Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background In recent years, the Ontario grape and wine industry has experienced outbreaks of viral diseases across the province. Little is known about the prevalence of viruses and viral diseases in Ontario. Since 2015, we have conducted large-scale surveys for major viruses in commercial wine grapes in order to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the prevalence and severity of viral diseases in Ontario. Methods A total of 657 composite leaf samples representing 3285 vines collected from 137 vine blocks of 33 vineyards from three appellations: Niagara Peninsula, Lake Erie North Shore and Prince Edward County. These samples covered six major red cultivars and five major white grape cultivars. Using a multiplex RT-PCR format, we tested these samples for 17 viruses including those involved in all major viral diseases of the grapevine, such as five grapevine leafroll-associated viruses (GLRaV-1, 2, 3, 4, 7), grapevine red blotch virus (GRBV), grapevine Pinot gris virus (GPGV), grapevine rupestris stem sitting-associated virus (GRSPaV), grapevine virus A (GVA), grapevine virus B (GVB), grapevine fleck virus (GFkV), arabis mosaic virus (ArMV), tomato ringspot virus (ToRSV), trapevine fanleaf virus (GFLV), among others. Results Fourteen of the 17 viruses were detected from these samples and the predominant viruses are GRSPaV, GLRaV-3, GFkV, GPGV and GRBaV with an incidence of 84.0, 47.9, 21.8, 21.6 and 18.3%, respectively. As expected, mixed infections with multiple viruses are common. 95.6% of the samples included in the survey were infected with at least one virus; 67% of the samples with 2–4 viruses and 4.7% of the samples with 5–6 viruses. The major grape cultivars all tested positive for these major viruses. The results also suggested that the use of infected planting material may have been one of the chief factors responsible for the recent outbreaks of viral diseases across the province. Conclusions This is the first such comprehensive survey for grapevine viruses in Ontario and one of the most extensive surveys ever conducted in Canada. The recent outbreaks of viral diseases in Ontario vineyards were likely caused by GLRaV-3, GRBV and GPGV. Findings from this survey provides a baseline for the grape and wine industry in developing strategies for managing grapevine viral diseases in Ontario vineyards.

In this study, an analysis of the virome of 51 grapevines from the Don ampelographic collection named after Ya. I. Potapenko (Russia) was performed using high-throughput sequencing of total RNA. A total of 20 previously described grapevine viruses and 4 viroids were identified. The most detected were grapevine rupestris stem pitting-associated virus (98%), hop stunt viroid (98%), grapevine Pinot gris virus (96%), grapevine yellow speckle viroid 1 (94%), and grapevine fleck virus (GFkV, 80%). Among the economically significant viruses, the most present were grapevine leafroll-associated virus 3 (37%), grapevine virus A (24%), and grapevine leafroll-associated virus 1 (16%). For the first time in Russia, a grapevine-associated tymo-like virus (78%) was detected. After a bioinformatics analysis, 123 complete or nearly complete viral genomes and 64 complete viroid genomes were assembled. An analysis of the phylogenetic relationships with reported global isolates was performed. We discovered and characterized the genomes of five novel grapevine viruses: bipartite dsRNA grapevine alphapartitivirus (genus Alphapartitivirus, family Partitiviridae), bipartite (+) ssRNA grapevine secovirus (genus Fabavirus, family Secoviridae) and three (+) ssRNA grapevine umbra-like viruses 2, -3, -4 (which phylogenetically occupy an intermediate position between representatives of the genus Umbravirus and umbravirus-like associated RNAs).

A survey of viruses affecting grapevine in the wine regions of the Western Cape Province in South Africa was conducted. The survey determined the relative abundance of five different Grapevine leafroll-associated virus 3 (GLRaV-3) variants. Virus profiles were also determined for individual vines. A total of 315 plants were sampled and analysed over two growing seasons. Five GLRaV-3 variants were detected as either single or mixed infections, with GLRaV-3 variant groups II and VI being the most prominent as single infections and in combinations with each other and other variants. An analysis of the distribution of variants per region showed that single infections of variant groups II and VI occurred predominantly in certain regions, and were equally distributed in the red and white cultivars studied. The distribution of a recently identified, unclassified variant of GLRaV-3 (represented by isolates GH24 and GTG10) was included in the study. The overall analysis showed that infection with variant groups II and VI were the most abundant among the samples with 49.8 and 47.6 %, respectively, followed by variant group I, variants similar to isolate GH24 and variant group III with 16.2, 13.3 and 2.5 % infection, respectively. Mixed infections, representing 36 virus combinations, were found in 251 plants. The most abundant virus combination was GLRaV-3 with Grapevine virus E (GVE), found in 28 % of the plants. GLRaV-3 was the predominant virus detected in the samples with a frequency of 80 % detection, followed by GVE (57.4 %), Grapevine rupestris stem pitting-associated virus (GRSPaV) (36.8 %), Grapevine virus A (GVA) (19.3 %), Grapevine virus F (GVF) (16.25 %), Grapevine leafroll-associated virus 2 (GLRaV-2) (8.25 %), Grapevine leafroll-associated virus 1 (GLRaV-1) (1.58 % infection) and Grapevine leafroll-associated virus 4 (GLRaV-4 like) (0.6 %). Most of the plants tested were infected with multiple viruses. The complexity of virus populations detected in this study, highlights the need for detection methods able to identify all viruses and their variants in vineyards. The information generated in this study will assist in the development of reliable detection assays that will benefit the monitoring of disease spread and aid in the efficient management of Grapevine leafroll disease (GLD).

Viral diseases can seriously damage the vineyard productivity and the quality of grape and wine products. Therefore, the study of the species composition and range of grapevine viruses is important for the development and implementation of strategies and tactics to limit their spread and increase the economic benefits of viticulture. In 2014–2019, we carried out a large-scale phytosanitary monitoring of Russian commercial vineyards in the Krasnodar region, Stavropol region and Republic of Crimea. A total of 1857 samples were collected and tested for the presence of Grapevine rupestris stem pitting-associated virus (GRSPaV), Grapevine virus A (GVA), Grapevine leafroll-associated virus-1 (GLRaV-1), Grapevine leafroll-associated virus-2 (GLRaV-2), Grapevine leafroll-associated virus-3 (GLRaV-3), Grapevine fanleaf virus (GFLV), and Grapevine fleck virus (GFkV) using RT-PCR. Out of all samples tested, 54.5% were positive for at least one of the viruses (GRSPaV, GVA, GLRaV-1, GLRaV-2, GLRaV-3, GFLV, GFkV) in the Stavropol region, 49.8% in the Krasnodar region and 49.5% in the Republic of Crimea. Some plants were found to be infected with several viruses simultaneously. In the Republic of Crimea, for instance, a number of plants were infected with five viruses. In the Krasnodar region and the Republic of Crimea, 4.7% and 3.3% of the samples were predominantly infected with both GFkV and GRSPaV, whereas in the Stavropol region, 6% of the selected samples had both GLRaV-1 and GVA infections. We carried out a phylogenetic analysis of the coat protein genes of the detected viruses and identified the presence of GVA of groups I and IV, GRSPaV of groups BS and SG1, GLRaV-1 of group III, GLRaV-2 of groups PN and H4, GLRaV-3 of groups I and III. The results obtained make it possible to assess the viral load and the distribution of the main grapevine viruses on plantations in the viticultural zones of Russia, emphasizing the urgent need to develop and implement long-term strategies for the control of viral diseases of grapes.

Viral diseases in viticulture lead to annual losses in the quantity and quality of grape production. Since no direct control measures are available in practice, preventive measures are taken to keep the vines healthy. These include, for example, the testing of propagation material for viruses such as Arabis mosaic virus (ArMV), Grapevine fanleaf virus (GFLV) or Grapevine leafroll-associated virus 1 (GLRaV-1) and 3 (GLRaV-3). As long-term investigations have shown, GLRaV-1 (2.1%) occurs most frequently in southwestern German wine-growing regions, whereas GLRaV-3 (<0.1%) is almost never found. However, tests conducted over 12 years indicate that there is no general decline in virus-infected planting material. Thus, it can be assumed that a spread of the viruses via corresponding vectors still takes place unhindered. Beyond the examinations regulated within the German Wine Growing Ordinance, one-time tests were carried out on Grapevine Pinot gris virus (GPGV). This analysis showed that GPGV was found in 17.2% of the samples.

This is the first viral metagenomic analysis of grapevine conducted in Mexico. During the summer of 2021, 48 plants displaying virus-like symptoms were sampled in Queretaro, an important grapevine-producing area of Mexico, and analyzed for the presence of viruses via high-throughput sequencing (HTS). The results of HTS were verified by real-time RT-PCR following a standardized testing scheme (Protocol 2010). Fourteen different viruses were identified, including grapevine asteroid mosaic-associated virus (GAMaV), grapevine Cabernet Sauvignon reovirus (GCSV), grapevine fanleaf virus (GFLV), grapevine fleck virus (GFkV), grapevine Pinot gris virus (GPGV), grapevine red globe virus (GRGV), grapevine rupestris stem pitting-associated virus (GRSPaV), grapevine rupestris vein feathering virus (GRVFV), grapevine Syrah virus 1 (GSyV-1), grapevine virus B (GVB), and grapevine leafroll-associated viruses 1, 2, 3, 4 (GLRaV1, 2, 3, 4). Additionally, divergent variants of GLRaV4 and GFkV, and a novel Enamovirus-like virus were discovered. This is the first report of GAMaV, GCSV, GLRaV4, GPGV, GRGV, GRVFV, and GSyV-1 infecting grapevines in Mexico; the impact of these pathogens on production is unknown.

Two years ago, archaeologists discovered shards of clay vessels in the Caucasus region of Georgia that were covered in wine residue more than 8,000 years old. As the Washington Post reports, the finding boosted the former Soviet state's claim of being the birthplace of wine. Now, a group of Georgian entrepreneurs and academics want their country to create the first Martian wines and are working to develop grapevines for an eventual human colony there.

Grapevine leafroll disease (GLD) is one of the most economically damaging virus diseases in grapevine, with grapevine leafroll-associated virus 1 (GLRaV-1) and grapevine leafroll-associated virus 3 (GLRaV-3) as the main contributors. This study complements a previously published transcriptomic analysis and compared the impact of two different forms of GLD to a symptomless control treatment: a mildly symptomatic form infected with GLRaV-1 and a severe form with exceptionally early leafroll symptoms (up to six weeks before veraison) infected with GLRaV-1 and GLRaV-3. Vine physiology and fruit composition in 17-year-old Pinot noir vines were measured and a gradient of vigor, yield, and berry quality (sugar content and berry weight) was observed between treatments. Virome composition, confirmed by individual RT-PCR, was compared with biological indexing. Three divergent viromes were recovered, containing between four to seven viruses and two viroids. They included the first detection of grapevine asteroid mosaic-associated virus in Switzerland. This virus did not cause obvious symptoms on the indicators used in biological indexing. Moreover, the presence of grapevine virus B (GVB) did not cause the expected corky bark symptoms on the indicators, thus underlining the important limitations of the biological indexing. Transmission of GLRaV-3 alone or in combination with GVB by Planococcus comstocki mealybug did not reproduce the strong symptoms observed on the donor plant infected with a severe form of GLD. This result raises questions about the contribution of each virus to the symptomatology of the plant.

We developed a NitroPure Nitrocellulose (NPN) membrane-based method for sampling and storing grapevine sap for grapevine virus detection. We devised an efficient nucleic acid extraction method for the NPN membrane, resulting in 100% amplification success for grapevine leafroll-associated virus 2 (GLRaV2) and 3 (GLRaV3), grapevine rupestris stem pitting-associated virus (GRSPaV), grapevine virus A, grapevine virus B, and grapevine red blotch virus (GRBV). This method also allowed the storage of recoverable nucleic acid for 18 months at room temperature. We created a sampling kit to survey GLRaV2, GLRaV3, and GRBV in Japanese vineyards. We tested the kits in the field in 2018 and then conducted mail-in surveys in 2020–2021. The results showed a substantial prevalence of GLRaV3, with 48.5% of 132 sampled vines being positive. On the other hand, only 3% of samples tested positive for GLRaV2 and none for GRBV.

This study focused on the viruses of the Tymoviridae family that infect grapevines in the Czech Republic. Complete sequences of GFkV (grapevine fleck virus) and GRGV (grapevine red globe virus) from the genus Maculavirus and GRVFV (grapevine rupestris vein feathering virus) and GSyV-1 (grapevine Syrah virus 1) from the genus Marafivirus were obtained using high-throughput sequencing of small RNAs and total RNAs. Mixed infections with these viruses were observed, as well as several variants of these viruses in the same plant. Phylogenetic analysis showed the position of the newly obtained virus isolates within the Tymoviridae family. Recombinant analysis provided evidence of single and multiple intraspecific recombinations in GRGV, GSyV-1, and GRVFV. Additionally, GAMaV, a grapevine virus from the genus Marafivirus, was reported for the first time in the Czech Republic.