim0021
  47. Pouzoulet J., Mailhac N., Couderc C., Besson X., Dayde J., … Jacques A. 2013. A method to detect and quantify Phaeomoniella chlamydospora and Phaeoacremonium aleophilum DNA in grapevine-wood samples. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 97: 10163–10175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-013-5299-6
  48. Rolshausen P., Mahoney N., Molyneux R., Gubler W. 2006. Reassessment of the species concept in Eutypa lata, the causal agent of eutypa dieback of grapevine. Phytopathology 96: 369–377. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-96-0369
  49. Rolshausen P.E., Urbez-Torres J.R., Rooney-Latham S., Eskalen A., Smith R.J., Gubler W.D. 2010. Evaluation of pruning wound susceptibility and protection against fungi associated with grapevine trunk diseases. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 61: 113–119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5344/ajev.2010.61.1.113
  50. Schindelin J., Arganda-Carreras I., Frise E., Kaynig V., Longair M., … Cardona A. 2012. Fiji: an open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nature Methods 9: 676–682. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2019
  51. Surico G. 2009. Towards a redefinition of the diseases within the esca complex of grapevine. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 48: 5–10.
  52. Travadon R., Baumgartner K., Rolshausen P., Gubler W., Sosnowski M., … Péros J. 2012. Genetic structure of the fungal grapevine pathogen Eutypa lata from four continents. Plant Pathology 61: 85–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3059.2011.02496.x
  53. Travadon R., Lecomte P., Diarra B., Lawrence D., Renault D., … Baumgartner K. 2016. Grapevine pruning systems and cultivars influence the diversity of wood-colonizing fungi. Fungal Ecology 24: 82–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.funeco.2016.09.003
  54. Trouillas F., Urbez-Torres J., Gubler W. 2010. Diversity of diatrypaceous fungi associated with grapevine canker diseases in California. Mycologia 102: 319–336. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3852/08-185
  55. van Niekerk J., Groenewald J., Farr D., Fourie P., Halleen F., Crous P. 2005. Reassessment of Phomopsis species on grapevines. Australasian Plant Pathology 34: 27–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1071/AP04072
  56. Vanga B., Panda P., Shah A., Thompson S., Woolley R., … Bulman S. 2022. DNA metabarcoding reveals high relative abundance of trunk disease fungi in grapevines from Marlborough, New Zealand. Bmc Microbiology 22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12866-022-02520-2
  57. Wickham H. 2009. Ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer, New York, USA. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98141-3
  58. Úrbez-Torres J.R. 2011. The status of Botryosphaeriaceae species infecting grapevines. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 50: S5–S45.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>