Protection of grapevine pruning wounds against Eutypa lata by biological and chemical methods

South African Journal of Enology and Viticulture

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 125-132

  Halleen, F ^a   Fourie, P H ^b   Lombard, P J ^c  

^a ARC INFRUITEC NIETVOORBIJ   (South Africa)

^b CITRUS RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL   (South Africa)

^c Kelp Products (Pty) Ltd   (South Africa)

Author keywords

Bacillus subtilis; Benomyl; Flusilazole; Trichoderma; Vitis vinifera

Indexed keywords

BACILLUS SUBTILIS; BACTERIA (MICROORGANISMS); EUTYPA DIEBACK; EUTYPA LATA; FUNGI; HYPOCREA LIXII; TRICHODERMA; VITACEAE; VITIS; VITIS VINIFERA;

EID: 79951728638     PISSN: 0253939X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Carter, M.V., 1994. Eutypa dieback. In: Pearson, R.C. & Coheen, A.C. (eds). Compendium of grape diseases. APS Press, Minnesota. pp. 32 - 34.
2. Chapuis, L., Richard, L. & Dubos, B., 1998. Variation in susceptibility of grapevine pruning wound to infection by Eutypa lata in south-western France. Plant Pathol. 47, 463-472.
3. Creaser, M.L. & Wicks, T.J., 2000. Eutypa dieback - current status and future directions. The Australian Grapegrower and Winemaker. Ann. Tech. Issue 438a, 82-87.
4. Creaser, M.L. & Wicks, T.J., 2002. Evaluation of fungicides, paints and a biological product for the prevention of Eutypa dieback of grapevines. The Aust. New Zealand Grapegrower and Winemaker 465, 15-18.
5. Ferreira, J.H.S., Matthee, F.N. & Thomas, A.C., 1991. Biological control of Eutypa lata on grapevines by an antagonistic strain of Bacillus subtilis. Phytopathol. 81, 283-287.
6. Gendloff, E.H., Ramsdell, D.C. & Burton, C.L., 1983. Fungicidal control of Eutypa armeniacae infecting Concord grapevine in Michigan. Plant Dis. 67, 754-756.
7. Halleen, F., Volkmann, A.S. & Fourie, P.H., 2001. Incidence of Eutypa-like symptoms in Cabernet Sauvignon vineyards in the greater Stellenbosch area. Wynboer 143, 12-14.
8. Hunt, J.S., 1999. Wood-invading fungi: protective management in the vineyard. The Australian Grapegrower and Winemaker. Ann. Tech. Issue 426a, 125-126.
9. John, S., Scott, E.S., Wicks, T.J. & Hunt, J.S., 2004. Interactions between Eutypa lata and Trichoderma harzianum. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 43, 95-104.
10. John, S., Wicks, T.J., Hunt, J.S. & Scott, E.S., 2008. Colonisation of grapevine wood by Trichoderma harzianum and Eutypa lata. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 14, 18-24.
11. John, S., Wicks, T.J., Hunt, J.S., Lorimer, M.F., Oakey, H. & Scott, E.S., 2005. Protection of grapevine wounds from infection by Eutypa lata using Trichoderma harzianum and Fusarium lateritium. Australas. Plant Pathol. 34, 569-575.
12. Kotze, C., 2008. Biological control of the grapevine trunk disease pathogens: pruning wound protection. MSc. thesis, University of Stellenbosch, Private Bag X1, 7602 Matieland (Stellenbosch), South Africa.
13. Lecomte, P., Louvet, G., Vacher, B. & Guilbaud, P., 2006. Survival of fungi associated with grapevine decline in pruned wood after composting. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 45, 127-130.
14. McMahan, G., Yeh, W., Marshall, M.N., Olsen, M., Sananikone, S., Wu, J.Y., Block, D.E. & VanderGheynst, J.S., 2001. Characterizing the production of a wild-type and benomyl-resistant Fusarium lateritium for biocontrol of Eutypa lata on grapevine. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 26, 151-155.
15. Moller, W.J. & Kasimatis, A.N., 1978. Dieback of grapevine caused by Eutypa armeniacae. Plant Dis. Reporter 62, 254-258.
16. Moller, W.J. & Kasimatis, A.N., 1980. Protection of grapevine pruning wounds from Eutypa dieback. Plant Dis. 64, 278-280.
17. Munkvold, G.P. & Marois, J.J., 1993a. The effects of fungicides on Eutypa lata germination, growth, and infection of grapevines. Plant Dis. 77, 50-55.
18. Munkvold, G.P. & Marois, J.J., 1993b. Efficacy of natural epiphytes and colonizers of grapevine pruning wounds for biological control of Eutypa dieback. Phytopathol. 83, 624-629.
19. Munkvold, G.P. & Marois, J.J., 1995. Factors associated with variation in susceptibility of grapevine pruning wounds to infection by Eutypa lata. Phytopathol. 85, 249-256.
20. Munkvold, G.P., Duthie, J.A. & Marois, J.J., 1993. Spatial patterns of grapevines with Eutypa dieback in vineyards with or without perithecia. Phytopathol. 83, 1440-1448.
21. Munkvold, G.P., Duthie, J.A. & Marois, J.J., 1994. Reductions in yield and vegetative growth of grapevines due to Eutypa dieback. Phytopathol. 84, 186-192.
22. Mutawila, C., 2010. Biological control of trunk disease pathogens at the pruning wound site of grapevine. MSc. thesis, University of Stellenbosch, Private Bag X1, 7602 Matieland (Stellenbosch), South Africa.
23. Nel, A., Krause, M. & Khelawanlall, N., 2003. A guide for the control of plant diseases. Department of Agriculture, Republic of South Africa.
24. Pearson, R.C., 1980. Discharge of ascospores of Eutypa armeniacae in New York. Plant Dis. 64, 171-174.
25. Pearson, R.C., 1982. Protection of grapevine pruning wounds from infection by Eutypa armeniacae in New York State. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 33, 51-52.
26. Petzoldt, C.H., Moller, W.J. & Sall, M.A., 1981. Eutypa dieback of grapevine: seasonal difference in infection and duration of susceptibility of pruning wounds. Phytopathol. 71, 540-543.
27. Petzoldt, C.H., Sall, M.A. & Moller, W.J., 1983. Factors determining the relative number of ascospores released by Eutypa armeniacae in California. Plant Dis. 67, 857-860.
28. Ramsdell, D.C., 1995. Winter air-blast sprayer applications of benomyl for reduction of Eutypa dieback disease incidence in concorde grape vineyard in Michigan. Plant Dis. 79, 399-402.
29. Rolshausen, P.E. & Gubler, W.D., 2005. Use of boron for the control of Eutypa dieback of grapevines. Plant Dis. 89, 734-738.
30. SAS, 1990. SAS/STAT User's Guide, Version 6, Fourth Edition, Volume 2. SAS Institute Inc, SAS Campus Drive, Cary, NC 27513.
31. Schmidt, C.S., Lorenz, D., Wolf, G.A. & Jäger, J., 2001. Biological control of the grapevine dieback fungus Eutypa lata II: Influence of formulation additives and transposon mutagenesis on the antagonistic activity of Bacillus subtilis and Erwinia herbicola. J. Phytopathol. 149, 437-445.
32. Shapiro, S.S. & Wilk, M.B., 1965. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 52, 591-611.
33. Sosnowski, M.R., Creaser, M.L. & Wicks, T.J., 2004. Evaluating fungicides as pruning wound treatments to control eutypa dieback. The Aust. New Zealand Grapegrower and Winemaker. Ann. Tech. Issue 485a, 51-53.
34. Sosnowski, M.R., Creaser, M.L., Wicks, T.J., Lardner, R. & Scott, E.S., 2008. Protection of grapevine pruning wounds from infection by Eutypa lata. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 14, 134-142.
35. Trese, A.T., Burton, C.L. & Ramsdell, D.C., 1980. Eutypa armeniacae in Michigan vineyards: ascospore production and survival, host infection, and fungal growth at low temperatures. Phytopathol. 70, 788-793.
36. Trese, A.T., Ramsdell, D.C. & Burton, C.L., 1982. Effects of winter and spring pruning and postinoculation cold weather on infection of grapevine by Eutypa armeniacae. Phytopathol. 72, 438-440.
37. Van Niekerk, J., Fourie, P.H. & Halleen, F., 2003. Ekonomiese impak van Eutypa terugsterwing van wingerd. Wynboer 173, 10-12.
38. Van Niekerk, J.M., 2008. Epidemiology of grapevine trunk disease pathogens. PhD dissertation, University of Stellenbosch, Private Bag X1, 7602 Matieland (Stellenbosch), South Africa.
39. Wicks, T. & Davies, K., 1999. The effect of Eutypa on grapevine yield. The Aust. Grapegrower and Winemaker. Ann. Tech. Issue 426a, 15-16.