Fungal communities are differentially affected by conventional and biodynamic agricultural management approaches in vineyard ecosystems

Abstract

There is increased need to identify sustainable agricultural methods which avoid environmental degradation. Previous studies have focused on the effect of specific agricultural interventions on large organisms, but we have fewer data evaluating how microbes, which are key components of ecosystems, might be affected. Additionally, previous studies have been constrained as they only examined one habitat in an ecosystem and have not gone on to evaluate the effect of agricultural approach on harvested crops. Here we take an ecosystems approach and evaluate the net effect of conventional versus biodynamic management on agricultural ecosystems by quantifying fungal communities in multiple habitats using metagenomics. We go on to measure biodiversity in the crop and key chemical quality parameters in the product consumed by humans. We find that the method of management significantly affects communities in soil, on plant structures, and on the developing crop in subtle but importantly different ways in terms of number, type, and abundance of species. However, management approach has no effect on communities in the final harvested juice, nor on product traits aligned with quality. This shows that while management approach impacts different habitats in the environment in different ways, this does not automatically flow onto the harvested crop

Genetic structure of Italian population of the grapevine downy mildew agent, Plasmopara viticola

“…Disease management could also contribute in shaping the pathogen population. It has been reported that fungal communities in vineyard can vary according to the disease management practices adopted (Morrison‐Whittle, Lee, & Goddard, ). However, the results obtained in the analysis of microbial communities of grapevine are not conclusive in discriminating among disease management strategies (Kecskeméti, Berkelmann‐Löhnertz, & Reineke, ).…”

Geographical and Cultivar Features Differentiate Grape Microbiota in Northern Italy and Spain Vineyards

“…Recently, DNA studies supported that the grape microbiome is related to vineyard location, climatic conditions, and other vineyard-related factors ( Taylor et al, 2014 ; Bokulich et al, 2016 ). Other studies also showed that agronomical practices, such as biodynamic management are able to modify the microbiome of grape and must ( Burns et al, 2016 ; Mezzasalma et al, 2017 ; Morrison-Whittle et al, 2017 ). Similarly, other authors suggested that the occurrence of specific bacteria in must and wine has an effect on wine characteristics and typicity ( Belda et al, 2017 ; Liu et al, 2017 ).…”

Vineyard under-vine floor management alters soil microbial composition, while the fruit microbiome shows no corresponding shifts

“…Management practices in the vineyard and winery, such as the use of fungal sprays and sulfiting fermentations, play important roles in the microbial dynamics of grape and wine fermentations that potentially contribute to wine sensory typicity 17 . Yeast populations in vineyard soil 18 , grapes, and wine fermentations 19 – 22 have been studied in the context of overall vineyard management approaches, such as organic, conventional, and biodynamical management, where the direct manipulation of grape-associated microbiomes were involved. Differentiated grape microbial management using different phytosanitation sprayers derived predictable results, while masking the effect of other management practices on grape microbial ecology.…”