Can yeast cells sense other yeasts beyond competition interactions?

Grapevine trunk diseases (GTD) occur wherever grapes are grown and are considered the main biotic factor reducing yields and shortening vineyards’ lifespan. Currently, no product is available to eradicate GTD once grapevines are infected. Therefore, prophylactic strategies based on pruning wound protection and ‘remedial surgery’, the only eradication method based on the elimination of infected wood and renewal of the vine by means of new canes or suckers, are the only effective strategies available. The Canadian grape and wine industry focusses on a sustainable production and thus, looking for alternatives to chemicals for disease management is a top priority.

Plant diseases are a major obstacle to crop production. The main approaches to battle plant diseases, consist of synthetic chemicals to attack infecting pathogens. However, concerns are increasing about the effects of chemicals in the environment, leading to an increase in the use of biocontrol agents (BCAs), due to their assets, such as, antagonism, and competition. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that the introduction of Bacillus subtilis PTA-271 (Bs PTA-271) and Trichoderma atroviride SC1 (Ta SC1) produce distinctive modifications in the composition and network structure of the grapevine rhizosphere microbial community, as well as grapevine induced defenses.

Each grapevine variety has a specific water use regulation response under drought, and it is still unclear whether this regulation results from innate genotypic behavior (iso- and anisohydric), or is a response to environmental factors, namely recurrent water stress priming effects. In the present work, we explored the influence of the field-grown genotypes’ drought memory in the drought-response phenotype of their vegetative progenies, in Trincadeira (isohydric) and Castelão (anisohydric) varieties under a drought event followed by recovery in a glasshouse. Cuttings from both cultivars subjected to full irrigation (FI) and non-irrigation (NI) treatments for 5 consecutive years were used.

Top quality sparkling wines (SW) are mostly produced using the traditional method that implies a second fermentation into the bottle[1]. That is the case of sparkling wines of reputed AOC such as Champagne, Cava or Franciacorta. However, it seems that the first SW was elaborated using the ancestral method in which only one fermentation takes place[2]. That is the case of the classical SW from the AOC Blanquette de Limoux[3]. In both cases, SW age in the bottle during some time in contact with lees favoring yeast’s autolysis[4]. There is a lot of information about traditional method but only few exists about ancestral method. The aim of this work was to compare SW made by the ancestral method with SW made by the traditional method.

In Ancient Egypt, wine was a luxury product consumed mainly by the upper classes and the royal family and offered to gods in daily religious rituals in the temples.
Since the Predynastic (4000-3100 BC) period, wine jars were placed in tombs as funerary offerings. From the Old Kingdom (2680-2160 BC) to the Greco-Roman (332 BC-395 AD) period, viticulture and winemaking scenes were depicted on the private tombs’ walls. During the New Kingdom (1539-1075 BC), wine jars were inscribed to indicate: vintage year, product, quality, provenance, property and winemaker’s name and title.