Submitted to: Meeting Abstract
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 12/1/2009
Publication Date: 1/15/2010
Citation: Rolshausen, P.E., Wilcox, W., Baumgartner, K. 2010. Distribution and Occurrence of Fungi Associated with Grapevine Trunk Diseases in Northeastern American Vineyards. Phytopathologia Mediterranea. 49:105. . Meeting Abstract. 49:105. Interpretive Summary:
Technical Abstract: Winegrape production in northeastern America is a relatively new, developing industry. Concord (Vitis labruscana) has been the main grape grown for juice production. However, in recent years New York wine production (V. vinifera) has been recognized nationwide for their quality and typicity. Vitis vinifera is now grown commercially in many eastern states and wineries are established in every state. However, cold climatic conditions and the short growing season necessitate the planting of inter-specific hybrids (north American Vitis species X V. vinifera). Given that the viticultural practices, surrounding ecosystems, and terroirs are quite specific, the objectives of our study are to identify the causal agents of trunk diseases in these regions, to map their distribution, and to quantify their occurrence. We surveyed a total of 50 vineyards, representing 30 varieties, in 11 US states and two Canadian provinces. From 700 wood samples, we found a high degree of diversity in the fungal taxa. Four species of Eutypa were recovered, some of which were not identified before. Eutypa lata was found only in Rhode Island. Of the three species in the Botryosphaeriaceae that were identified, Neofusicoccum parvum was most common. Phaeomoniella chlamydospora, Phaeoacremonium aleophilum, Cadophora sp., and Phomopsis spp. were ubiquitous across states. Cytospora sp. was only recovered in cold climate regions. Several species of Cylindrocarpon were recovered, but only in Quebec. Therefore, the fungal community associated with trunk diseases in eastern North America is similar to that of Mediterranean regions, but their relative abundance and latitudinal variation are different.