Grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) is one of the most important fruit crop worldwide. Commercial cultivars are greatly affected by a large number of pathogenic microorganisms that cause diseases during pre- and/or post-harvest periods, affecting production, processing and export, along with fruit quality. Among the potential threats, we can find bacteria, fungi, oomycete, or viruses with different life cycles, infection mechanisms and evasion strategies. While plant–pathogen interactions are cycles of resistance and susceptibility, resistance traits from natural resources are selected and may be used for breeding purposes and for a sustainable agriculture. In this context, here we summarize some of the most important diseases affecting V. vinifera together with their causal agents. The aim of this work is to bring a comprehensive review of the infection strategies deployed by significant types of pathogens while understanding the host response in both resistance and susceptibility scenarios. New approaches being used to uncover grapevine status during biotic stresses and scientific-based procedures needed to control plant diseases and crop protection are also addressed.

Fungal pathogens are the cause of the most common diseases in grapevine and among them powdery mildew represents a major focus for disease management. Different strategies for introgression of resistance in grapevine are currently undertaken in breeding programs. For example, introgression of several resistance genes (R) from different sources for making it more durable and also strengthening the plant defense response. Taking this into account, we cross-pollinated P09-105/34, a grapevine plant carrying both RUN1 and REN1 pyramided loci of resistance to Erysiphe necator inherited from a pseudo-backcrossing scheme with Muscadinia rotundifolia and Vitis vinifera ‘Dzhandzhal Kara,’ respectively, with the susceptible commercial table grape cv. ‘Crimson Seedless.’ We developed RUN1REN1 resistant genotypes through conventional breeding and identified them by marker assisted selection. The characterization of defense response showed a highly effective defense mechanism against powdery mildew in these plants. Our results reveal that RUN1REN1 grapevine plants display a robust defense response against E. necator, leading to unsuccessful fungal establishment with low penetration rate and poor hypha development. This resistance mechanism includes reactive oxygen species production, callose accumulation, programmed cell death induction and mainly VvSTS36 and VvPEN1 gene activation. RUN1REN1 plants have a great potential as new table grape cultivars with durable complete resistance to E. necator, and are valuable germplasm to be included in grape breeding programs to continue pyramiding with other sources of resistance to grapevine diseases.

Grapevine is one of the most abundant crops worldwide, with varieties destined for fresh and dry consumption, as well as wine production. Unfortunately, grapevine plants are affected by both biotic and abiotic stresses, generating significant economic losses. These conditions can negatively impact grape cultivation at different stages: plant and berry development during pre-and post-harvest, production, fresh fruit processing and export, along with wine quality. Most of the grapevine varieties are susceptible to several pathogens and within this chapter, particular attention is given to fungi (Botrytis cinerea and Erysiphe necator) and viruses, since they are a worldwide concern. Within the latter, special focus is given to the grapevine leafroll disease, a complex and destructive infection. On the other hand, abiotic stress is also relevant in grapevine, and in this chapter it will be exemplified by UV-B radiation and its impact on growth and fruit development, plant adaptive responses and its relationship with the quality of grape berries for winemaking. The main biotic and abiotic grapevine stress factors are reviewed in this chapter, considering a special focus on biotechnological approaches carried out in order to address them and minimize their detrimental consequences.

Carotenoids are essential components of the photosynthetic antenna and reaction center complexes, being also responsible for antioxidant defense, coloration, and many other functions in multiple plant tissues. In tomato, salinity negatively affects the development of vegetative organs and productivity, but according to previous studies it might also increase fruit color and taste, improving its quality, which is a current agricultural challenge. The fruit quality parameters that are increased by salinity are cultivar-specific and include carotenoid, sugar, and organic acid contents. However, the relationship between vegetative and reproductive organs and response to salinity is still poorly understood. Considering this, Solanum lycopersicum cv. Micro-Tom plants were grown in the absence of salt supplementation as well as with increasing concentrations of NaCl for 14 weeks, evaluating plant performance from vegetative to reproductive stages. In response to salinity, plants showed a significant reduction in net photosynthesis, stomatal conductance, PSII quantum yield, and electron transport rate, in addition to an increase in non-photochemical quenching. In line with these responses the number of tomato clusters decreased, and smaller fruits with higher soluble solids content were obtained. Mature-green fruits also displayed a salt-dependent higher induction in the expression of PSY1, PDS, ZDS, and LYCB, key genes of the carotenoid biosynthesis pathway, in correlation with increased lycopene, lutein, β-carotene, and violaxanthin levels. These results suggest a key relationship between photosynthetic plant response and yield, involving impaired photosynthetic capacity, increased carotenoid-related gene expression, and carotenoid biosynthesis.