Next Article in Journal
Are Mediterranean Island Mountains Hotspots of Taxonomic and Phylogenetic Biodiversity? The Case of the Endemic Flora of the Balearic Islands
Next Article in Special Issue
Hyperspectral Imaging and Selected Biological Control Agents for the Management of Fusarium Head Blight in Spring Wheat
Previous Article in Journal
Deciphering the Genetic Mechanisms of Salt Tolerance in Sorghum bicolor L.: Key Genes and SNP Associations from Comparative Transcriptomic Analyses
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Variation in Susceptibility to Downy Mildew Infection in Spanish Minority Vine Varieties

by
Susana Boso
1,
Pilar Gago
1,
José-Luis Santiago
1,
Gregorio Muñoz-Organero
2,
Félix Cabello
2,
Belén Puertas
3,
Anna Puig
4,
Carme Domingo
4,
M. Esperanza Valdés
5,
Daniel Moreno
5,
Emilia Diaz-Losada
6,
José F. Cibriain
7,
Oier Dañobeitia-Artabe
8,
José-Antonio Rubio-Cano
9,
Jesús Martínez-Gascueña
10,
Adela Mena-Morales
10,
Camilo Chirivella
11,
Jesús-Juan Usón
12 and
María-Carmen Martínez
1,*
1
Misión Biológica de Galicia, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC), Carballeira 8, 36143 Salcedo, Spain
2
Instituto Madrileño de Investigación y Desarrollo Rural, Agrario y Alimentario (IMIDRA), Finca El Encín, Ctra. A-2 km 38, 28805 Alcalá de Henares, Spain
3
Instituto de Investigación y Formación Agraria, Pesquera y de la Producción Ecológica, Ctra. Cañada de la Loba (CA-3101) Pk. 3.1, 11471 Jerez de la Frontera, Spain
4
Catalan Institute of Vine and Wine—Institute of Agrifood Research and Technology (INCAVI-IRTA), Plaça Àgora 2, 08720 Vilafranca del Penedès, Spain
5
Center for Scientific and Technological Research of Extremadura (CICYTEX), Food and Agriculture, Technology Institute of Extremadura (INTAEX), Avenue Adolfo Suárez s/n, 06071 Badajoz, Spain
6
Estación de Viticultura y Enología de Galicia (EVEGA), Ponte San Clodio s/n, 32419 Leiro, Spain
7
Estación de Viticultura y Enología de Navarra (EVENA), C. del Valle de Orba, 34, 31390 Olite, Spain
8
Diputación Foral de Bizkaya, Avda. Lehendakari Aguirre, 9, 48014 Bilbao, Spain
9
Instituto Tecnológico Agrario de Castilla y León (ITACYL), Finca Zamadueñas, Ctra. Burgos km. 119, 47071 Valladolid, Spain
10
Instituto Regional de Investigación y Desarrollo Agroalimentario y Forestal de Castilla-La Mancha (IRIAF), Ctra. Toledo-Albacete s/n, 13700 Tomelloso, Spain
11
Servicio de Producción Ecológica e Innovación, Instituto Tecnológico de Viticultura y Enología, Av. del General Pereyra, 4, 46340 Requena, Spain
12
Centro Transferencia Agroalimentaria de Aragón, Avda. de Movera S/N, 50001 Zaragoza, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2023, 12(14), 2638; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12142638
Submission received: 30 May 2023 / Revised: 6 July 2023 / Accepted: 7 July 2023 / Published: 13 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Fungus- and Oomycete-Plant Interactions)

Abstract

:
Downy mildew is one of the most destructive diseases affecting grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.). Caused by the oomycete Plasmopara viticola (Berk. and Curt.) Berl. and de Toni, it can appear anywhere where vines are cultivated. It is habitually controlled by the application of phytosanitary agents (copper-based or systemic) at different stages of the vine growth cycle. This, however, is costly, can lead to reduced yields, has a considerable environmental impact, and its overuse close to harvest can cause fermentation problems. All grapevines are susceptible to this disease, although the degree of susceptibility differs between varieties. Market demands and European legislation on viticulture and the use of phytosanitary agents (art. 14 of Directive 128/2009/EC) now make it important to know the sensitivity of all available varieties, including minority varieties. Such knowledge allows for a more appropriate use of phytosanitary agents, fosters the commercial use of these varieties and thus increases the offer of wines associated with different terroirs, and helps identify material for use in crop improvement programmes via crossing or genetic transformation, etc. Over 2020–2021, the susceptibility to P. viticola of 63 minority vine varieties from different regions of Spain was examined in the laboratory using the leaf disc technique. Some 87% of these varieties were highly susceptible and 11% moderately susceptible; just 2% showed low susceptibility. The least susceptible of all was the variety Morate (Madrid, IMIDRA). Those showing intermediate susceptibility included the varieties Sanguina (Castilla la Mancha, IVICAM), Planta Mula (Comunidad Valenciana, ITVE), Rayada Melonera (Madrid, IMIDRA), Zamarrica (Galicia, EVEGA), Cariñena Roja (Cataluña, INCAVI), Mandrègue (Aragón, DGA) and Bastardo Blanco (Extremadura, CICYTEX). The highly susceptible varieties could be differentiated into three subgroups depending on sporulation severity and density.

1. Introduction

Downy mildew is, on a global level, one of the diseases that most affects grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.) [1]. It is caused by the oomycete Plasmopara viticola (Berk. and Curt.) Berl. and de Toni. Its control largely relies on the use of phytosanitary agents. Copper-based contact-acting products or systemic agents are commonly applied at different times during the vine growth cycle. Indeed, successful modern viticulture is dependent on the repeated application of large quantities of fungicides. Their use in Europe is particularly heavy. Not only does this have a negative environmental impact, it reduces the profitability of viticulture compared to the raising of other crops, calling into question the sustainability of wine production (a problem for both viticulturalists and consumers). The continued (and excessive) use of fungicides could also provoke the development of resistance to them, and the appearance of more aggressive, more virulent ‘races’ of the causal pathogen.
As far as we know, all grapevine varieties are susceptible to downy mildew, although not all to the same degree [2]; differences in susceptibility may also exist between clones of the same variety [3]. It is not known for sure how many varieties exist, but a figure somewhere between 8000 and 10,000 seems likely [4]. Despite the many planting options this affords, many winemaking regions around the world use only 10–12 varieties. Over the last 20 years, however, market competition has led to increased interest in the recovery of old, ‘pre-phylloxera’ varieties which, for a variety of reasons, fell into disuse (with some even approaching extinction) [5,6]. Some of these varieties are unknown beyond their local areas, yet they may have great oenological potential, and may even be able to adapt to different climates [5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13]. Certainly, our poor knowledge of the characteristics of these varieties extends to their degree of susceptibility to diseases such as downy mildew. Their study might allow some to come into commercial use, diversifying the offer of wines linked to different terroirs. Material that could be used in crop improvement programmes (crossing, genetic transformation, etc.) designed to produce plants resistant to disease, might also be identified. Such programmes, however, have so far only involved wild American (V. riparia, V. rupestris, V. rotundifolia and V. cinerea, etc.) and Far Eastern (V. piasezkii, V. amurensis, V. romanetii; V. vinifera Kishmish vatkana) species. These can confer partial or even total resistance to downy mildew (such is the case of V. rotundifolia and V. piasezkii) [14,15]. To date, 27 genomic regions associated with resistance to the disease (Rpv loci) have been identified [16,17,18,19,20]. Some of the genes that confer this resistance include Rpv1 and Rpv2 in Muscadinia rotundifolia Michaux, Rpv3 and Rpv19 in Vitis rupestris Scheele, Rpv4, Rpv7, Rpv11, Rpv17, Rpv18, Rpv20 and Rpv21 in unspecified American species, and Rpv5, Rpv6, Rpv9 and Rpv13 in V. riparia. Recently, three loci—Rpv29, Rpv30 and Rpv31—have been identified in V. vinifera (Georgian germplasm) that confer resistance.
The aim of the present work was to determine the susceptibility to downy mildew of minority, pre-phylloxera vine varieties from different regions of Spain.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plant Materials

Sixty-three minority varieties from 13 regions of Spain (Figure 1) were studied over 2020 and 2021. In January/February of each year, research groups in each of these regions sent 10–20 cuttings of varieties of interest to the MBG-CSIC for analysis. All cuttings were disinfected, placed in paraffin wax, and held in a cold chamber for four months to promote later root growth. Two rounds of bud break (one in March and one in April) were organised for each variety in each year, thus ensuring sufficient material for testing. For each round, cuttings were placed in water for a few hours in order to hydrate. A hormone-based rooting solution (0.4% indole butyric acid) was then applied to the base of the cuttings, and five of each variety that developed 3–4 buds were planted in a peat-perlite mixture in alveolar trays within a cultivation chamber (hot bed temperature 30 °C, air temperature 22 °C, humidity 80%, 8 h dark/16 h light). When rooting had taken place, the plants were transplanted to pots and placed in a greenhouse with a controlled environment (temperature 25 °C, humidity 80%, 8 h dark/16 h light). Materials belonging to the resistant rootstock varieties 110-Richter (derived from the cross V. berlandieri cv. Rességuier n°2 × V. rupestris cv. Martin) and SO4 (V. berlandieri × V. riparia; selection Oppenheim de Teléki n°4) were planted to provide controls.

2.2. Collection and Preservation of Plasmopara viticola

Plasmopara viticola for inoculations was obtained from natural infections of vines at the MBG-CSIC research vineyard, following the method of Rumbolz et al. [21].

2.3. Inoculation of Leaf Discs

The leaf disc technique described by Rumbolz et al. [21] and Staudt et al. [22] was used to determine the susceptibility of the different varieties to downy mildew. Once the plants had produced canes some 15–30 cm in length, five leaves (the 5th or 6th leaves from the apical bud) were collected for each test and control variety. Thirty discs were then punched from the leaves and placed in Petri dishes (one variety per dish). Each disc was inoculated with P. viticola using a 50 μL of suspension of sporangia (50,000 mL−1) and left to incubate for six days (25 °C, 95% relative humidity, 8 h dark/16 h light). On the 6th day, each disc was visually inspected for signs of infection, measuring sporulation incidence (percentage of discs showing sporulation), sporulation severity (surface area affected by sporulation), and sporulation density (concentration of sporangia). The latter two variables were quantified using a visual scale (for both variables: 0–25% low; 25–50% moderate; 50–75% high; 75–100%: very high). Inoculations were performed twice, once in June and once in July, using the material produced in the two rounds of bud break (see above).

2.4. Statistical Analysis

Differences in the recorded variables between the varieties were analysed by two-way ANOVA (significance was recorded at p < 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001). The F test was then used to compare each fixed factor against its error. The means of those variables that returned a significant F value were then subjected to Fisher’s least significant difference (LSD) test. Principal components analysis was used to confirm the existence of groups of varieties with different levels of susceptibility. All analyses were made using SAS System v.8.1 software [23].

3. Results and Discussion

No differences were seen between the results for the plants produced in the first and second rounds of sprouting; the results for both were therefore analysed together. Table 1 shows, for each variety, the mean, standard deviation and coefficient of variation for each of the three measured variables. ANOVA revealed significant differences (p < 0.01) among the varieties and years for all three variables. The interaction variety × year had no significant impact on the variables recorded; thus, the plants of each variety behaved similarly in both years. The control varieties (110-Richter and SO4) showed resistance to the disease, returning sporulation incidence values of <15% and sporulation density values of <20%, confirming what was reported by other authors [2,24,25,26,27], with SO4 being the more resistant of the two (Table 1). The SO4 leaf discs showed small, dispersed necrotic spots, while those for 110-Richter showed fewer but larger sports. This necrosis is a response to infection seen in resistant vines [28,29,30]; hypersensitivity reactions cause programmed cell death around infection sites, helping to prevent the further spread of the pathogen.
Fisher’s LSD test revealed 87% of the test varieties to be highly susceptible to downy mildew, while 11% were moderately susceptible and just 2% showed low susceptibility (Figure 2). Some 87.5% showed a sporulation incidence of >75%, 10.9% returned values of 50–75%. The variety Morate (from the IMIDRA), however, returned an incidence value of <50% (34%). The variety Hebén from Extremadura returned the highest severity score (75%); overall, 29.68% of the varieties returned values of 50–75%, 14.6% returned values of 50–25%, and four of <15% (Tinto Jeromo, IVICAM; Mandrègue, Aragón-DGA; Albariño Tinto, Galicia-EVEGA; Planta Mula, Comunidad Valenciana-ITVE). Additionally, 11.1% of the test varieties showed a sporulation density of >75%, 67.2% returned a value of 50–75%, and the remainder (21.9%) a value of 25–50%.
These results show the great majority of the test varieties to be highly susceptible to downy mildew. The incidence of sporulation, however, was shown to be a poor discriminator for assessing degrees of susceptibility; sporulation severity and density were much better indicators.
Principal components analysis involving all three measured variables showed the first two principle components to explain 91% of the total variance. In the first component (Prin 1), sporulation severity and density had the greatest weight, while in the second component (Prin 2) the incidence of sporulation had the greatest weight (Figure 3). With respect to Prin 1, Trobat Negre (Cataluña, INCAVI), Hebén (Extremadura, CICYTEX), Zurieles (Castilla la Mancha, IVICAM) and Rayada Melonera (Andalucía, IFAPA) group towards the right of the graph given the high severity and density values they returned. Morate (Madrid, IMIDRA), which had the lowest severity and density results, was placed to the extreme left. With respect to Prin 2, Albariño Tinto (Galicia, EVEGA) appears in the upper part of the graph given its high incidence value; Morate (Madrid, IMIDRA), Trobat Negre (Cataluña, INCAVI), and Rayada Melonera (Andalucía, IFAPA) and the rootstock varieties 110-Richter and SO4 group towards the bottom given the lower incidence values they returned. Thus, three groups of varieties are distinguishable. The first is formed by Morate (Madrid, IMIDRA)—the least susceptible, with sporulation incidence, severity and density values all <40%. The second comprises the varieties showing moderate susceptibility (incidence < 75%, severity < 50%, density < 50%); within this latter group, the varieties Sanguina (Castilla la Mancha, IVICAM), Planta Mula (Comunidad Valenciana, ITVE), Rayada Melonera (Madrid, IMIDRA), Zamarrica (Galicia, EVEGA), Cariñena Roja (Cataluña, INCAVI), Mandrègue (Aragón, DGA) and Bastardo Blanco (Extremadura, CICYTEX) were the most resistant. Note that the last variety clustered with this group despite returning a sporulation density of 59% (Figure 4). Finally, the third group is formed by highly susceptible varieties. Within this group, three subgroups can be distinguished (Figure 5).
Subgroup A: varieties with an incidence value of >75% plus severity and density values of >50%, thus including Riera 2, Albana and Trobat Negre (Cataluña, INCAVI), Rufete Serrano, Hebén and Zurieles (Extremadura, CICYTEX), Albillo del Pozo, Zurieles and Terriza (Castilla La Mancha, IVICAM), Diega 1 and Tortozona Tinta (CF Navarra, EVENA + UPNA), Tinto Jeromo and Gajo Arroba (Castilla y León, ITACYL), Jarrosuelto and Tortozona Tinta (Aragón, DGA), Rayada Melonera and Indiana (Andalucía, IFAPA), and Forcallat and Planta Nova (Comunidad Valenciana, ITVE).
Subgroup B: varieties with an incidence value of >75%, plus a severity value of <50%, but a density value of >50%, thus including Sanguina and Riera 46 (Cataluña, INCAVI), Santa Fe, Castellana Blanca, Jarrosuelto and Diega 2 (CF Navarra, EVENA + UPNA), Montonera del Casar, Jarrosuelto and Maquías (Castilla La Mancha, IVICAM), Albarín Tinto and Xafardán (Galicia, EVEGA), Tortozona Tinta and Cagarrizo (Madrid, IMIDRA), Greta and Santa Fe (Aragón, DGA), Rufete Serrano and Estaladiña (Castilla y León, ITACYIL), Corchera (Andalucía, IFAPA), Arcos (Comunidad Valenciana, ITVE), and Giro Negre (Baleares, IUB).
Subgroup C: varieties with an incidence value of >75%, plus severity and density values of <50%, thus including Moscatel de Grano Menudo, Castellana Blanca, Tinto Fragoso, Tortozona Tinta and Tinto Jeromo (Castilla la Mancha, IVICAM), Ratiño, Albariño Tinto and Albillo do Avia (Galicia, EVEGA), Cenicienta (Castilla y León, ITACYL), Evena 1 (CF Navarra, EVENA + UPNA), Cagarrizo (Extremadura, CICYTEX), Albana (Aragón, DGA), Terriza, Hebén and Castellana Blanca (Madrid, IMIDRA), and Riera 43 (Cataluña, INCAVI).
The present results thus show that the majority of the tested varieties were either highly or moderately susceptible to downy mildew, although it should be noted that the severity of sporulation (i.e., the surface area occupied by sporulating oomycete) was often <50% (Figure 6). Thus, once the pathogen has entered the plant, response mechanisms would seem to come into play that are able to defend the host to a degree depending on the variety. Similar results were reported by Hernández et al. [31] for some of the same varieties when challenged with the same pathogen.
Plants of the variety Rayada Melonera from the IFAPA were more susceptible (in terms of sporulation incidence, severity and density) compared to those from the IMIDRA. Similarly, Hebén material from Extremadura was more susceptible than the same from the IMIDRA, and significant differences were seen in terms of incidence between Castellana Blanca material from the IVICAM and both the IMIDRA and EVENA. In a further difference between these latter materials, the plants from the EVENA returned significantly higher sporulation density values. Other authors [32] have reported similar behaviour within the varieties Chasselas Doré and Doña Blanca, with resistances to downy mildew and powdery mildew (caused by Erysiphe necator) varying between low and moderate depending on the material’s origin. This phenomenon might be explained by clonal differences, agronomic- or climate-linked factors, etc. Some authors attribute host–pathogen interactions to the adaptation of plants to the damage caused to the former by the latter [33]. Thus, plants of the same variety but of different origin, and perhaps therefore living in different environments or exposed to pathogen strains of different aggressiveness, may develop different levels of resistance to further attack.
The clustering of the present varieties in terms of their susceptibility was independent of berry colour. It might be thought that red varieties, with their higher contents in phenolic compounds such as resveratrol [34,35], might be less susceptible to downy mildew [28,36]. Certainly this has been reported with respect to other pathogens such as Botrytis cinerea [37,38]. However, no such correlation was seen in the present work, nor in previous work was any detected in different vine varieties growing in the field [2].
Colleagues working in tandem within the same major project (RTI 2018-101085-RC32—see Acknowledgements) detected no relationship between susceptibility to P. viticola and agronomic or ampelographic factors such as earliness or the density of reclining or erect hairs (which provide a barrier to zoospores trying to enter the plant via the stomata) (at press). Other reports [39,40] also indicate a lack of relationship between susceptibility to downy mildew and leaf morphology variables such as hair density. However, these authors indicated associations between factors such as stomatal density and the production of stilbenes; these factors would appear to influence the progress of disease.

4. Conclusions

Importantly, 2% of the tested varieties—in particular Morate—showed low susceptibility to the pathogen. If cultivated, they might require fewer fungicide treatments than other varieties, reducing costs as well as the environmental impact associated with the use of these agents. They might also be good material for the production of resistant varieties. Their cultivation would not infringe current viticultural legislation, and might improve the selection of wines available to consumers.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.-C.M., J.-L.S. and S.B.; methodology, S.B., J.-L.S. and M.-C.M.; formal analysis, S.B., M.-C.M., J.-L.S. and P.G.; investigation, S.B., M.-C.M., P.G. and J.-L.S.; vegetable resources, G.M.-O., F.C., B.P., A.P., C.D., M.E.V., D.M., E.D.-L., J.F.C., O.D.-A., J.-A.R.-C., J.M.-G., A.M.-M., C.C. and J.-J.U.; writing—original draft preparation, S.B. and M.-C.M.; writing—review and editing, S.B., M.-C.M., P.G. and J.-L.S.; project administration, M.-C.M., G.M.-O. and A.P.; funding acquisition, M.-C.M., G.M.-O. and A.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work, performed by the VIOR (Viticultura, Olivo y Rosa) group of the Misión Biológica de Galicia (CSIC), forms part of the project “Valorización de variedades minoritarias de vid por su potencial para la diversificación vitivinícola. Resiliencia a enfermedades fúngicas influenciadas por el cambio climático” (MINORVIN) (RTI 2018-101085-RC32), funded by MCIN/AEI/, 10.13039/501100011033 and the European Regional Development Fund.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Adrian Burton for language and editing assistance, and Elena Zubiaurre, Jorge Silva López and Angela Costas Lorenzo for technical assistance.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Dick, M.W. Towards and understanding of the evolution of the downy mildew. In Advances in Downy Mildew Research; Spencer-Phillips, P.T.N., Gisi, U., Lebeda, A., Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2002; pp. 1–57. [Google Scholar]
  2. Boso, S.; Alonso-Villaverde, V.; Gago, P.; Santiago, J.; Martínez, M.C. Susceptibility of 44 grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) varieties to downy mildew in the field. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 2011, 17, 394–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Boso, S.; Santiago, J.L.; Martínez, M.C. A method to evaluate downy mildew resistance in grapevine. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2005, 25, 163–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Lacombe, T. Contribution à l’étude de l’histoire Evolutive de la Vigne Cultivée (Vitis vinifera L.) par l’analyse de la Diversité Genetique Neutre et de Gènes d’intérêt; Institut National d’Etudes Supérieures Agronomiques de Montpellier: Montpellier, France, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  5. Balda, P.; Martínez de Toda, F. Variedades Minoritarias de Vid en La Rioja; Consejería de Agricultura, Ganadería y Medio Ambiente; Gobierno de La Rioja: Logroño, Spain, 2017; 193p. [Google Scholar]
  6. Ferreira, V.; Pinto-Carnide, O.; Mota, T.; Martín, J.P.; Ortiz, J.M.; Castro, I. Identification of minority grapevine cultivars from Vinhos Verdes Portuguese DOC region. Vitis 2015, 54, 53–58. [Google Scholar]
  7. Santiago, J.L.; Boso, S.; Martínez, M.C.; Pinto-Carnide, O.; Ortiz, J.M. Ampelographic comparison of grape cultivars (Vitis vinifera L.) grown in northwestern Spain and northern Portugal. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 2005, 56, 287–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Gago, P.; Santiago, J.L.; Boso, S.; Alonso-Villaverde, V.; Grando, S.; Martínez, M.C. Biodiversity and Characterization of Twenty-two Vitis vinifera L. Cultivars in the Northwestern Iberian Peninsula. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 2009, 60, 293–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Martínez-Pinilla, O.; Guadalupe, Z.; Ayestarán, B.; Pérez-Magariño, S.; Ortega-Heras, M. Characterization of volatile compounds and olfactory profile of red minority varietal wines from La Rioja. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2013, 93, 3720–3729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Pérez-Magariño, S.; Ortega-Heras, M.; Martínez-Lapuente, L.; Guadalupe, Z.; Ayestarán, B. Multivariate analysis for the differentiation of sparkling wines elaborated from autochthonous Spanish grape varieties: Volatile compounds, amino acids and biogenic amines. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2013, 236, 827–841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zinelabidine, L.H.; Laiadi, Z.; Benmehaia, R.; Gago, P.; Boso, S.; Santiago, J.L.; Haddioui, A.; Ibáñez, J.; Martínez-Zapater, J.M.; Martínez, M.C. Comparative ampelographic and genetic analyses of grapevine cultivars from Algeria and Morocco. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 2014, 20, 324–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Martínez, M.C.; Boso, S.; Gago, P.; Muñoz-Organero, G.; De Andrés, M.T.; Gaforio, L.; Cabello, F.; Santiago, J.L. Value of two Spanish live grapevine collections in the resolution of synonyms, homonyms and naming errors. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 2018, 24, 430–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Gutiérrez-Gamboa, G.; Moreno-Simunovic, Y. Terroir and typicity of Carignan from Maule Valley (Chile): The resurgence of a minority variety. OENO One 2019, 53, 75–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Merdinoglu, D.; Schneider, C.; Prado, E.; Wiedemann-Merdinoglu, S.; Mestre, P. Breeding for durable resistance to downy and powdery mildew in grapevine. OENO One 2018, 52, 203–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Maul, E.; Töpfer, R. VIVC—Vitis International Variety Catalogue. Available online: http://www.vivc.de/ (accessed on 31 May 2019).
  16. Moreira, F.M.; Madini, A.; Marino, R.; Zulini, L.; Stefanini, M.; Velasco, R.; Kozma, P.; Grando, M.S. Genetic linkage maps of two interspecific grape crosses (Vitis spp.) used to localize quantitative trait loci for downy mildew resistance. Tree Genet. Genomes 2011, 7, 153–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Bove, F.; Savary, S.; Willocquet, L.; Rossi, V. Designing a modelling structure for the grapevine downy mildew pathosystem. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 2020, 157, 251–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Foria, S.; Copetti, D.; Eisenmann, B.; Magris, G.; Vidotto, M.; Scalabrin, S.; Testolin, R.; Cipriani, G.; Wiedemann-Merdinoglu, S.; Bogs, J.; et al. Gene duplication and transposition of mobile elements drive evolution of the Rpv3 resistance locus in grapevine. Plant J. 2020, 101, 529–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Sargolzaei, M.; Maddalena, G.; Bitsadze, N.; Maghradze, D.; Bianco, P.A.; Failla, O.; Toffolatti, S.L.; De Lorenzis, G. Rpv29, Rpv30 and Rpv31: Three Novel Genomic Loci Associated with Resistance to Plasmopara viticola in Vitis vinifera. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 562432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ruiz-García, L.; Gago, P.; Martínez-Mora, C.; Santiago, J.L.; Fernádez-López, D.J.; Martínez, M.D.C.; Boso, S. Evaluation and Pre-selection of New Grapevine Genotypes Resistant to Downy and Powdery Mildew, Obtained by Cross-Breeding Programs in Spain. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 674510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Rumbolz, J.; Wirtz, S.; Kassemeyer, H.-H.; Guggenheim, R.; Schäfer, E.; Büche, C. Sporulation of Plasmopara viticola: Differentiation and Light Regulation. Plant Biol. 2002, 4, 413–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Staudt, G.; Kassemeyer, H.H. Evaluation of downy mildew resistance in various accessions of wild Vitis species. Vitis 1995, 34, 225–228. [Google Scholar]
  23. SAS Institute, Inc. SAS Online Doc, Version 8; SAS Institute, Inc.: Cary, NC, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  24. Gutiérrez-Gamboa, G.; Liu, S.-Y.; Pszczólkowski, P. Resurgence of minority and autochthonous grapevine varieties in South America: A review of their oenological potential. Sci. Food Agric. 2020, 100, 465–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Galbiati, C. Structure di infezione di Plasmopora vitícola in diversi portainnesti di plante di vite. Riv. Patol. Veg. 1980, 16, 5–8. Available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/42556771 (accessed on 25 May 2023).
  26. Bankovskaya, M.G.; Molchanova, Y.V. Evaluation of disease resistance of grape leaves under laboratory conditions. Vinograd Vino Ross. 1999, 5, 35–36. [Google Scholar]
  27. Galet, P. Précis de Viticulture, 7th ed.; Pierre Galet: Montpellier, France, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  28. Dai, G.H.; Andary, C.; Mondolot-Cosson, L.; Boubals, D. Histochemical studies on the interaction between three species of grapevine, Vitis vinifera, V. rupestris and V. rotundifolia and the Downy mildew fungus, Plasmopara viticola. Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 1995, 46, 177–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Kortekamp, A.; Wind, R.; Zyprian, E. Investigation of the interaction of Plasmopara viticola with susceptible and resistant grapevine varieties. J. Plant Dis. Prot. 1998, 105, 475–488. [Google Scholar]
  30. Unger, S.; Büche, C.; Boso, S.; Kassemeyer, H.-H. The course of colonization of two different Vitis genotypes by Plasmopara viticola indicates compatible and incompatible host-pathogen interactions. Phytopathology 2007, 97, 780–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  31. Hernandez, M.M.; Castillo, C.; Menendez, C.M. Variability of Spanish minority varieties to Erysiphe necator infection. In Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Grapevine Physiology and Biotechnology, Stellenbosch, South Africa, 31 October–5 November 2021. [Google Scholar]
  32. Gaforio, L.; García-Muñoz, S.; Cabello, F.; Muñoz-Organero, G. Evaluation of susceptibility to powdery mildew (Erysiphe necator) in Vitis vinifera varieties. Vitis 2011, 50, 123–126. [Google Scholar]
  33. Delmas, C.E.L.; Fabre, F.; Jolivet, J.; Mazet, I.D.; Richart Cervera, S.; Delière, L.; Delmotte, F. Adaptation of a plant pathogen to partial host resistance: Selection for greater aggressiveness in grapevine downy mildew. Evol. Appl. 2016, 9, 709–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Frankel, E.N.; Waterhouse, A.L.; Teissedre, P.L. Principal phenolic phytochemicals in selected California wines and their antioxidant activity in inhibiting oxidation of human low-density lipoproteins. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1995, 43, 890–894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Goldberg, D.M.; Yan, J.; Ng, E.; Diamandis, E.P.; Karumanchiri, A.; Soleas, G.; Waterhouse, A.L.A. Global survey of transresveratrol concentration in commercial wines. Am. J. Enol. Vitic 1995, 46, 159–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Pezet, R.; Gindro, K.; Viret, O.; Spring, J.-L. Glycosylation and oxidative dimerization of resveratrol are respectively associated to sensitivity and resistance of grapevine cultivars to downy mildew. Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2004, 65, 297–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Langcake, P.; Pryce, R.J. The production of resveratrol by Vitis vinifera and other members of the Vitaceae as a response to infection or injury. Physiol. Plant Pathol. 1976, 9, 77–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Montero, C.; Cristescu, S.M.; Jimenez, J.B.; Orea, J.M.; Lintel Hekkert, S.T.; Harren, F.J.M.; Gonzalez, U.A. Trans-resveratrol and grape resistance. A dynamic study by high-resolution laser-based techniques. Plant Physiol. 2003, 131, 129–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Boso Alonso, S.; Alonso-Villaverde Iglesias, V.; Santiago Blanco, J.L.; Gago Montaña, P.; Dürrenberger, M.; Düggelin, M.; Martínez Rodríguez, M.C. Macro-and microscopic leaf characteristics of six grapevine genotypes (Vitis spp.) with different susceptibilities to grapevine downy mildew. Vitis 2010, 49, 43–50. [Google Scholar]
  40. Paolocci, M.; Muganu, M.; Alonso-Villaverde Iglesias, V.; Gindro, K. Leaf morphological characteristics and stilbene production differently affect downy mildew resistance of Vitis vinifera varieties grown in Italy. Vitis 2014, 53, 155–161. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Provenance of the cuttings used in the present work.
Figure 1. Provenance of the cuttings used in the present work.
Plants 12 02638 g001
Figure 2. Percentage of susceptibility in the most susceptible varieties, taking into account disease incidence, severity and density.
Figure 2. Percentage of susceptibility in the most susceptible varieties, taking into account disease incidence, severity and density.
Plants 12 02638 g002
Figure 3. Principal components analysis involving the three variables recorded: 1—SO4; 2—110-Richter; 3—Morate (MIDRA); 4—Zamarrica (EVEGA); 5—Mandrègue (DGA); 6—Planta Mula (ITVE); 7—Tinto Jeromo (IVICAM); 8—Sanguina (IVICAM); 9—Cariñena Roja (INCAVI); 10—Castellana Blanca (IMIDRA); 11—Albariño Tinto (EVEGA); 12—Rayada Melonera (IMIDRA); 13—Hebén (IMIDRA); 14—Riera 43 (INCAVI); 15—Tinto Fragoso (IVICAM); 16—Albana (DGA); 17—Bastardo Blanco (CICYTEX); 18—Terriza (IMIDRA); 19—Cagarrizo/Folgasao (CICYTEX); 20—Castellana Blanca (IVICAM); 21—Maquías (IVICAM); 22—Arcos (ITVE); 23—Cenicienta (ITACYL); 24—Tortozona Tinta (IVICAM); 25—Albilla do Avia (EVEGA); 26—Xafardán (EVEGA); 27—Santa Fe/Cadrete (EVENA + UPNA); 28—Cagarrizo (IMIDRA); 29—Estaladiña (ITACYL); 30—Riera 46 (INCAVI); 31—Sanguina (INCAVI); 32—Diega 2 (EVENA + UPNA); 33—Evena1 (EVENA + UPNA); 34—Moscatel Grano Menudo (IVICAM); 35—Rufete Serrano (ITACYL); 36—Albarin Tinto (EVEGA); 37—Castellana Blanca (EVENA + UPNA); 38—Gajo Arroba (ITACYL); 39—Ratiño (EVEGA); 40—Greta (DGA); 41—Planta Nova (ITVE); 42—Tortozona Tinta (IMIDRA); 43—Montonera del Casar (IVICAM); 44—Corchera (IFAPA); 45—Jarrosuleto (EVENA + UPNA); 46—Jarrosuleto (IVICAM); 47—Santa Fe (DGA); 48—Terriza (IVICAM); 49—Tortozona Tinta (DGA); 50—Albillo del Pozo (IVICAM); 51—Tinto Jeromo (ITACYL); 52—Albana (INCAVI); 53—Tortozona Tinta (EVENA + UPNA); 54—Giro Negre (UIB); 55—Rufete Serrano (CICYTEX); 56—Zurieles (CICYTEX); 57—Diega 1 (EVENA + UPNA); 58—Riera 2 (INCAVI); 59—Forcallat (ITVE); 60—Indiana (IFAPA); 61—Jarrosuelto (DGA); 62—Zurieles (IVICAM); 63—Hebén (CICYTEX); 64—Trobat Negre (INCAVI); 65—Rayada Melonera (IFAPA).
Figure 3. Principal components analysis involving the three variables recorded: 1—SO4; 2—110-Richter; 3—Morate (MIDRA); 4—Zamarrica (EVEGA); 5—Mandrègue (DGA); 6—Planta Mula (ITVE); 7—Tinto Jeromo (IVICAM); 8—Sanguina (IVICAM); 9—Cariñena Roja (INCAVI); 10—Castellana Blanca (IMIDRA); 11—Albariño Tinto (EVEGA); 12—Rayada Melonera (IMIDRA); 13—Hebén (IMIDRA); 14—Riera 43 (INCAVI); 15—Tinto Fragoso (IVICAM); 16—Albana (DGA); 17—Bastardo Blanco (CICYTEX); 18—Terriza (IMIDRA); 19—Cagarrizo/Folgasao (CICYTEX); 20—Castellana Blanca (IVICAM); 21—Maquías (IVICAM); 22—Arcos (ITVE); 23—Cenicienta (ITACYL); 24—Tortozona Tinta (IVICAM); 25—Albilla do Avia (EVEGA); 26—Xafardán (EVEGA); 27—Santa Fe/Cadrete (EVENA + UPNA); 28—Cagarrizo (IMIDRA); 29—Estaladiña (ITACYL); 30—Riera 46 (INCAVI); 31—Sanguina (INCAVI); 32—Diega 2 (EVENA + UPNA); 33—Evena1 (EVENA + UPNA); 34—Moscatel Grano Menudo (IVICAM); 35—Rufete Serrano (ITACYL); 36—Albarin Tinto (EVEGA); 37—Castellana Blanca (EVENA + UPNA); 38—Gajo Arroba (ITACYL); 39—Ratiño (EVEGA); 40—Greta (DGA); 41—Planta Nova (ITVE); 42—Tortozona Tinta (IMIDRA); 43—Montonera del Casar (IVICAM); 44—Corchera (IFAPA); 45—Jarrosuleto (EVENA + UPNA); 46—Jarrosuleto (IVICAM); 47—Santa Fe (DGA); 48—Terriza (IVICAM); 49—Tortozona Tinta (DGA); 50—Albillo del Pozo (IVICAM); 51—Tinto Jeromo (ITACYL); 52—Albana (INCAVI); 53—Tortozona Tinta (EVENA + UPNA); 54—Giro Negre (UIB); 55—Rufete Serrano (CICYTEX); 56—Zurieles (CICYTEX); 57—Diega 1 (EVENA + UPNA); 58—Riera 2 (INCAVI); 59—Forcallat (ITVE); 60—Indiana (IFAPA); 61—Jarrosuelto (DGA); 62—Zurieles (IVICAM); 63—Hebén (CICYTEX); 64—Trobat Negre (INCAVI); 65—Rayada Melonera (IFAPA).
Plants 12 02638 g003
Figure 4. Percentage susceptibility in the ‘intermediate susceptiblility’ varieties, taking into account disease incidence, severity and density.
Figure 4. Percentage susceptibility in the ‘intermediate susceptiblility’ varieties, taking into account disease incidence, severity and density.
Plants 12 02638 g004
Figure 5. Subgroups of the susceptible varieties. (A): incidence > 75%, severity and density > 50%; (B): incidence > 75%, severity < 50%, density > 50%; (C): incidence > 75%, severity and density < 50%.
Figure 5. Subgroups of the susceptible varieties. (A): incidence > 75%, severity and density > 50%; (B): incidence > 75%, severity < 50%, density > 50%; (C): incidence > 75%, severity and density < 50%.
Plants 12 02638 g005
Figure 6. Images of leaf discs showing different degrees of resistance to downy mildew (6 dpi). (A) Plants grown in the greenhouse for leaf collection. (B) Inoculation of the discs. (C) Incubation of the discs in an environmental chamber. (D) Least susceptible variety. (E) Example of moderate susceptibility. (F) Most susceptible variety.
Figure 6. Images of leaf discs showing different degrees of resistance to downy mildew (6 dpi). (A) Plants grown in the greenhouse for leaf collection. (B) Inoculation of the discs. (C) Incubation of the discs in an environmental chamber. (D) Least susceptible variety. (E) Example of moderate susceptibility. (F) Most susceptible variety.
Plants 12 02638 g006
Table 1. Sporulation incidence, severity and density with respect to the different vine varieties tested. Values are means. SD = standard deviation, CV = coefficient of variation, LSD = least significant difference.
Table 1. Sporulation incidence, severity and density with respect to the different vine varieties tested. Values are means. SD = standard deviation, CV = coefficient of variation, LSD = least significant difference.
IncidenceSeverity (%)Density (%)
VarietyOriginMeanSDCVMeanSDCVMeanSDCV
Greta DGA100.0 a0.00.037.5 efghijkl17.747.156.2 bcdefg23.942.5
Moscatel G. MenudoIVICAM100.0 a0.00.037.5 efghijkl14.438.550.0 bcdefgh28.957.7
Ratiño EVEGA100.0 a0.00.041.7 defghijk14.434.650.0 bcdefgh0.00.0
Riera 2 INCAVI100.0 a0.00.056.2 abcdef12.522.262.5 abcde25.040.0
Rufete SerranoCICYTEX100.0 a0.00.052.5 bcdefg16.631.662.5 abcde14.423.1
Diega 1 EVENA + UPNA98.4 ab3.13.253.1 abcdefg15.729.665.6 abcd12.018.2
Giro Negre UIB97.5 ab5.05.140.6 defghijk18.746.175.0 ab0.00.0
Hebén CICYTEX97.5 ab17.819.975.0 a23.934.875.0 ab12.518.2
Santa Fe DGA97.5 ab5.05.143.7 cdefghijk23.954.762.5 abcde25.040.0
Tinto Jeromo ITACYL97.0 ab3.63.756.5 abcdef16.128.756.2 bcdefg23.942.5
Zurieles CICYTEX97.0 ab6.06.250.0 bcdefghi0.000.068.7 abcd12.518.2
Evena 1 EVENA + UPNA96.2 ab7.57.840.0 efghijk12.230.650.0 bcdefgh20.440.8
Castellana Blanca IVICAM95.7 ab8.68.929.0 ijklmn8.930.743.7 dfgh12.528.5
Indiana IFAPA95.2 ab3.53.659.4 abcde12.020.262.5 abcde14.423.1
Albana INCAVI95.0 abc9.910.451.5 bcdefgh22.142.662.5 abcde14.423.1
Albillo del Pozo IVICAM95.0 abcd5.776.0856.2 abcdef23.942.556.2 bcdefg12.522.2
Tortozona TintaIMIDRA95.0 abcd10.010.543.7 cdefghijk12.528.656.2 bcdefg12.522.2
JarrosueltoDGA93.7 abcde12.513.350.0 bcdefghi20.440.875.0 ab 0.0 0.0
Tortozona Tinta DGA93.7 abcde12.513.350.0 bcdefghi10.220.462.5 abcde14.423.1
Zurieles IVICAM93.7 abcde12.513.359.4 abcde23.739.875.0 ab20.427.2
Forcallat ITVE93.6 abcde11.011.753.3 abcdefg20.237.8970.8 abc7.210.2
Montonera del Casar IVICAM93.2 abcde9.410.140.6 defghijk23.758.262.5 abcde14.423.1
CenicientaITACYL92.7 abcde9.19.927.5 ijklmn26.094.550.0 bcdefgh20.440.8
Corchera IFAPA92.5 abcde15.016.242.5 defghijk12.028.062.5 abcde17.728.3
Gajo Arroba ITACYL92.5 abcde11.912.950.0 bcdefghi20.440.846.9 cdefgh15.733.5
Tortozona Tinta EVENA + UPNA92.5 abcde11.912.950.0 ijklmn20.440.868.7 bcdefg37.554.5
Santa Fe/Cadrete EVENA + UPNA92.5 abcde15.016.227.5 bcdefghi5.018.156.2 abcd23.942.5
Tinto Fragoso IVICAM92.2 abcde11.812.826.2 jklmno18.470.237.5 efghi25.066.7
Albariño Tinto EVEGA91.5 abcde13.915.210.0 no10.0100.037.5 efghi25.066.7
Trobat Negre INCAVI90.8 abcde12.714.068.7 ab23.934.875.0 ab0.00.0
CagarrizoCICYTEX90.7 abcde11.112.326.2 jklmno18.470.250.0 bcdefgh0.00.0
Albilla do AviaEVEGA89.8 abcde16.718.632.5 ghijklm21.867.150.0 bcdefgh28.957.7
Rayada Melonera IFAPA88.8 abcde22.525.365.6 abc31.247.684.4 a18.722.2
Albarín Tinto EVEGA87.7 abcdef14.816.946.9 bcdefghij15.733.553.1 bcdefg21.340.2
Castellana Blanca EVENA + UPNA87.5 abcdef14.416.537.5 efghijkl14.438.562.5 abcde14.423.1
JarrosueltoEVENA + UPNA87.5 abcdef14.416.540.6 defghijk23.954.775.0 ab12.518.2
Rufete Serrano ITACYL86.7 abcdef18.921.737.5 efghijkl14.438.562.5 abcde14.423.1
Estaladiña ITACYL86.5 abcdef27.531.937.5 efghijkl14.438.553.1 bcdefg21.340.2
Diega 2EVENA + UPNA86.0 abcdef16.319.028.1 ijklmn6.222.268.7 abcd12.518.2
Riera 46 INCAVI85.7 abcdef16.719.532.5 ghijklm21.867.162.5 abcde14.423.1
CagarrizoIMIDRA85.2 abcdefg20.724.336.9 fghijklm10.327.953.1 bcdefg6.211.8
Arcos ITVE85.0 abcdefg30.035.325.0 jklmno56.629.856.2 bcdefg22.259.4
Terriza IVICAM84.2 abcdefg11.914.156.2 abcdef12.522.262.5 abcde14.423.1
Planta NovaITVE83.3 abcdefg28.934.650.0 bcdefghi0.00.058.3 bcdef28.849.5
Jarrosuelto IVICAM83.2 abcdefg22.226.743.7 cdefghijk12.029.568.7 abcd0.00.0
Sanguina INCAVI83.0 abcdefg19.924.043.7 cdefghijk16.1436.956.2 bcdefg23.942.5
Tortozona TintaIVICAM82.2 abcdefg12.014.637.5 efghijkl14.438.550.0 bcdefgh20.440.8
AlbanaDGA81.7 abcdefg21.326.125.6 jklmno9.236.050.0 bcdefgh20.440.8
Hebén IMIDRA81.2 abcdefg13.516.225.6 jklmno9.236.043.7 dfgh12.528.6
TerrizaIMIDRA81.2 abcdefg23.929.543.7 cdefghijk23.954.738.7 efghi30.3478.4
Maquías IVICAM80.6 abcdefg4.15.121.9 klmno10.347.062.5 abcde14.423.1
XafardánEVEGA79.2 abcdefg24.130.437.5 efghijkl25.066.756.2 bcdefg37.566.7
Tinto JeromoIVICAM77.0 abcdefg28.036.415.0 mno11.577.025.0 hi0.00.0
Castellana BlancaIMIDRA76.0 bcdefg28.337.123.8 klmno16.469.034.4 fghi12.034.8
Riera 43 INCAVI76.0 bcdefg7.49.824.4 klmno22.994.150.0 bcdefgh28.957.7
SanguinaIVICAM72.1 cdefgh16.022.225.0 hijklmn0.00.025.0 abcdef0.00.0
Planta Mula ITVE71.5 defgh34.648.47.5 jklmno5.066.732.5 hi29.991.9
Bastardo blanco CICYTEX72.2 efgh26.937.729.8 no18.863.359.4 ghi12.020.2
Rayada Melonera IMIDRA65.2 fgh11.717.928.1 ijklmn6.222.250.0 bcdefgh20.440.8
Zamarrica EVEGA64.5 fgh23.135.717.5 lmno15.085.725.0 hi0.00.0
Cariñena Roja INCAVI62.0 hg26.943.426.2 jklmno25.597.232.5 ghi29.991.9
MandrègueDGA51.7 hi14.2027.410.0 no10.0100.043.7 dfgh12.528.6
Morate IMIDRA34.0 ij14.2842.017.5 lmno15.085.737.5 efghi14.438.5
110-RichterMBG18.3 jk11.2562.115.0 mno0.00.015.0 i11.577.0
SO4 MBG5.0 k0.000.05.0 o0.00.015.0 i11.577.0
LSD (0.05)23.5 22.4 25.4
Values followed by the same letter, in each column, and for each variable, are not significantly different.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Boso, S.; Gago, P.; Santiago, J.-L.; Muñoz-Organero, G.; Cabello, F.; Puertas, B.; Puig, A.; Domingo, C.; Valdés, M.E.; Moreno, D.; et al. Variation in Susceptibility to Downy Mildew Infection in Spanish Minority Vine Varieties. Plants 2023, 12, 2638. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12142638

AMA Style

Boso S, Gago P, Santiago J-L, Muñoz-Organero G, Cabello F, Puertas B, Puig A, Domingo C, Valdés ME, Moreno D, et al. Variation in Susceptibility to Downy Mildew Infection in Spanish Minority Vine Varieties. Plants. 2023; 12(14):2638. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12142638

Chicago/Turabian Style

Boso, Susana, Pilar Gago, José-Luis Santiago, Gregorio Muñoz-Organero, Félix Cabello, Belén Puertas, Anna Puig, Carme Domingo, M. Esperanza Valdés, Daniel Moreno, and et al. 2023. "Variation in Susceptibility to Downy Mildew Infection in Spanish Minority Vine Varieties" Plants 12, no. 14: 2638. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12142638

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop