Grapevine trunk diseases: complex and still poorly understood

423 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A critical review of plant protection tools for reducing pesticide use on grapevine and new perspectives for the implementation of IPM in viticulture (2017, background): “In fact research (Mugnai et al., 1999; Bertsch et al., 2013) demonstrated the important role of both nursery (Surico et al., 2004) and vineyard management in the infection and symptom development.”
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV)-based remote sensing to monitor grapevine leaf stripe disease within a vineyard affected by esca complex (2016, background): “Affected vines produce poor quality grapes 263Vol. 55, No. 2, August, 2016 (Calzarano et al., 2004b; Lorrain et al., 2012), have reduced production and a high incidence of yearly death, representing an increasing threat for grape growers around the world, but especially in Europe (Bertsch et al., 20”
The effects of grapevine trunk diseases (GTDs) on vine physiology (2016, background): “Notably, the attention was drawn to the wood discoloration considered as being strictly related to Botryosphaeria dieback, namely the brown stripe (Larignon et al. 2001; Bertsch et al. 2013; Spagnolo et al. 2014b).”
Overview of grapevine trunk diseases in France in the 2000s (2013, background): “The involvement of other microorganisms is still a matter of speculation and recent studies indicate that a diverse microflora colonise the wood of esca-diseased grapevines (Bruez et al., 2011; Maher et al., 2012), but its exact role remains to be determined.”