Pruning-wound protectants for trunk-disease management in California table grapes

Abstract

In California's Mediterranean climate, management of grapevine trunk diseases (Botryosphaeria dieback, Eutypa dieback, Phomopsis dieback, Esca) focuses on protecting vines during the dormant season, when pruning coincides with rain-induced spore dispersal of the causal fungi (‘trunk pathogens’). Applying protectants (fungicides, toxic barriers, sealants, biocontrol agents) after pruning can minimize infection of pruning wounds. For the dormant seasons of 2017–2019, in a 2-year-old Vitis vinifera ‘Scarlet Royal’ vineyard in the southern San Joaquin Valley, we evaluated tractor-spray applications of the following protectants labeled for table grapes: fluopyram + tebuconazole, pyraclostrobin + boscalid, thiophanate-methyl + myclobutanil, and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens. A comprehensive set of virulent and widespread trunk pathogens, including Diaporthe ampelina, Eutypa lata, Neofusicoccum parvum, and Phaeomoniella chlamydospora, were inoculated to pruning wounds post-application, with detection attempts after a 3 to 4-week incubation period (before budbreak). Consistently high efficacies of pyraclostrobin + boscalid (68–100% and 56–100%, respectively) and thiophanate-methyl + myclobutanil (64–77% and 91–100%, respectively) against Botryosphaeria-dieback pathogen N. parvum and Phomopsis-dieback pathogen D. ampelina suggest spray applications of these protectants could minimize infection by these common trunk pathogens. Low and variable detection rates of slow-growing Eutypa-dieback pathogen E. lata and Esca pathogen P. chlamydospora suggest that the incubation period should be longer or that more replication is needed. Low efficacy of B. amyloliquefaciens, especially with only 4 days in 2017 before pathogen inoculation, suggests this biological-control agent may need more time and/or repeated applications to become established on pruning wounds before being challenged by a pathogen.