www.vinehealth.com.au

Figure 1. Phylloxera adults, nymphs and eggs Photo courtesy of Agriculture Victoria (Rutherglen) Vigilance required in Phylloxera fight

Phylloxera, a major biosecurity pest of grapevines, was a buzz word 15 years ago. There was a ‘keep our vineyards phylloxera free’ sticker on the back of every ute. But industry focus on biosecurity has, in recent years, declined.

Vinehealth Australia is planning to turn things around. Suzanne McLoughlin, Vinehealth Australia; Kevin Powell, Agriculture Victoria; and Inca Pearce, Vinehealth Australia report.

INCA PEARCE, the new CEO of to have 83 endemic strains (Umina et al., of phylloxera insects on the roots and Vinehealth Australia (formerly known 2007) (Powell and Korosi, 2014). damage in the form of nodosities, but not as the Phylloxera and Grape Industry At present, these endemic strains are tuberosities, hovever visual symptoms in Board of SA) is leading a renewed push to confined to parts of Victoria and New the canopy do not occur, which makes refocus industry attention on phylloxera South Wales. detection difficult. Grafted vines can prevention and management. The phylloxera lifecycle involves egg, sustain populations of phylloxera, which “I’ve worked in the viticulture nymph and adult stages. Adult phylloxera can spread to ungrafted vines. Some industry for the past 19 years and I’ve are 1mm long and yellow to brown in phylloxera strains which can feed on seen the devastation that pests such colour (Figure 1). They feed on leaves tolerant American rootstock leaves and/ as phylloxera can cause. I know how and/or grapevine roots causing death of or roots cause neither vine decline nor dangerous complacency can be,” Pearce the European grapevine, Vitis vinifera, economic damage. Phylloxera resistant said. “Biosecurity and farm-gate hygiene within five-to-six years on average; but grapevines are those on which phylloxera may not be the most exciting things, dependent on which endemic strain is cannot develop to the adult stage so but if we get those fundamental things present. there is no egg production and no gall wrong, then our industry will suffer.” The roots of V. v in ifer a, are extremely production (Powell and Krstic, 2015). susceptible to attack by phylloxera but the Phylloxera tolerant rootstocks are those WHAT IS PHYLLOXERA? leaves are resistant to strains present in on which phylloxera can feed, reproduce Grape phylloxera Daktulsphaira Australia; endemic strains of phylloxera and cause galling (nodosities) Rootstocks vitifoliae is a devastating pest of in Australia mostly feed on roots. used commercially in Australia are grapevines worldwide, affecting Vitis Root feeding on V. vinifera results considered to vary in their resistance, or species (commercial grapevines and in distinctive hook-shaped galls or tolerance, to different phylloxera strains, ornamental vines). Phylloxera is an insect nodosities on fleshy roots (Figure 2) or and research continues in this area. native to eastern North America, first tuberosities on older roots. Depending Phylloxera can survive for up to eight affecting native European Vitis vinifera. on the phylloxera strain, leaf galls days in warm weather and considerably in the late 19th century. may occur on the leaves of suckers of longer in cooler conditions, without There have been several hundred American Vitis rootstocks. Grapevines feeding on grapevines. They may be found strains of the pest documented grafted to phylloxera tolerant rootstocks in the vineyard throughout the year, worldwide, of which Australia is known or nursery plantings may show signs with populations peaking both above

34 and below ground between December and February. Early signs of a phylloxera infestation include slow and stunted shoot growth and early yellowing of leaves as they lose function initially. Leaf yellowing will normally be seen in two to three neighbouring vines – usually, but not always, within the same row. In the mid stages of infestation, an infested vineyard area looks like an ‘oil spot’ in its spreading pattern as the phylloxera move from vine to adjacent vine and from row to row, spreading out from the roots of the vine where it was first introduced. Smaller satellite spots also occur when phylloxera has been accidentally moved on clothing, footwear or vineyard machinery. Grape phylloxera causes considerable losses in both quality and yield of grapevines throughout many grape- Figure 2. Galls on grapevine roots Photo courtesy of Agriculture Victoria (Rutherglen) producing areas around the world (PGIBSA, 2003; INRA, 2009). Crop losses been grafted onto phylloxera-resistant international rules on phylloxera range from no noticeable impact to almost American rootstocks. outbreak notification and border total crop loss. The infestation rate and The cost of grafted material alone is restrictions on movement of propagation yield decline is significantly related to three-to-five times that of own rooted material (Hamilton, 2012). vine variety, seasonal temperatures, soil vine material, notwithstanding costs The first detection of phylloxera in moisture levels and phylloxera strain. of vine removal, ground preparation, Australia was near Geelong, Victoria in Vines planted on ungrafted V. v in ifer a planting, trellising, additional water and 1877. Once several vineyards were found rather than onto phylloxera resistant nutrition. Besides vine material costs of to be infested, a policy of destroying rootstock are most at risk to succumbing replanting a vineyard post-phylloxera vineyards and leaving them fallow to phylloxera. infection, other secondary management for many years to eradicate the insect costs may include extra machinery was implemented based on the French IMPACT IN AUSTRALIA and infrastructure (such as heat sheds, experience. Unfortunately, this early There is no proven chemical method washdown bays, etc), heightened farm- attempt at eradication was unsuccessful to eradicate phylloxera on roots of gate hygiene practices (including cleaning and phylloxera was later detected in ungrafted V. v in ifer a grapevines (Loch and disinfestation), people management, other parts of Central and North East and Slack, 2007). Little information on logistics and loss of production while a Victoria. biological control of grape phylloxera is new vineyard is maturing. The first detection in New South available. Wales was in 1884 at Camden and further In 2007, approximately 80 per cent WHERE IS PHYLLOXERA IN infestations were subsequently found of Australia’s commercial winegrapes AUSTRALIA? nearby. Phylloxera was first found in were reported to be ungrafted V. v in ifer a, Phylloxera is a devastating pest that Queensland at Enoggera, Brisbane, in susceptible to phylloxera (Trethowan and destroyed more than one million hectares 1910 and has not been detected in that Powell, 2007). From a South Australian of grapevines in Europe in the late 1800s. state since the 1960s. perspective nearly 10 years on, 74 per Movement of American propagation South Australia, which had not cent of winegrapes are planted on own material into Europe was a fascination received infected material, banned roots (Vinehealth Australia, 2016). These of the wealthy long before anyone movement of vine material under the figures highlight the risk and potential began to understand the importance of powers of the Vine Protection Act of 1874. impact of phylloxera to the Australian biosecurity. The first Phylloxera Act was enacted in wine industry. French viticulturists allowed 1899. Then in 1995, the Act became the With the lack of available chemical importation of propagation material from Phylloxera and Grape Industry Act 1995 or biological controls for phylloxera, the north-eastern United States until the (http://www.vinehealth.com.au/bio- only proven cultural method to manage 1860s, unwittingly and inadvertendly security/phylloxera/) with government phylloxera is to pull out infested vines facilitating rapid phylloxera spread. support for levies in order to undertake and replant with new vines that have In 1878, the ‘Agreement of Berne’ set its duties under the Act.

Accolade Wines Australia Limited, Aravina Estate, Australian Vintage Ltd, Barwick Wines, Beltunga, Bests Wines Great Western, Bremerton Wines, Brown Brothers Milawa Vineyard Pty Ltd, Campbells Wines, Casama Group Pty Ltd, Cellarmaster Group, , Clover Hill Wines, CMV Farms, , Delegats Wine Estate, Delegat’s Wine Estate Limited, DogRidge, Edgemill Group, Fanselow Bell, Five Star Wines, Fowles Wine, Fuse Wine Services Pty Ltd, Gemtree Vineyards, Glenlofty Wines, Harry Jones Wines, Henry’s Drive Vignerons Pty Ltd,Go Hentley with Farm, Hope the Estate, Hospitality site Recruitment that Solutions, leading , Hungerford Hill Wines, Inglewood Wines Pty Ltd, Innocent Bystander, Jack Rabbit Vineyard, Jim Barry Wines, KarriBindi, Kauri, Kingston Estate Wines Pty Ltd, Kirrihill Wines Pty Ltd, Krinklewood Biodynamic Vineyard, L’Atelier by, Aramis Vineyards, ,The Wine Make Industry’s WInes LeadingAustralia, Online McWilliam’s Job Site Wines Group, Memstar, Mondo Consulting, Moppity VIneyards, Moxon Oak, Nadalie aus- tralia, Nexthire, Oenotec Pty Ltd, Options Winewine Merchants, Orlandoindustry Wines, Ozpak Pty companies Ltd, Patrick of Coonawarra, Plantagenet use. Wines, Portavin Integrated Wine Services, R&D VITICULTURAL SERVICES PTY LTD, Robert Oatley Vineyards, Rymill Coonawarra, Seville

35 They may also be carried by wind, with FOOTBATH REMINDER spread of up to 25 metres (Powell, 2000). Natural spread occurs at a rate of 100-200 Anyone who has already visited a vineyard before they enter yours could potentially metres per year within a vineyard (King carry phylloxera, weed seeds and other pests and diseases with them. An important and Buchanan, 1986). While crawlers are step to protect your vines is to ensure that everyone coming onto your vineyard is the most widely spread life-stage, other wearing clean clothes and that their footwear is clean and disinfested. life-stages including eggs and wingless adults can be spread in soil, in leaves The footwear disinfestation process is also recommended for disinfesting pruning with leaf galls and on planting material. snips, picking snips, shovels and other small hand tools that come into contact with In Australia Phylloxera adults are soil and grapevine material. all female and are able to reproduce The footwear disinfestation protocol has been updated and footwear must now be asexually. One adult female is capable of laying up to 200 eggs per cycle and immersed for at least 60 seconds in 2% sodium hypochlorite solution. Do not rinse can have several breeding cycles in its after immersion. lifetime. This means only one insect is To view the footwear disinfestation protocol visit www.vinehealth.com.au needed to infest a vineyard.

WHAT’S BEING DONE TO STOP ITS SPREAD? Currently, declared Phylloxera with phylloxera; alongside large parts In Australia, the Commonwealth Infested Zones (PIZ) are confined to areas of Victoria and New South Wales. Government is responsible for regulating in Victoria (North East, Maroondah, Queensland is thought to be free the movement of plants and plant Nagambie, Mooroopna, Upton and of phylloxera. For detailed maps of products into and out of Australia. Whitebridge) and New South Wales current phylloxera zones, refer to www. However, each state and territory (Sydney region and Albury/Corowa) – vinehealth.com.au/resources/maps/. government is responsible for plant refer to the maps on Page 37. health controls within their individual Since December 2015, there has been an HOW DOES PHYLLOXERA jurisdiction (DAWR, 2016). upsurge of new detections of phylloxera SPREAD? To prevent the spread of phylloxera within the existing Maroondah PIZ, Movement of phylloxera can primarily from infested areas, each state has resulting in boundary adjustments to be attributed to the transfer of first legislation and associated regulations, this zone. instar (crawler) or first instar lifecycle which restrict or prohibit the movement “These outbreaks clearly demonstrate stages, which are associated with the of ‘phylloxera risk vectors’. These include the need for greater awareness, vigilance movement of various human assisted grapevine material, grape products and and requirement for compliance with vectors that can lead to unlimited spread vineyard or winery equipment and quarantine legislations. No one can if no control measures are practiced. machinery (PIRSA, 2015). afford to be complacent,” Pearce said. Although phylloxera infestations in These regulations are documented “It is critical that the wine industry Europe in the late 19th century have in Plant Quarantine Standards or maintains its investment in phylloxera been largely attributed to the movement equivalent, all of which are underpinned research to ensure industry is armed of propagation material, grape phylloxera by the National Phylloxera Management with the most up-to-date knowledge can be spread by numerous mechanisms Protocol, which allows for the delineation in fighting phylloxera and that this including: of grapegrowing regions by phylloxera knowledge strengthens the quarantine • Movement of vineyard machinery, status (http://www.vinehealth.com.au/ regulations. equipment and vehicles: media/National-Phylloxera-Management- “Vinehealth Australia acknowledges • Soil from a vineyard; Protocol.pdf). the proactive awareness campaigns that • Footwear and clothing; Phylloxera Exclusion Zones (PEZ) are the Yarra Valley Phylloxera Management • Grapes – whole or harvested; areas that have been surveyed and found Working Group has implemented in an • Grape products such as unfiltered free of phylloxera or are declared free attempt to prevent further spread of juice and pre-fermentation grape historically, Phylloxera Risk Zones (PRZ) phylloxera in and out of the Maroondah marc; and are areas that have not been surveyed for PIZ.” • Grapevine material – rootlings, phylloxera and are of unknown status, Through quarantine measures, cuttings, potted vines, leaves and and Phylloxera Infested Zones (PIZ) are implementation of farm-gate hygiene shoots. areas that contain vineyards known to be practices and continued vigilance, the Crawlers can also naturally spread infested with phylloxera. The boundaries major grape growing states of South from vine to vine by crawling along of a PIZ must be a minimum of 5kms Australia, Western Australia and the soil surface and in the canopy or from the closest infested vineyard Tasmania have not become infested crawling below ground from root to root. (NVHSC, 2009). Vinehealth Australia

Equipment, Supplies & Services for the wine & grape industry SEARCH N W Online Buyers’ Guide www.winetitles.com.au/guide

36 has identified an opportunity to assist Plant Biosecurity Cooperative Research Other secondary methods of state governments to communicate these Centre (PBCRC) and Wine Australia, to surveillance, such as aerial imagery, legal requirements around moving grape- develop an advanced early detection and have been used since the early 2000s by related phylloxera vectors between states surveillance system using phylloxera Vinehealth Australia and even earlier and between phylloxera management DNA extracted from soil samples. Once by Agriculture Victoria, to look for weak zones within states. endorsed, the DNA method, which was vines using Normalised Differential Demonstrating a coordinated approach first developed in 2006 by a collaboration Vegetation Index (NDVI), hyperspectral to biosecurity, Vinehealth Australia has between Agriculture Victoria and SARDI, imagery and Plant Cell Density (PCD). initiated the building of a simple, easy will form part of an integrated approach Vinehealth Australia continues to use a to use, online ‘winegrape biosecurity for the detection and surveillance of system of routine aerial imaging followed legislation’ tool with the potential to phylloxera. by on-ground surveying, as a method raise the awareness and understanding Favourable results to date indicate to detect vine decline across South of these legal requirements and improve this method along with other primary Australia. Researchers including Dr compliance with these requirements surveillance methods of digging and Kevin Powell have also investigated the among users of the tool. Ultimately, to emergence traps, will be able to support potential for electromagnetic induction- be successful in stopping the spread identification and verification of area based soil sensing (EM 38) and chemical of phylloxera, we need to ensure that freedom status to facilitate market fingerprinting to assist with phylloxera the surveillance methods we use in access for growers, as well as improving surveillance. vineyards have the highest chance of proactive management strategies for Phylloxera research in Australia is detecting where phylloxera is and is not. phylloxera. For information about this predominantly undertaken by Australia’s Since 2013, Vinehealth Australia has project visit http://www.vinehealth.com. authority on grape phylloxera, Dr Kevin been the lead agency in a collaborative au/projects/dna-testing-early-accurate- Powell, a Principal Research Scientist phylloxera research project, funded by the detect ion/. – Invertebrate Sciences, for Agriculture

Subscribers can access an online version of each print issue plus over 1500 archived articles. The winegrape industry’s leading information source Subscribe by: W: www.winetitles.com.au/gwm E: [email protected] T: +618 8369 9522

37 phylloxera and other priority biosecurity policy to keep vineyards free of threats, to arm industry with information phylloxera and other pests and diseases. required to combat the introduction, Vinehealth Australia is a biosecurity establishment and spread of phylloxera regulator in SA and jointly manages and other pests and diseases in Australia. biosecurity incursions in SA alongside Biosecurity SA. As phylloxera does WHAT ORGANISATIONS ARE not respect state borders, Vinehealth INVOLVED IN PHYLLOXERA Australia understands it must enhance MANAGEMENT? collaboration with interstate colleagues Biosecurity management must be to prevent further spread of endemic viewed across a continuum from pre- strains of phylloxera in Australia and border, at the border and post-border. The the potential introduction of exotic Australian Department of Agriculture phylloxera strains into Australia; and and Water Resources and Plant Health • State regulators such as Primary Australia as its conduit to industry, are Industries departments are primarily responsible for managing Australia’s responsible for surveillance and robust biosecurity system. responses to incursions. They also With regard to phylloxera post-border, have the responsibility of maintaining responsibility for limiting the infestation adequate quarantine standards and spread of phylloxera between states and ensuring compliance to these and within states, is a collective effort standards. between industry, government-industry conduits and national and state-based References regulators: • Industry responsibility lies with 1. Department of Agriculture and Water Resources (DAWR) (2016). Draft report for the non-regulated grapegrowers, winemakers and others analysis of existing policy for table grapes from in the supply chain to adhere to legal Sonora, Mexico. movement requirements, plant with 2. Hamilton, R. (2012). Phylloxera Position Paper. clean propagation material, implement Phylloxera and Grape Industry Board of South farm-gate hygiene practices, maintain Australia, Australia. awareness of phylloxera and other pest 3. INRA (2009). Viteus vitifoliae (Fitch) Dactylosphaera vitifoliae Fitch, Viteus vitifolii (Shimer). and disease threats, monitor vineyards and verify anything unusual and to 4. King P. D. and Buchanan G. A. (1986). The dispersal Suzanne McLoughlin and Inca Pearce, of phylloxera crawlers and spread of phylloxera Vinehealth Australia communicate the importance of being infestations in New Zealand and Australian vineyards. vigilant to all staff and visitors; American Journal of Enology and Viticulture. 37: • National, state and regional grape 26–33. Victoria based at Rutherglen. Kevin is and wine industry bodies have a key 5. Loch A. and Slack, J. (2007). Grape phylloxera: the working to improve our understanding role in advocacy, communications world’s worst grapevine pest. Primefacts: Profitable and Sustainable Primary Industries. 553: 1-4. of the comparative levels of virulence of and education. Australian Vignerons the various phylloxera strains endemic is signatory to the Emergency Plant 6. National Vine Health Steering Committee (NVHSC) (2009). National Phylloxera Management Protocol. to Australia and therefore the risk of Pest Response Deed and provides an spread of these strains in practice. His industry voice if there is an exotic 7. PGIBSA (2003) A guide to grape phylloxera in Australia. Phylloxera and Grape Industry Board of current research on phylloxera involves biosecurity incursion of importance to South Australia, Australia. determining the effect of different the wine industry; 8. Primary Industries and Resources South Australia disinfestation treatments on survival of • Research providers, such as Dr Kevin (PIRSA) (2015). Plant Quarantine Standard South endemic phylloxera strains, developing Powell (Agriculture Victoria) and the Australia. Version 11.1. effective management options using Australian Wine Research Institute, 9. Powell, K.S. (2000). Management of grape rootstocks to restrict their further spread are involved in conducting research phylloxera in South-east Australia Phase I and II. GWRDC Final Project Report, p 17. and testing of novel detection approaches. to support our quarantine legislation In addition, several projects part of the and knowledge of how to manage 10. Powell, K. S. and Korosi, G. A. (2014). ‘Taking the strain’ – selecting the right rootstock to protect against PBCRC program, include the Vinehealth- phylloxera in Australia, as well as endemic phylloxera strains. Acta Horticulturae. 1045: led ‘On-farm DNA surveillance for grape communicating the importance of 9 9 -107. growers’ mentioned above, as well as being vigilant to limit the spread of 11. Powell, K. S. and M. Krstic (2015). Phylloxera: WA-based Michael Renton and Maggie phylloxera; Rootstock tolerance and resistance to different Triska’s ‘Design and evaluation of targeted • Vinehealth Australia operates under genetic strains of phylloxera. Wine and Viticulture Journal. 30(5): 48-51. biosecurity surveillance systems’ looking The Phylloxera and Grape Industry to design biosecurity surveillance Act (1995) and is responsible to the 12. Trethowan, C.J. and Powell, K.S. (2007). Rootstock-Phylloxera interactions under Australian systems that are more effective and South Australian Parliament through field conditions. Acta Horticulturae. 733: 115-122. economical, based on factors such as the Minister for Agriculture, Food and 13. Umina P. A., Corrie A. M., Herbert K. S., White V. the number and location of traps or soil Fisheries. For more than a century L., Powell K. S., Hoffmann A. A. (2007). The use of samples, and the frequency with which Vinehealth Australia (formerly the DNA markers for pest management: clonal lineages and population biology of Grape phylloxera. Acta they are conducted or checked. Phylloxera and Grape Industry Board Horticulturae. 733: 183-195. Importantly, Vinehealth Australia of SA) has protected South Australia’s 14. Vinehealth Australia (2016). Annual Report 2015- advocates for a national, coordinated clean-green status by leading industry 2016. Vinehealth Australia, South Australia, Australia. approach to education and awareness of initiatives, education and influencing

38