terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Mgaloblishvili Rpv29 and Rpv31 loci reveal new insights on downy mildew resistance sources in Vitis vinifera

Mgaloblishvili Rpv29 and Rpv31 loci reveal new insights on downy mildew resistance sources in Vitis vinifera

Abstract

Downy mildew, a disease caused by Plasmopara viticola (Berk. et Curt.) Berl. and De Toni, is one of the strongest threats to grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) production. Recently, sources of resistance to downy mildew were identified among Caucasian germplasm. Among them, the Georgian variety Mgaloblishvili revealed a unique resistance mechanism. A genome wide association study (GWAS) allowed the identification of the genetic bases of Mgaloblishvili resistance, the loci Rpv29, Rpv30 and Rpv31. To dissect the three resistance loci, Mgaloblishvili genome was sequenced using PacBio HiFi reads and assembled. A chromosome-scale diploid genome assembly consisting of ~ 986 Mb and a contig N50 length of 25.8 Mb was obtained. A total of 58,912 protein-coding genes were predicted on the two sets of phased chromosomes. A whole genome comparison with the genome of the susceptible reference accession PN40024 was performed. Mgaloblishvili resistance loci were in-depth analyzed in terms of structure, gene content, gene expression and impact of structural variants (SVs) and SNPs (Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms). Furthermore, using DNA sequencing data of Mgaloblishvili self-cross progeny, resistance haplotypes were identified for Rpv30 and Rpv31. The obtained data highlighted Mgaloblishvili resistant phenotype as a consequence of multiple small SVs and SNPs, that eventually results into differential transcriptional regulation. Altogether, these genetic resources will increase the knowledge about downy mildew-grapevine pathosystem. Moreover, they will be available for breeding programs aiming to develop grapevine resistant varieties.

DOI:

Publication date: June 13, 2024

Issue: Open GPB 2024

Type: Article

Authors

Valentina Ricciardi 1, Andrea Minio 2, Melanie Massonnet 2, Alexander H.J. Wittenberg3, David Maghradze 4,5,6, Silvia Laura Toffolatti 1, Osvaldo Failla 1, Dario Cantù 2*, Gabriella De Lorenzis

1 Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Milan
2 Department of Viticulture and Enology, University of California, Davis (CA), USA
3 KeyGene, Wageningen, The Netherlands
4 Caucasus International University, Tbilisi, Georgia
5 Georgian Technical University, Tbilisi, Georgia
6National Wine Agency of Georgia, Tbilisi, Georgia

Contact the author*

Keywords

Grapevine, biotic stress, QTL, genome, Caucasus

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Open GPB | Open GPB 2024

Citation

Related articles…

From the current probabilistic approach to a deterministic production process, a clear step towards digital transformation in the wine sector

Currently, to consistently ensure the maintenance of a wine-style while benefiting from the utmost rigor made possible by the winemaking process, the composition of the wine blend is made using sensory control. This is performed after the wine is made with no real possibility of deterministic intervention.

Bio-metaethics viticulture proposed by the GiESCO

Concerning sustainable Viticultures, the GiESCO notices the current confusion around the notions of:
– ‘integrated’ Viticulture which does not clearly set itself apart of classical so-called ‘reasoned’ Viticulture and involves series of certifications which are distinguishable with difficulty,
– ‘agro-ecological’ Viticulture which adds important elements of sustainability to ‘integrated’ Viticulture, without clarifying really the latter,
– ‘organic’ Viticulture which leans on some unbearable principles such as the opposition between chemical or natural products, with besides a frequent recourse to copper-products,
– ‘biodynamic Viticulture’ which recommends environment-friendly methods, but for very not scientifically verified.

Un siècle de publications et d’archives de l’OIV : un patrimoine mondial de valeur universelle exceptionnelle pour les sciences et techniques de la vigne et du vin

In 2004, at its general assembly, the oiv adopted the transfer of its scientific and technical heritage from the office to the international organisation of vine and wine. Unesco defines heritage as “our legacy from the past, what we live with today, and what we pass on to future generations.”

Climate projections over France wine-growing region and its potential impact on phenology

Climate change represents a major challenge for the French wine industry. Climatic conditions in French vineyards have already changed and will continue to evolve. One of the notable effects on grapevine is the advancing growing season. The aim of this study is to characterise the evolution of agroclimatic indicators (Huglin index, number of hot days, mean temperature, cumulative rainfall and number of rainy days during the growing season) at French wine-growing regions scale between 1980 and 2019 using gridded data (8 km resolution, SAFRAN) and for the middle of the 21th century (2046-2065) with 21 GCMs statistically debiased and downscaled at 8 km. A set of three phenological models were used to simulate the budburst (BRIN, Smoothed-Utah), flowering, veraison and theoretical maturity (GFV and GSR) stages for two grape varieties (Chardonnay and Cabernet-Sauvignon) over the whole period studied. All the French wine-growing regions show an increase in both temperatures during the growing season and Huglin index. This increase is accompanied by an advance in the simulated flowering (+3 to +9 days), veraison (+6 to +13 days) and theoretical maturity (+6 to +16 days) stages, which are more noticeable in the north-eastern part of France. The climate projections unanimously show, for all the GCMs considered, a clear increase in the Huglin index (+662 to 771 °C.days compared to the 1980-1999 period) and in the number of hot days (+5.6 to 22.6 days) in all the wine regions studied. Regarding rainfall, the expected evolution remains very uncertain due to the heterogeneity of the climates simulated by the 21 models. Only 4 regions out of 21 have a significant decrease in the number of rainy days during the growing season. The two budburst models show a strong divergence in the evolution of this stage with an average difference of 18 days between the two models on all grapevine regions. The theoretical maturity is the most impacted stage with a potential advance between 40 and 23 days according to wine-growing regions.