Plant- and Microbial-Based Organic Disease Management for Grapevines: A Review

Abstract

This review compares 32 studies (2000–2024) on plant- and microbial-based organic disease management to control grapevine pests and diseases. A systematic literature search provided 24 studies on microbial agents and 8 on plant treatments. Their effectiveness against key pathogens, including downy mildew, powdery mildew, and gray mold, was compared. Microbial agents such as Candida sake inhibited Botrytis cinerea by up to 80% in the lab and Pseudomonas sp. dramatically reduced grapevine lesion lengths by 32–52% in field conditions, while Bacillus subtilis reduced powdery mildew by 96% in greenhouse conditions and A. pullulans reduced Ochratoxin A infection by 99% in field conditions. In laboratory conditions, C. guilliermondii A42 reduced grape rot to 8–22% and A. cephalosporium B11 reduced it to 16–82%, confirming A42’s greater efficacy. Plant-derived agents and essential oils, including lavender and cinnamon, suppressed 100% of pathogens in vitro, whereas copper coupled with plant-derived agents reduced disease incidence by up to 92% under field conditions. While promising, plant-derived agents are plagued by formulation instability, which affects shelf life and effectiveness, while microbial agents must be kept under stringent storage conditions and can be variable under different vineyard conditions. These limitations identify the requirement for a stronger formulation strategy and large field validations. Organic disease management offers several important benefits, such as environmental safety, biodegradability, compatibility with organic cultivation, and low pesticide dependence. The application of these agents in pest management systems is ecologically balanced, improves soil health, and enables sustainable vineyard management.

1. Introduction

Grapes (Vitis vinifera) are one of the widely consumed fruits, serve as the backbone of the wine industry, and are generally a favorite variety on the table. The cultivation of grapes is increasing year by year all over the world due to their encouraging nutritional attributes. In 2020, the area covered by vast vineyards was just over 7.3 million hectares of land [1]. Also, the increase in the global population requires that quality grapes and their products are available on every continent [2,3].

However, grapes suffer from certain diseases throughout their growth period, including downy mildew, powdery mildew, oidium, black root, and anthracnose, which eventually affect the yield and quality of the fruits immensely. In intensive farming, the use of pesticides has remained a key component in the protection of crops as a result of most pests and diseases causing devastating effects on crop yield and productivity [4,5,6]. A variety of pesticides are used to ensure the quality of grapes and their products during the ripening process. The common types of pesticides applied are fungicides, insecticides, and herbicides for the control of diseases in grapes and to fight against insect infestation [7,8]. Moreover, a large volume of studies have performed analyses of pesticides in grapes using different sample preparation techniques. The most dominant extraction methods used are liquid–liquid extraction, dispersive and in-cartridge solid-phase extraction, and matrix solid-phase microextraction [9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16]. Other extraction strategies of note encompass dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction [7], supported-liquid extraction [17], pressurized liquid extraction [18], using the QuEChERS (Quick, Easy, Cheap, Effective, Rugged, and Safe) [19], solid-segment microextraction [9], and vacuum-assisted head space stable-segment microextraction [20]. Samples are subsequently prepared for instrumental analyses targeting volatile organic compounds (VOCs) [21,22,23], typically employing gas chromatography (GC) or high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) coupled with highly sensitive detectors [19,24,25,26].

Traditionally, artificial insecticides were the primary approach to controlling diseases to enhance the yield and quality of grape products [4,27,28]. Pesticides are chemically derived substances or microorganisms utilized in agriculture to govern, spoil, attack, or counteract pests, illnesses, and parasites. They consist of organochlorine compounds, organophosphorus compounds, carbamates, formamidines, thiocyanates, organotin, dinitrophenol, artificial pyrethroids, and antibiotics [5,29,30]. Based on the above, worries about their environmental effects, risks to human health, and the improvement of pesticide-resistant lines have led researchers to look for more environmentally friendly options. Among these alternatives, organic disease management comprising diverse biological marketers and natural compounds is becoming increasingly common. Moreover, there may be a trend toward organic disease management based totally on vegetation and microorganisms developing, characterized by its efficiency and environmental friendliness [31]. In contrast to their chemical equivalents, organic disease management agents are derived from residing organisms or natural substances, often with a distinctly specific action against targeted pests. The primary distinction between synthetic pesticides and organic disease management is the decreased risk of damage to non-target organisms, inclusive of humans and useful insects, making it an environmentally friendly and safe alternative [32,33,34].

The move from artificial chemical pesticides to organic disease management for grapevine control is driven by the need for a more sustainable and complete technique for pest management. The harmful effects of chemical pesticides on biodiversity, soil health, and human protection are clear [12,13,14]. Thus, organic disease management constitutes a paradigm shift toward the control of pathogens and pests through techniques that are not necessarily the most powerful, but are environmentally accountable. The key issues that may be addressed by switching to plant-based pesticides are as follows: (1) meeting the need for food; (2) maintaining the environment and contributing to ecology; (3) lowering pesticide residues; (4) sustainability, including pest management; and (5) the promotion of environmentally friendly agricultural practices.

This review provides a comprehensive analysis of organic disease management strategies employed in grape cultivation. It elucidates the underlying mechanisms of action of these methods, offering insights into their control of fungal pathogens. The assessment critically evaluates the associated benefits and challenges, including environmental advantages, risk reduction for non-target organisms, formulation development, regulatory frameworks, and practical applications within the agricultural sector.

The primary purpose of this review is to explore how organic disease management can effectively control grape diseases, emphasizing the diverse categories of organic disease management, their mechanisms of action, benefits, and challenges, and the various extraction and detection methods used to identify and isolate these natural agents.

This review is guided by the following central question: “How can organic disease management serve as a sustainable and efficient alternative to synthetic pesticides in grapevine disease management, and which biopesticide plants have demonstrated effective suppression of diseases and pathogens”?

2. Materials and Methods

A systematic literature search was performed using multiple electronic databases, including Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed, to identify relevant studies published between 1 January 2000 and 31 November 2024. The development of the review included the following steps: (1) clearly defining the research questions, (2) identifying the databases to be consulted, (3) applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, (4) assessing the quality of the selected studies, and (5) presenting the results according to the PRISMA (Preferred Items for the Elaboration of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology, as detailed in Figure 1 [35,36].

2.1. Bibliometric Analysis

The search equation used was as follows: (TITLE-ABS-KEY(“biopesticide” OR “grape disease”) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY(“plant extract” OR “natural pesticide”) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY(“microbial pesticide”).

2.2. Eligibility Criteria

Research was included based on certain criteria. The studies selected focused solely on grapevines and looked at natural or microbial organic disease management. The agents included essential oils, extracts, bacteria, fungi, and yeasts for managing grapevine pests or diseases. The studies had to present first-order experimental data. These included data from field, greenhouse, or laboratory experiments and that were published in peer-reviewed journals. Studies that were not conducted on grapevines or that exclusively discussed synthetic pesticides were excluded. Review papers, editorials, conference abstracts, and studies that were not available in English or could not be obtained in their entirety after reasonable efforts (e.g., interlibrary requests) were excluded. Some studies (n = 50) were excluded due to the unavailability of the full texts. Specifically, these included publications behind paywalls without institutional access, articles published in languages other than English, records with incomplete or incorrect bibliographic data, and articles published in local journals not indexed in major international databases.

2.3. Data Synthesis

Due to the heterogeneity of study designs, pathogens investigated, and outcome measures, a narrative synthesis was conducted rather than a meta-analysis. Studies were grouped into the following two categories: plant-based organic disease agents (e.g., essential oils and extracts) and microbial-based organic disease agents (e.g., bacteria, fungi, and yeasts). The results were summarized descriptively, focusing on efficacy. Keyword trends were visualized using a bibliometric map (Figure 2) generated with VOSviewer software (version 1.6.20, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands), based on the authors’ keywords from the included studies.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Botanical Approaches to Organic Disease Management

The exploration of plant-derived organic disease management has gained significant attention as a sustainable alternative to synthetic pesticides, particularly in viticulture.

Some secondary plant additives have been reported to hold potential for use in organic disease management, such as phenols, alkaloids, terpenoids, lipids, carbohydrates, polyketides, glycosides, cyanogenic phenylpropanoids, anthocyanins, amino acids, nucleic acids, flavonoids, and saponins [37,38]. Primary metabolism comprises processes such as photosynthesis, respiration, and nutrient absorption, which enable plant survival. Secondary metabolites are distinct and generally serve specialized functions. Examples of secondary plant compounds that might be responsible for the antimicrobial and antioxidant properties of plant extracts include eight-methyl-6-prenylquercetin, aspilactonol B, and citral derived from Cymbopogon citratus; fucugiside and fucugetin derived from Geophagus brasiliensis; and rosmanol, carnosol, and carnosic acid derived from Lepidium meyenii [38]. It is vital to investigate the phytochemical properties (which include antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and antibacterial effects) and safety (genotoxicity and cytotoxicity) of medicinal plants in order to preserve and ensure the safety of horticultural vegetation, particularly in the context of grape diseases [39].

Plant-based organic disease management is crucial for addressing pest management challenges in grapevine cultivation. This comparison assesses oil-based and grape-berry-derived organic disease management products, as well as broader plant extract formulas. Harnessing bioactive compounds and advanced analytical tools, these eco-friendly alternatives enhance crop health and yields while aligning with global sustainability goals.

Table 1 provides a comprehensive evaluation of diverse plant-based and fully organic disease management products, their key bioactive compounds, and the techniques used for compound identification. These organic disease management products contain a number of herbal compounds that offer effective control of bacterial and fungal pathogens in agriculture, specifically viticulture.

3.1.1. Plant Extracts

The plant extracts listed in Table 1, including ligninsulfonate-based grape cane extract (GCE), apple extract, and neem, ginger, garlic, eucalyptus, and onion extracts, exhibited strong suppression of the grape pathogens Plasmopara viticola and Cladosporium cladosporioides.

In greenhouse tests, the GCE formulations alone greatly reduced disease severity by 29–69% in a dose-dependent manner. The copper control treatment led to 56% disease suppression. Of particular interest is the fact that when GCE was used in combination with copper, disease severity was reduced by 78–92%, suggesting a significant synergistic interaction between the natural product and the standard fungicide. Further enhancement was observed when apple extract was added to GCE, and disease severity showed an 80% decline. This indicates the existence of additive action that increases the biocontrol efficacy of the aforementioned bioformulations. All these findings indicate the contribution of plant biopesticides in limiting the application of copper-based synthetic fungicides with comparable activity against P. viticola [40].

In addition, the neem, ginger, garlic, eucalyptus, and onion plant extracts demonstrated excellent antifungal activity against Cladosporium cladosporioides, the causal agent of grapevine rot. The extracts inhibited the linear growth of colonies by 77% in the lab and were proven to be a feasible eco-friendly alternative to chemical fungicides [41].

These findings highlight the potential of plant-based biopesticides as effective alternatives to synthetic fungicides, demonstrating the significant suppression of grapevine pathogens and synergistic interactions that enhance disease control while reducing reliance on copper-based treatments.

3.1.2. Essential Oils

The essential oils, as listed in Table 1, included those from biopesticide plants such as Baccharis trimera, Baccharis dracunculifolia, Origanum vulgare essential oil vapor, Eucalyptus globulus Labill, Citrus limonum (L.) Burm, Cinnamomum zeylanicum Blume, Lavandula latifolia aspic, Rosmarinus officinalis L., and Mentha spicata L., along with 26 essential oils from Cinnamomum zeylanicum, Cymbopogon citratus, Lavandula × hybrida (lavender), Rosmarinus officinalis (rosemary), Mentha piperita (peppermint), and Thymus vulgaris (thyme). These essential oils demonstrated the effective suppression of grape diseases/pathogens such as B. cinerea, Colletotrichum acutatum, Diplodia mutila, Neoscytalidium novaehollandia, Trichothecium roseum, Neopestalotiopsis vitis, Pseudocercospora vitis, and Sphaceloma ampelinum.

An experiment on the Baccharis trimera and Baccharis dracunculifolia essential oils revealed 100% botryticide activity against B. cinerea and Colletotrichum acutatum, with grape postharvest treatments in concentrations of 200–600 ppm. Due to their natural chemical makeup, these substances were noted as strong antifungal compounds [41].

Similarly, Origanum vulgare essential oil vapor completely suppressed B. cinerea growth in vitro, while field experiments on Chasselas grapes showed a 73% suppression of pathogens. These observations highlight its significance as a practical postharvest disease management method [42].

In addition, a blend of eucalyptus, lemon, cinnamon, lavender, rosemary, and peppermint essential oils possessed notable antifungal activity against certain grapevine pathogens such as Trichothecium roseum, Diplodia mutila, Neopestalotiopsis vitis, and Neoscytalidium novaehollandiae. The inhibitory percentages ranged from 47.45% to 81.37%, depending on the pathogen and essential oil blend, which is testimony to their broad-spectrum antifungal action [43].

Laboratory experiments with Cinnamomum zeylanicum (cinnamon) and Cymbopogon citratus (lemongrass) essential oils showed the 100% inhibition of Pseudocercospora vitis and Sphaceloma ampelinum [44].

Moreover, Lavandula × hybrida (lavender) Rosmarinus officinalis (rosemary), Mentha piperita (peppermint), and Thymus vulgaris (thyme) essential oils were also shown to control Botrytis cinerea, a common postharvest disease of grapes. Application of the lavender, rosemary, peppermint, and thyme oils led to 60–70% disease incidence control, while peppermint essential oil enabled 53–60% control. Table 1 shows that the same compounds are found in different essential oils, but in different concentrations. For example, Linalool is dominant in Lavandula × hybrida (34.4%), but only comprises 4.45% of the compounds in Thymus vulgaris. 1,8-Cineole accounts for 48.24% of the compounds in Rosmarinus officinalis, but only 6.88% in Lavandula × hybrida. Thymol is most concentrated in Thymus vulgaris (51.83%), while in Origanum vulgare, it only comprises 1.93%. This shows that even when compounds are repeatedly tested, their proportions vary greatly, influencing the antimicrobial efficacy of the oils [45].

These findings underscore the potent antifungal properties of essential oils as effective biopesticides, demonstrating broad-spectrum activity against key grapevine pathogens and highlighting their potential as sustainable alternatives for postharvest disease management.

3.1.3. Compost

Compost-based biopesticides such as Lantana camara offer a sustainable alternative to synthetic pesticides by utilizing bioactive compounds with antimicrobial properties. Their potential in vineyard disease management has been explored through laboratory and field studies, demonstrating inhibitory effects on key bacterial pathogens.

A laboratory test on Lantana compost demonstrated its activity against various bacterial pathogens such as E. coli, Salmonella, Xanthomonas citri, Xanthomonas campestris, Erwinia carotovora, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (Table 1). The extract inhibited Pseudomonas aeruginosa (1.08-fold), Erwinia carotovora (0.79–1.08-fold), Xanthomonas campestris (0.88–0.96-fold), and Xanthomonas citri (0.88–1.08-fold) in laboratory and field tests. These findings indicate that compost extracts may function as natural biopesticides, reducing the application of chemical pesticides in controlling vineyard disease [46].

The antibacterial activity of Lantana camara compost against major vineyard pathogens highlights its potential as a natural biopesticide. Its application could reduce reliance on chemical pesticides, supporting sustainable and environmentally friendly disease management in viticulture.

Table 1. Effectiveness of plant-based organic disease management against grapevine pathogens.

Biopesticides	Pathogens	Bioactive Compounds	Effectiveness (in Lab, Greenhouse, and Field)	Ref.
Ligninsulfonate-based grape cane and apple extract	Plasmopara viticola	Vineatrol (36.6%)	GCE formulations alone reduced downy mildew disease severity in greenhouse trials by 29–69% in a dose-dependent manner, whereas a standard application of the copper-based agent alone reached 56%. When applied together, disease severity was diminished by 78–92%, revealing a synergistic effect that depended on the mixture ratio (lab and greenhouse)	[40]
Neem Ginger Garlic Eucalyptus Onion	Cladosporium cladosporioides	Hexaconazole (94.44%) Carbendazim (84.93%) propiconazole (81.53%) Difenconazole (75.97%) Thiophanate methyl (51.21%)	Cladosporium cladosporioides with 77% reduction in linear colony growth (lab)	[41]
Baccharis trimera and Baccharis dracunculifolia (essential oils)	Botrytis cinerea and Colletotrichum acutatum	Baccharis trimera: Carquejyl acetate (67.48%) Palustrol (3.12%) Globulol (2.41%) δ-cadinene (2.26%) Camphor (1.68%) Sabinene (1.45%) Baccharis dracunculifolia: Ledol (13.55%) Spathulenol (13.43%) Limonene (10.11%) Germacrene-δ-4-ol (5.39%) α-thujene (4.02%)	At concentrations of 50% and 100%, Baccharis trimera (BtEO) significantly inhibited Botrytis cinerea growth up to the 14th day For Colletotrichum acutatum, 12.5% and 25% inhibited growth until the 7th day, while 50% and 100% suppressed growth until the 14th day. Regarding Baccharis dracunculifolia (BdEO), 100% concentration of volatile compounds inhibited B. cinerea growth up to the 14th day, whereas for C. acutatum, all tested concentrations significantly suppressed growth until the 5th day, but the effect was less pronounced afterward at 200–600 ppm (lab)	[42]
Origanum vulgare essential oil vapor	Botrytis cinerea	p-Cymene (11.27%), Thymol (1.93%), Carvacrol (58.1%)	Oregano essential oil vapor achieved 100% inhibition of Botrytis cinerea growth in vitro. Chasselas berries resulted in 73% reduction in fungal growth (field)	[43]
Eucalyptus globulus Labill; Citrus limonum (L.) Burm; Cinnamomum zeylanicum Blume; Lavandula latifolia aspic; Rosmarinus officinalis L.; and Mentha spicata L.	Diplodia mutila, Neoscytalidium novaehollandia, Trichothecium roseum, and Neopestalotiopsis vitis	Eucalyptus globulus: Eucalyptol (63.99%) Benzene, 1-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)- (11.20%) ɤ-Terpinene (8.39%) 2-Pinene (6.31%) Citrus limonum (L.) Burm: D-Limonene (46.82%) 1,7,7-trimethylbicyclo [2.2.1]Heptan-2-one (7.81%) Borneol (5.87%) Bicyclo [3.1.1]heptane, 6,6-dimethyl-2-methylene-, (1 S)-(4.81%) Cinnamomum zeylanicum: cis-Cinnamaldehyde (87.53%) 2-Pinene (25.41%) Lavandula latifolia: Linalyl acetate (15.44%) Linalool (14.22%) 1,7,7-trimethylbicyclo [2.2.1]heptan-2-one (11.44%) Borneol (8.68%) Rosmarinus officinalis L.: 2-Oxabicyclo [2.2.2]octane, 1,3,3-trimethyl- (24.66%) m-Eugenol (12.47%) 1,7,7-trimethylbicyclo [2.2.1]heptan-2-one (22.52%) Bicyclo [2.2.1]heptane, 2,2-dimethyl-3-methylene-, (1 S) (7.64%) Mentha spicata L: 2-Oxabicyclo [2.2.2]octane, 1,3,3-trimethyl- (73.54%) o-Cymene (11.08%) ɤ-Terpinene (4.77%)	Trichothecium roseum, inhibited growth by 81.37%, Diplodia mutila by 47.45%. Neopestalotiopsis vitis reduced growth by 73.33%, Neoscytalidium novaehollandiae achieved 56.79% inhibition (field and lab)	[44]
26 essential oils Cinnamomum zeylanicum and Cymbopogon citratus	Pseudocercopora vitis and Sphaceloma ampelinum	Cinnamomum zeylanicum: (E)-cinnamaldehyde (92.36%) (E)-cinnamyl acetate (1.48%) 1,8-cineole (1.05%) Cymbopogon citratus Geranial (58.89%) Neral (38.50%)	Cinnamomum zeylanicum (cinnamon) and Cymbopogon citratus (lemongrass) exhibited 100% inhibition of Sphaceloma ampelinum and Pseudocercospora vitis spore germination in both vapor and liquid phases (field and lab)	[45]
Lavandula × hybrida (lavender) Rosmarinus officinalis (rosemary), Mentha piperita (peppermint), and Thymus vulgaris (thyme)	Botrytis cinerea	Lavandula × hybrida: Linalool (34.4%) Linalyl acetate (25.8%) 1,8-Cineol (6.88%) Camphor (6.28%); Rosmarinus officinalis: 1,8-Cineol (48.24%) a-Pinene (10.26%) b-Pinene (8.55%) Camphor (8.66%); Mentha piperita: Menthol (34.71%) Menthone (27.44%) Menthyl acetate (4.92%); Thymus vulgaris: Thymol (51.83%) Cymene (20.26%) γ-Terpinen (6.91%) Linalool (4.45%)	Rosemary oil reduced the incidence by 70% and 66% (7 day), peppermint oil reductions of 53% and 60% (5 day) (lab)	[46]
Lantana	Escherichia coli, Salmonella, Xanthomonas citrus, Xanthomonas campestris, Erwinia carotovora, and Pseudomonas aerogenosa	Hexadecane (3.93%), tetradecane (3.05), heptacosane (5.49), heptadecane (3.05%), and heptacosane 1-chloro- (5.49%)	Lantana compost extract showed 1.08-fold inhibition of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 0.79–1.08-fold inhibition of Erwinia carotovora, 0.88–0.96-fold inhibition of Xanthomonas campestris, and 0.88–1.08-fold inhibition of Xanthomonas citrus (field and lab)	[47]

Table 1. Effectiveness of plant-based organic disease management against grapevine pathogens.

Biopesticides	Pathogens	Bioactive Compounds	Effectiveness (in Lab, Greenhouse, and Field)	Ref.
Ligninsulfonate-based grape cane and apple extract	Plasmopara viticola	Vineatrol (36.6%)	GCE formulations alone reduced downy mildew disease severity in greenhouse trials by 29–69% in a dose-dependent manner, whereas a standard application of the copper-based agent alone reached 56%. When applied together, disease severity was diminished by 78–92%, revealing a synergistic effect that depended on the mixture ratio (lab and greenhouse)	[40]
Neem Ginger Garlic Eucalyptus Onion	Cladosporium cladosporioides	Hexaconazole (94.44%) Carbendazim (84.93%) propiconazole (81.53%) Difenconazole (75.97%) Thiophanate methyl (51.21%)	Cladosporium cladosporioides with 77% reduction in linear colony growth (lab)	[41]
Baccharis trimera and Baccharis dracunculifolia (essential oils)	Botrytis cinerea and Colletotrichum acutatum	Baccharis trimera: Carquejyl acetate (67.48%) Palustrol (3.12%) Globulol (2.41%) δ-cadinene (2.26%) Camphor (1.68%) Sabinene (1.45%) Baccharis dracunculifolia: Ledol (13.55%) Spathulenol (13.43%) Limonene (10.11%) Germacrene-δ-4-ol (5.39%) α-thujene (4.02%)	At concentrations of 50% and 100%, Baccharis trimera (BtEO) significantly inhibited Botrytis cinerea growth up to the 14th day For Colletotrichum acutatum, 12.5% and 25% inhibited growth until the 7th day, while 50% and 100% suppressed growth until the 14th day. Regarding Baccharis dracunculifolia (BdEO), 100% concentration of volatile compounds inhibited B. cinerea growth up to the 14th day, whereas for C. acutatum, all tested concentrations significantly suppressed growth until the 5th day, but the effect was less pronounced afterward at 200–600 ppm (lab)	[42]
Origanum vulgare essential oil vapor	Botrytis cinerea	p-Cymene (11.27%), Thymol (1.93%), Carvacrol (58.1%)	Oregano essential oil vapor achieved 100% inhibition of Botrytis cinerea growth in vitro. Chasselas berries resulted in 73% reduction in fungal growth (field)	[43]
Eucalyptus globulus Labill; Citrus limonum (L.) Burm; Cinnamomum zeylanicum Blume; Lavandula latifolia aspic; Rosmarinus officinalis L.; and Mentha spicata L.	Diplodia mutila, Neoscytalidium novaehollandia, Trichothecium roseum, and Neopestalotiopsis vitis	Eucalyptus globulus: Eucalyptol (63.99%) Benzene, 1-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)- (11.20%) ɤ-Terpinene (8.39%) 2-Pinene (6.31%) Citrus limonum (L.) Burm: D-Limonene (46.82%) 1,7,7-trimethylbicyclo [2.2.1]Heptan-2-one (7.81%) Borneol (5.87%) Bicyclo [3.1.1]heptane, 6,6-dimethyl-2-methylene-, (1 S)-(4.81%) Cinnamomum zeylanicum: cis-Cinnamaldehyde (87.53%) 2-Pinene (25.41%) Lavandula latifolia: Linalyl acetate (15.44%) Linalool (14.22%) 1,7,7-trimethylbicyclo [2.2.1]heptan-2-one (11.44%) Borneol (8.68%) Rosmarinus officinalis L.: 2-Oxabicyclo [2.2.2]octane, 1,3,3-trimethyl- (24.66%) m-Eugenol (12.47%) 1,7,7-trimethylbicyclo [2.2.1]heptan-2-one (22.52%) Bicyclo [2.2.1]heptane, 2,2-dimethyl-3-methylene-, (1 S) (7.64%) Mentha spicata L: 2-Oxabicyclo [2.2.2]octane, 1,3,3-trimethyl- (73.54%) o-Cymene (11.08%) ɤ-Terpinene (4.77%)	Trichothecium roseum, inhibited growth by 81.37%, Diplodia mutila by 47.45%. Neopestalotiopsis vitis reduced growth by 73.33%, Neoscytalidium novaehollandiae achieved 56.79% inhibition (field and lab)	[44]
26 essential oils Cinnamomum zeylanicum and Cymbopogon citratus	Pseudocercopora vitis and Sphaceloma ampelinum	Cinnamomum zeylanicum: (E)-cinnamaldehyde (92.36%) (E)-cinnamyl acetate (1.48%) 1,8-cineole (1.05%) Cymbopogon citratus Geranial (58.89%) Neral (38.50%)	Cinnamomum zeylanicum (cinnamon) and Cymbopogon citratus (lemongrass) exhibited 100% inhibition of Sphaceloma ampelinum and Pseudocercospora vitis spore germination in both vapor and liquid phases (field and lab)	[45]
Lavandula × hybrida (lavender) Rosmarinus officinalis (rosemary), Mentha piperita (peppermint), and Thymus vulgaris (thyme)	Botrytis cinerea	Lavandula × hybrida: Linalool (34.4%) Linalyl acetate (25.8%) 1,8-Cineol (6.88%) Camphor (6.28%); Rosmarinus officinalis: 1,8-Cineol (48.24%) a-Pinene (10.26%) b-Pinene (8.55%) Camphor (8.66%); Mentha piperita: Menthol (34.71%) Menthone (27.44%) Menthyl acetate (4.92%); Thymus vulgaris: Thymol (51.83%) Cymene (20.26%) γ-Terpinen (6.91%) Linalool (4.45%)	Rosemary oil reduced the incidence by 70% and 66% (7 day), peppermint oil reductions of 53% and 60% (5 day) (lab)	[46]
Lantana	Escherichia coli, Salmonella, Xanthomonas citrus, Xanthomonas campestris, Erwinia carotovora, and Pseudomonas aerogenosa	Hexadecane (3.93%), tetradecane (3.05), heptacosane (5.49), heptadecane (3.05%), and heptacosane 1-chloro- (5.49%)	Lantana compost extract showed 1.08-fold inhibition of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 0.79–1.08-fold inhibition of Erwinia carotovora, 0.88–0.96-fold inhibition of Xanthomonas campestris, and 0.88–1.08-fold inhibition of Xanthomonas citrus (field and lab)	[47]

Among the three plant-based biocontrol strategies—essential oils, plant extracts, and compost-based treatments—essential oils exhibited the highest antifungal activity. The studies confirmed the 100% inhibition of B. cinerea and Colletotrichum acutatum, with Origanum vulgare essential oil vapor achieving 100% suppression in vitro and 73% in field trials. Additionally, the Cinnamomum zeylanicum (cinnamon) and Cymbopogon citratus (lemongrass) essential oils completely inhibited Pseudocercospora vitis and Sphaceloma ampelinum under laboratory conditions. The Lavandula × hybrida (lavender), Rosmarinus officinalis (rosemary), Mentha piperita (peppermint), and Thymus vulgaris (thyme) essential oils reduced B. cinerea incidence by 60–70%, with peppermint oil alone providing 53–60% control.

Plant extracts, particularly ligninsulfonate-based grape cane extract and apple extract, showed strong suppression of Plasmopara viticola, reducing downy mildew severity by 29–69% in greenhouse trials. When combined with copper-based fungicides, the effectiveness increased to 78–92%, while the addition of apple extract led to an 80% reduction, highlighting the complementary role of these extracts in disease control.

Compost-based biocontrol was moderately effective, primarily against bacterial pathogens. Lantana compost inhibited Pseudomonas aeruginosa and other bacteria by up to 0.79–1.08-fold, demonstrating soil-improving benefits rather than direct pathogen suppression.

Overall, essential oils emerged as the most effective antifungal agents, while plant extracts provided targeted disease management and compost-based treatments contributed to soil and plant health improvement. These findings emphasize the importance of integrating plant-based biopesticides into vineyard pest management strategies, offering environmentally friendly alternatives to chemical fungicides while ensuring effective grapevine disease control.

3.2. Microbial Organic Disease Management

Microbial-based pesticides provide sustainable, environmentally friendly alternatives to synthetic insecticides in grapevine disease management. Through mechanisms including nutrient competition, unstable organic compound manufacturing, enzyme induction, and systemic resistance, bacterial-, fungal-, and yeast-based pesticides successfully suppress a variety of grapevine pathogens. Microbial-based pesticides aimed at grapevine diseases typically prevent pathogen spread through natural acid production, bacteriocin secretion, or competitive inhibition (Table 2).

3.2.1. Bacteria-Based Biopesticides

Bacteria-based biopesticides offer an eco-friendly alternative to chemical pesticides by effectively suppressing grapevine diseases through antimicrobial activity and plant resistance induction. Beneficial bacterial strains, such as Pseudomonas sp., B. subtilis, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum, Bacillus thuringiensis, and Bacillus velezensis, exhibit antimicrobial activity against a wide range of fungal and bacterial pathogens affecting grape production. These antagonistic bacteria function through diverse mechanisms, including competition, antimicrobial metabolite production, and plant resistance induction, making them valuable components of sustainable viticulture.

As listed in Table 2, biopesticide/antagonist strains such as Pseudomonas sp. I2R21 and Pseudomonas sp. W1R33, B. subtilis, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum, Bacillus thuringiensis, and Bacillus velezensis demonstrated the effective suppression of grapevine diseases, including Neofusicoccum luteum and N. parvum, Erysiphe necator, Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae, Botrytis cinerea, Oenococcus oeni, Monilinia fructicola, Monilinia laxa, Penicillium digitatum, Penicillium expansum, and Penicillium italicum.

Endophytic Pseudomonas sp. I2R21 and Pseudomonas sp. W1R33 showed promising results in controlling Neofusicoccum luteum and N. parvum, major pathogens causing grapevine trunk diseases. Field trials demonstrated a 32–52% reduction in lesion length, highlighting their potential in limiting disease progression and enhancing vine health [37].

The widely studied B. subtilis exhibited a high efficacy against Erysiphe necator, the causative agent of powdery mildew. Greenhouse trials showed a 96% reduction in disease severity, proving its effectiveness as an alternative to chemical fungicides in sustainable vineyard management [48].

Lactiplantibacillus plantarum effectively suppressed Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae and B. cinerea in grapes. In vitro, it inhibited pathogen growth through antimicrobial compound production. In vivo, L. plantarum Q4 reduced bacterial infection by 45% and significantly decreased B. cinerea-induced fruit rot, confirming its potential as a natural biopesticide [49].

Beyond disease control, Bacillus thuringiensis has shown the ability to modulate microbial populations in vineyards. Field applications resulted in a 70–80% suppression of Oenococcus oeni, a bacterium involved in malolactic fermentation, without disrupting the fermentation process. This suggests that bacteria-based pesticides could influence wine quality and safety [49].

Bacillus velezensis strains exhibited strong antifungal activity against major postharvest fungal pathogens. In vitro tests showed that Monilinia fructicola, Monilinia laxa, and Penicillium italicum were inhibited by 66%, 72%, and 80%, respectively, while B. cinerea was completely suppressed (100%) by certain strains. In vivo, Bacillus velezensis strain I3 reduced the gray mold incidence in grapes by 50%. Additionally, diacetyl and benzaldehyde, key volatile organic compounds (VOCs) produced by B. velezensis, showed strong antifungal properties, with diacetyl reducing gray mold in grapes by 100% at 0.02 mL/L and blue mold in mandarins by up to 60% [48].

The demonstrated efficacy of bacterial strains in disease suppression and vineyard microbiota modulation highlights their potential as sustainable solutions for improving grape production and quality.

The efficacy of fungi-based biopesticides in suppressing key grapevine pathogens, reducing mycotoxin contamination, and improving fruit yield underscores their potential as sustainable alternatives to chemical fungicides. Their integration into vineyard management can enhance long-term disease control while supporting eco-friendly farming practices, demonstrating their crucial role in the future of viticulture.

3.2.2. Fungi-Based Biopesticides

Fungi-based biopesticides have emerged as effective and environmentally friendly alternatives for managing grapevine diseases while enhancing fruit quality and sustainability. Beneficial fungal strains, including Trichoderma harzianum, Trichoderma atroviride, Aspergillus carbonarius, Neurospora sp., Arthrinium sp., Pestalotiopsis sp., Hypocrea lixii, and Aureobasidium pullulans, exhibit strong antagonistic activity against major grape pathogens. These organic disease management treatments function through various mechanisms, including pathogen suppression, toxin detoxification, and plant growth promotion, making them valuable tools in integrated disease management strategies.

As listed in Table 2, for biopesticide/antagonist strains such as Trichoderma harzianum M10 and T22, Trichoderma atroviride P1, Aspergillus carbonarius, Trichoderma sp., Neurospora sp., Arthrinium sp., Pestalotiopsis sp., Hypocrea lixii, Fusarium sp., Trichoderma atroviride, Aureobasidium pullulans, and B. subtilis, A. pullulans and Potassium Bicarbonate demonstrated the effective suppression of grapevine diseases, including Uncinula necator, Penicillium adametzioides, Plasmopara viticola, Cladosporium cladosporioides, and Botrytis cinerea.

Trichoderma harzianum M10 and Trichoderma atroviride P1 reduced powdery mildew Uncinula necator by 60% (harzianic acid) and 28–32% (6-pentyl-α-pyrone) in greenhouse trials. Field tests showed a 63–97% increase in grape yield and a 48.7% boost in antioxidant activity, confirming their effectiveness in disease control and fruit quality improvement [50].

Ochratoxin A (OTA) is a mycotoxin produced by Aspergillus carbonarius, posing a serious risk to grape and wine quality. Penicillium adametzioides demonstrated an 80–90% OTA reduction in grape juice, highlighting its high detoxification potential. The fungal biocontrol approach provides a natural solution to mycotoxin contamination, ensuring safer grape-derived products in the wine industry [51].

Trichoderma harzianum combined with potassium tartrate was highly effective in controlling P. viticola, the pathogen responsible for downy mildew in grapevines. In the field experiments, a 78.9% reduction in the first year and an 81.8% reduction in the second year were recorded, demonstrating consistent, long-term protection against the disease [52].

Several fungal organic disease agents, including Neurospora sp., Arthrinium sp., Pestalotiopsis sp., Hypocrea lixii, and Fusarium sp., showed high pathogen suppression rates against Cladosporium cladosporioides in laboratory trials. The effectiveness varied among the species, as follows: Neurospora sp.—5.9% inhibition; Arthrinium sp.—91.7% inhibition; Pestalotiopsis sp.—90.0% inhibition; Hypocrea lixii—90.0% inhibition; and Fusarium sp.—89.4% inhibition. These findings highlight their strong antagonistic properties, making them valuable tools in grapevine disease management [40].

The second interesting find concerned Penicillium adametzioides, which decreased OTA contamination in grape juice by 80–90% and provided a natural way of enhancing fruit quality and ensuring wine safety. Additionally, a combination of Trichoderma atroviride, Aureobasidium pullulans, and B. subtilis could control Botrytis cinerea, reducing its frequency by 72–85%, demonstrating its promising status as a multifunctional disease management product. These findings indicate fungi-based biopesticides as highly potent and eco-friendly substitutes for protecting grapevines while adhering to sustainable farming [53].

Another promising approach to B. cinerea management was the application of potassium bicarbonate and Aureobasidium pullulans, with efficacy rates of 20% and 13%, respectively, in reducing fungal infections with a 3% disease severity in field conditions. These findings demonstrate that alternative treatments can complement traditional biocontrol methods, enhancing disease management effectiveness [54].

3.2.3. Yeast-Based Biopesticides

Yeast-based biopesticides have gained significant attention as natural and environmentally friendly alternatives for managing grapevine diseases and improving postharvest fruit quality. As listed in Table 2, biopesticide/antagonist strains such as Candida guilliermondii strain A42, Acremonium cephalosporium strain B11, Aureobasidium pullulans, Candida sake, Kluyveromyces thermotolerans, L. thermotolerans strains (RCKT4 and RCKT5), Hanseniaspora uvarum, Yarrowia lipolytica, K. thermotolerans, Pichia guillermondii, H. uvarum, Zygosaccharomyces fermentati, Candida flavus, Candida valdiviana, Metschnikowia pulcherrima LS16, A. pullulans LS30, A. pullulans AU34-2, Aureobasidium pullulans, Cryptococcus magnus, Candida sake, and Rhodotorula LS15 have demonstrated the effective suppression of grapevine diseases. These include Botrytis cinerea, Aspergillus niger, Rhizopus stolonifer, Pseudocercospora vitis, Sphaceloma ampelinum, and OTA-producing fungi, making them valuable for postharvest disease control and toxin reduction in grape production.

The most potent of the yeasts, Acremonium cephalosporium (B11) and Candida guilliermondii (A42), exhibited protective effects against Rhizopus stolonifer, Botrytis cinerea, and Aspergillus niger. C. guilliermondii reduced grape rot by 8–22% in laboratory experiments, and 16–82% inhibition was recorded with A. cephalosporium. A42 reduced grape rot by 22–30%, and B11 decreased the disease by 30–48%, as established as field-applicable in vineyard tests [55].

The biocontrol yeast Aureobasidium pullulans (isolate Y-1) demonstrated a high efficacy in controlling Aspergillus carbonarius and reducing OTA contamination in grapes. In field trials, A. pullulans reduced fungal growth by 14–92%, significantly limiting pathogen development compared to untreated berries. The application of A. pullulans Y-1 alone resulted in a 99% reduction in OTA levels, while its combination with chemical fungicides enhanced the suppression to 97–99%, confirming its potential for improving grape safety and postharvest quality. These results emphasize the role of yeast-based organic disease agents in mitigating mycotoxin contamination and promoting sustainable viticulture [56].

The application of Candida sake significantly inhibited B. cinerea development. Laboratory trials demonstrated that C. sake reduced B. cinerea incidence by up to 80%, depending on the formulation used. This yeast strain has been identified as a potential alternative to synthetic fungicides in postharvest disease control [57].

The yeast Kluyveromyces thermotolerans was tested against Aspergillus carbonarius and A. niger, two fungi responsible for grape contamination. Field studies revealed that it reduced fungal growth rates by 11–82.5%, emphasizing its versatility in biocontrol applications [58].

Strains of Lachancea thermotolerans (RCKT4 and RCKT5) demonstrated a 27–100% suppression of OTA accumulation in greenhouse and field experiments, confirming their strong detoxifying potential for use in winemaking and grape storage processes [59].

H. uvarum, enhanced with trehalose, significantly induced defense-related enzyme activities and gene expression in grapes against Aspergillus tubingensis. The yeast treatment resulted in a 70% reduction in rotten grapes after five days of storage. Additionally, catalase (CAT) gene expression increased 23-fold and polyphenol oxidase (PPO) showed a 9.5-fold increase, enhancing the grape’s natural defense mechanisms [60].

Yarrowia lipolytica significantly reduced postharvest grape decay caused by Penicillium rubens, decreasing the decay incidence to 12.45% and the decay area diameter to 6.19 mm, compared to a 79.15% decay incidence in controls. It also inhibited spore germination (7.22%) and germ tube elongation (1.25 μm). Additionally, the OTA content dropped from 74.61 ng/grape to 0.32 ng/grape after 17 days. The yeast induced defense enzyme activities, enhancing polyphenol oxidase (1.52×), catalase (8.33×), and PAL (1.38×) expression, reinforcing grape resistance [61].

Metschnikowia pulcherrima, Issatchenkia orientalis, and Candida incommunis effectively inhibited Aspergillus carbonarius and A. niger, key OTA-producing fungi in grapes. In vitro, M. pulcherrima reduced fungal growth by 77–100%, I. orientalis achieved 100% inhibition, and C. incommunis significantly suppressed pathogen development. In vivo, yeast application to wounded grapes reduced fungal colonization, confirming its strong biocontrol potential against OTA contamination [62].

The organic disease management species Metschnikowia pulcherrima LS16 and Aureobasidium pullulans strains LS30 and AU34-2 effectively suppressed Aspergillus carbonarius infection and reduced OTA contamination in wine grape berries. At 60% relative humidity (RH), all three strains provided nearly 100% protection, reducing infection rates by 99% (LS16), 95.9% (AU34-2), and 92% (LS30). At 100% RH, protection remained significant, reducing infections by 87% (LS16), 81.7% (AU34-2), and 69.1% (LS30). The OTA levels were reduced by up to 93.5% at 100% RH and by 77.5–87.7% at 60% RH. However, the efficacy declined at higher RH levels, where protection was limited. These findings emphasize the importance of environmental conditions in the effectiveness of biocontrol strategies against A. carbonarius in grapevine cultivation [63].

A mixture of Aureobasidium pullulans, Cryptococcus magnus, and Candida sake showed a 17.1–95.7% inhibition of Aspergillus tubingensis under laboratory conditions, suggesting that multi-yeast formulations can provide enhanced protection against fungal contamination [64].

The preharvest application of Rhodotorula LS15 effectively reduced gray mold (caused by Penicillium digitatum, Rhizopus stolonifer, and Aspergillus niger) on grapes by 28.3–38.2%. These findings emphasize the potential of yeast-based treatments in vineyard disease prevention [65].

The effectiveness of yeast-based biopesticides in suppressing major grapevine pathogens, mitigating mycotoxin accumulation, and enhancing plant defense responses underscores their potential as sustainable disease management tools. Their integration into vineyard and postharvest disease control strategies offers a promising approach to reducing chemical pesticide use while maintaining fruit quality and ensuring safer grape production in viticulture.

3.2.4. Commercial Biopesticides Based on Microorganisms

Commercially formulated microbial biopesticides have demonstrated strong potential for controlling grapevine diseases, offering an effective and sustainable alternative to synthetic fungicides. Commercially formulated biopesticides based on microorganisms have shown strong disease control potential in viticulture, particularly against Erysiphe necator and Botrytis cinerea. The application of Eco-Pesticide^® (Trichoderma asperellum), Bio-Pulse^® (Trichoderma asperellum and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens), and Bio-Care 24^® (Bacillus amyloliquefaciens) significantly reduced powdery mildew severity in field conditions. Disease severity, measured by the percent disease index (PDI), was reduced to 22.37 (Eco-Pesticide^®), 22.62 (Bio-Pulse^®), and 24.62 (Bio-Care 24^®) on leaves, while the disease levels on grape bunches decreased to 24.71, 24.94, and 26.77, respectively. These results indicate that microbial-based formulations can be effectively incorporated into integrated disease management programs, reducing reliance on synthetic fungicides [66].

Another widely used microbial biopesticide, Serenade Max (B. subtilis), demonstrated a high efficacy against Botrytis cinerea, one of the most significant fungal pathogens in grape production. Field applications of Serenade Max resulted in a 52.4–71.1% reduction in fruit rot incidence, proving its effectiveness in postharvest disease control [67].

The successful application of microbial biopesticides such as Eco-Pesticide^®, Bio-Pulse^®, Bio-Care 24^®, and Serenade Max highlights their effectiveness in reducing disease severity, reinforcing their role in integrated disease management strategies for viticulture.

Table 2. Effectiveness of microbial organic disease management against grapevine pathogens.

Biopesticides	Pathogens	Effectiveness (in Lab, Greenhouse and Field)	Ref.
Pseudomonas sp. I2R21 and Pseudomonas sp. W1R33	Neofusicoccum luteum and N. parvum	The endophytic bacteria reduced lesion length by 32–52% (field)	[37]
B. subtilis	E. necator	Powdery mildew severity reduced by 96% (greenhouse)	[48]
Lactiplantibacillus plantarum	Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae and B. cinerea	Lactiplantibacillus plantarum Q4 reduced Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae infection by 45% and significantly decreased Botrytis cinereal induced fruit rot, proving its biocontrol potential (lab)	[68]
Bacillus thuringiensis	Oenococcus oeni	Bacillus thuringiensis reduced Oenococcus oeni by 70–80% without affecting fermentation (field)	[50]
Bacillus velezensis	B. cinerea, Monilinia fructicola, M. laxa, Penicillium digitatum, P. expansum, and P. italicum	B. velezensis inhibited Monilinia fructicola (66%), M. laxa (72%), Penicillium italicum (80%), and completely suppressed B. cinerea (100%). In vivo, strain I3 reduced gray mold by 50%, and BUZ-14 lowered brown rot severity from 60 mm to 4 mm. VOCs like diacetyl eliminated gray mold (100%) and reduced blue mold by 60% (field)	[49]
Trichoderma harzianum M10 and T22 and Trichoderma atroviride P1.	Uncinula necator	Trichoderma harzianum M10 and T. atroviride P1 reduced powdery mildew by 60%, increased grape yield by 63–97%, and boosted antioxidant activity by 48.7%, proving their efficacy in disease control and fruit quality enhancement (field)	[51]
Aspergillus carbonarius	Penicillium adametzioides	P. adametzioides reduced OTA in grape juice by 80–90%, showing high efficiency (field)	[52]
Trichoderma	Plasmopara viticola	Trichoderma harzianum with potassium tartrate reduced grape downy mildew by 78.9% (year 1) and 81.8% (year 2) (field)	[53]
Neurospora sp. Arthrinium sp. Pestalotiopsis sp. Hypocrea lixii Fusarium sp.	Cladosporium cladosporioides	Neurospora sp.: 3.7 mm → 95.9% inhibition Arthrinium sp.: 7.5 mm → 91.7% inhibition Pestalotiopsis sp.: 9 mm → 90.0% inhibition Hypocrea lixii: 9 mm → 90.0% inhibition Fusarium sp.: 9.5 mm → 89.4% inhibition (lab)	[41]
Trichoderma atroviride, A. pullulans, and B. subtilis	B. cinerea	Pathogen suppression efficiency was 72–85% (field)	[54]
A. pullulans and Potassium Bicarbonate	B. cinerea	Potassium bicarbonate: 20%, Aureobasidium pullulans: 13% efficacy at 3% severity (field)	[56]
Candida guilliermondii, strain A42 and Acremonium cephalosporium, strain B11	B. cinerea, Aspergillus niger, and Rhizopus stolonifera	A42 reduced grape rot to 8–22% (lab) and B11 to 16–82%, confirming A42’s superior efficacy (lab), A42 reduced grape rot to 22–30% (field) and B11 to 30–48% (field), confirming B11’s superior efficacy	[36]
Aureobasidium pullulans	Aspergillus carbonarius	A. pullulans (isolate Y-1) effectively inhibited the growth of A. carbonarius, reducing it by 14–92% compared to untreated berries. The fungicide reduced OTA levels by 97%–99% and A. pullulans isolate Y-1—by 99% (field)	[57]
Candida sake	B. cinerea	C. sake reduced B. cinerea incidence by up to 80%, depending on the formulation used (lab)	[58]
Kluyveromyces thermotolerans	Aspergillus carbonarius and A. niger	The growth rate of fungi was reduced by 11% to 82.5% (field)	[59]
L. thermotolerans strains (RCKT4 and RCKT5)	Aspergillus Nigri	Achieved 27–100% reduction in OTA accumulation (greenhouse and field)	[60]
H. uvarum	Aspergillus tubingensis	H. uvarum with trehalose reduced grape rot by 70% and boosted defense enzyme activity, with CAT up 23-fold and PPO up 9.5-fold, enhancing resistance to Aspergillus tubingensis (lab)	[61]
Yarrowia lipolytica	Penicillium rubens	Yarrowia lipolytica reduced grape decay to 12.45% (from 79.15%), inhibited spore germination (7.22%), and lowered OTA from 74.61 to 0.32 ng/grape. It boosted defense enzymes, with catalase increasing 8.33× (lab)	[62]
K. thermotolerans, P. guillermondii, H. uvarum, Z. fermentati, C. flavus, and C. valdiviana	Aspergillus carbonarius and A. niger	Metschnikowia pulcherrima (77–100%) and Issatchenkia orientalis (100%) inhibited A.carbonarius and A. niger, reducing fungal colonization in grapes and preventing OTA contamination (lab)	[63]
Metschnikowia pulcherrima LS16, A. pullulans LS30, and A. pullulans AU34-2	A. carbonarius	Metschnikowia pulcherrima LS16 and A. pullulans (LS30 and AU34-2) reduced Aspergillus carbonarius infection by 69–99% and lowered (OTA) contamination by up to 93.5%, with effectiveness varying by humidity levels (lab)	[64]
Aureobasidium pullulans, Cryptococcus magnus, and Candida sake	Aspergillus tubingensis	A. pullulans reduced A. tubingensis by 17.1–95.7% (lab)	[65]
Rhodotorula LS15	Penicillium digitatum, Rhizopus stolonifera, and A. niger	Preharvest LS15 reduced gray mold on grapes by 28.3–38.2% (lab)	[66]
Eco-pesticide® (Trichoderma asperellum), Bio-Pulse® (Trichoderma asperellum and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens), and Bio-Care 24® (Bacillus amyloliquefaciens)	E. necator	PDI reduced to 22.37 (Eco-Pesticide®), 22.62 (Bio-Pulse®), and 24.62 (Bio-Care 24®) on leaves, and to 24.71, 24.94, and 26.77 on bunches (field)	[67]
Biopesticide Serenade Max (B. subtilis)	B. cinerea	Serenade Max reduced fruit rot by approximately 52.4–71.1% (field)	[69]

Table 2. Effectiveness of microbial organic disease management against grapevine pathogens.

Biopesticides	Pathogens	Effectiveness (in Lab, Greenhouse and Field)	Ref.
Pseudomonas sp. I2R21 and Pseudomonas sp. W1R33	Neofusicoccum luteum and N. parvum	The endophytic bacteria reduced lesion length by 32–52% (field)	[37]
B. subtilis	E. necator	Powdery mildew severity reduced by 96% (greenhouse)	[48]
Lactiplantibacillus plantarum	Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae and B. cinerea	Lactiplantibacillus plantarum Q4 reduced Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae infection by 45% and significantly decreased Botrytis cinereal induced fruit rot, proving its biocontrol potential (lab)	[68]
Bacillus thuringiensis	Oenococcus oeni	Bacillus thuringiensis reduced Oenococcus oeni by 70–80% without affecting fermentation (field)	[50]
Bacillus velezensis	B. cinerea, Monilinia fructicola, M. laxa, Penicillium digitatum, P. expansum, and P. italicum	B. velezensis inhibited Monilinia fructicola (66%), M. laxa (72%), Penicillium italicum (80%), and completely suppressed B. cinerea (100%). In vivo, strain I3 reduced gray mold by 50%, and BUZ-14 lowered brown rot severity from 60 mm to 4 mm. VOCs like diacetyl eliminated gray mold (100%) and reduced blue mold by 60% (field)	[49]
Trichoderma harzianum M10 and T22 and Trichoderma atroviride P1.	Uncinula necator	Trichoderma harzianum M10 and T. atroviride P1 reduced powdery mildew by 60%, increased grape yield by 63–97%, and boosted antioxidant activity by 48.7%, proving their efficacy in disease control and fruit quality enhancement (field)	[51]
Aspergillus carbonarius	Penicillium adametzioides	P. adametzioides reduced OTA in grape juice by 80–90%, showing high efficiency (field)	[52]
Trichoderma	Plasmopara viticola	Trichoderma harzianum with potassium tartrate reduced grape downy mildew by 78.9% (year 1) and 81.8% (year 2) (field)	[53]
Neurospora sp. Arthrinium sp. Pestalotiopsis sp. Hypocrea lixii Fusarium sp.	Cladosporium cladosporioides	Neurospora sp.: 3.7 mm → 95.9% inhibition Arthrinium sp.: 7.5 mm → 91.7% inhibition Pestalotiopsis sp.: 9 mm → 90.0% inhibition Hypocrea lixii: 9 mm → 90.0% inhibition Fusarium sp.: 9.5 mm → 89.4% inhibition (lab)	[41]
Trichoderma atroviride, A. pullulans, and B. subtilis	B. cinerea	Pathogen suppression efficiency was 72–85% (field)	[54]
A. pullulans and Potassium Bicarbonate	B. cinerea	Potassium bicarbonate: 20%, Aureobasidium pullulans: 13% efficacy at 3% severity (field)	[56]
Candida guilliermondii, strain A42 and Acremonium cephalosporium, strain B11	B. cinerea, Aspergillus niger, and Rhizopus stolonifera	A42 reduced grape rot to 8–22% (lab) and B11 to 16–82%, confirming A42’s superior efficacy (lab), A42 reduced grape rot to 22–30% (field) and B11 to 30–48% (field), confirming B11’s superior efficacy	[36]
Aureobasidium pullulans	Aspergillus carbonarius	A. pullulans (isolate Y-1) effectively inhibited the growth of A. carbonarius, reducing it by 14–92% compared to untreated berries. The fungicide reduced OTA levels by 97%–99% and A. pullulans isolate Y-1—by 99% (field)	[57]
Candida sake	B. cinerea	C. sake reduced B. cinerea incidence by up to 80%, depending on the formulation used (lab)	[58]
Kluyveromyces thermotolerans	Aspergillus carbonarius and A. niger	The growth rate of fungi was reduced by 11% to 82.5% (field)	[59]
L. thermotolerans strains (RCKT4 and RCKT5)	Aspergillus Nigri	Achieved 27–100% reduction in OTA accumulation (greenhouse and field)	[60]
H. uvarum	Aspergillus tubingensis	H. uvarum with trehalose reduced grape rot by 70% and boosted defense enzyme activity, with CAT up 23-fold and PPO up 9.5-fold, enhancing resistance to Aspergillus tubingensis (lab)	[61]
Yarrowia lipolytica	Penicillium rubens	Yarrowia lipolytica reduced grape decay to 12.45% (from 79.15%), inhibited spore germination (7.22%), and lowered OTA from 74.61 to 0.32 ng/grape. It boosted defense enzymes, with catalase increasing 8.33× (lab)	[62]
K. thermotolerans, P. guillermondii, H. uvarum, Z. fermentati, C. flavus, and C. valdiviana	Aspergillus carbonarius and A. niger	Metschnikowia pulcherrima (77–100%) and Issatchenkia orientalis (100%) inhibited A.carbonarius and A. niger, reducing fungal colonization in grapes and preventing OTA contamination (lab)	[63]
Metschnikowia pulcherrima LS16, A. pullulans LS30, and A. pullulans AU34-2	A. carbonarius	Metschnikowia pulcherrima LS16 and A. pullulans (LS30 and AU34-2) reduced Aspergillus carbonarius infection by 69–99% and lowered (OTA) contamination by up to 93.5%, with effectiveness varying by humidity levels (lab)	[64]
Aureobasidium pullulans, Cryptococcus magnus, and Candida sake	Aspergillus tubingensis	A. pullulans reduced A. tubingensis by 17.1–95.7% (lab)	[65]
Rhodotorula LS15	Penicillium digitatum, Rhizopus stolonifera, and A. niger	Preharvest LS15 reduced gray mold on grapes by 28.3–38.2% (lab)	[66]
Eco-pesticide® (Trichoderma asperellum), Bio-Pulse® (Trichoderma asperellum and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens), and Bio-Care 24® (Bacillus amyloliquefaciens)	E. necator	PDI reduced to 22.37 (Eco-Pesticide®), 22.62 (Bio-Pulse®), and 24.62 (Bio-Care 24®) on leaves, and to 24.71, 24.94, and 26.77 on bunches (field)	[67]
Biopesticide Serenade Max (B. subtilis)	B. cinerea	Serenade Max reduced fruit rot by approximately 52.4–71.1% (field)	[69]

Among the four biopesticide groups, fungi-based pesticides and commercially formulated microbial biopesticides demonstrated the highest efficacy in suppressing grapevine diseases, particularly foliar infections such as powdery and downy mildew. Trichoderma species effectively reduced Uncinula necator and Plasmopara viticola disease severity, while Penicillium adametzioides significantly lowered OTA contamination, highlighting its role in toxin mitigation. Bacteria-based pesticides, particularly those utilizing B. subtilis and Bacillus velezensis, exhibited strong disease control, completely suppressing B. cinerea and effectively managing Erysiphe necator and postharvest fungal infections. Yeast-based biopesticides provided moderate but promising results, particularly in mycotoxin reduction, with Aureobasidium pullulans and H. uvarum showing high inhibition rates against Aspergillus carbonarius and grape rot. Commercial microbial formulations, such as Eco-Pesticide^®, Bio-Pulse^®, Bio-Care 24^®, and Serenade Max, demonstrated a high field efficacy, significantly reducing powdery mildew and fruit rot incidence. These findings confirm that microbial and fungal biopesticides are valuable tools for integrated disease management, offering effective and sustainable alternatives to chemical pesticides in viticulture. Overall, fungi-based pesticides were the most effective for disease suppression, bacteria-based biopesticides showed a strong efficacy in foliar and fruit disease management, yeast-based treatments excelled in postharvest protection and toxin removal, and commercial formulations provided reliable vineyard-level disease control. These findings emphasize the need for integrated biocontrol strategies to reduce reliance on synthetic fungicides while maintaining sustainable grape production.

Publication trends in organic disease management in viticulture (2000–2024) are illustrated in Figure 3, which shows the number of scientific publications on microbial-based (purple) and plant-based (green) organic disease management techniques over time. Each bubble represents the number of studies published in a given year, with larger bubbles indicating a higher number of publications.

The amount of research on microbial-based biopesticides has been consistently higher in recent years, particularly after 2015, reaching a peak between 2019 and 2021, indicating a scientific and industrial drive towards adopting biological control methods for the control of vine diseases.

Between 2000 and 2024, interest in organic disease management in viticulture increased gradually, with studies on microbial compounds taking the lead initially and studies on plant compounds increasing sharply from 2017. The peak publication years of 2019–2021 suggest an evident shift in interest towards green, sustainable vineyard disease management.

3.3. Mechanisms and Applications of Organic Disease Management in Grapevines

Organic disease management techniques have different mechanisms, providing effective substitutes for chemical fungicides in grape disease control (

Table 3. Key mechanisms of organic agents for grapevine disease management.

Mechanism	Description	Organic Agent	Mechanism of Action
Resource competition	Compete with pathogens for nutrients and colonization sites	Aureobasidium pullulans	Inhibits Botrytis cinerea by occupying infection sites and limiting resource availability
Biosynthesis of antimicrobial compounds	Produce lipopeptides or secondary metabolites that inhibit pathogen growth	Bacillus subtilis and Leptospermum scoparium	Disrupt fungal membranes and suppress germination
Physical barrier formation and immune induction	Stimulate host defense enzymes and form protective films on plant surfaces	Chitosan	Activates peroxidase and phenylalanine ammonia-lyase activity; forms a protective layer on grapevine tissues
Direct pathogen disruption	Destroy fungal spores or membranes through biochemical interactions	Essential oils (eucalyptus, rosemary, and cinnamon)	Disrupt spore structure and inhibit fungal development
Soil microbiome enhancement	Improve beneficial soil microbiota and suppress harmful pathogens	Lantana camara compost	Releases bioactive compounds that reduce pathogen levels and enhance soil health

). Aureobasidium pullulans [42] suppresses Aspergillus carbonarius and B. cinerea via competing for nutrients and space and by reducing the production of mycotoxins, e.g., OTA.

Equivalently, cinnamon, rosemary, and eucalyptus EOs possess a good antifungal activity, targeting fungal membranes and inhibiting spore germination [38,43]. It has been demonstrated that Cinnamomum zeylanicum, Cymbopogon citratus [44] rosemary, peppermint, and thyme EOs inhibit key pathogens such as Sphaceloma ampelinum, Pseudocercospora vitis, and B. cinerea. Bioactive alkaloids released by composted Lantana camara into soil inhibit soil pathogens and increase vineyard resistance [55]. Chitosan forms a protective coating on grapes and also activates plant defense enzymes such as peroxidase and phenylalanine ammonia-lyase, enhancing their resistance to B. cinereal [70].

The biopesticide Serenade Max, a preparation from B. subtilis, affects fungal cell membranes and induces SAR, providing an organic-compatible control method for B. cinereal [69]. Additionally, bacterial endophytes of Leptospermum scoparium infect grapevine tissues and produce antimicrobial metabolites that inhibit Botryosphaeria ceae species, which induce trunk diseases.

Table 3 displays five important strategies through which organic agents control grapevine pathogens. The “Mechanism” column lists the general strategy (e.g., resource competition or antimicrobial metabolite biosynthesis), and the “Organic disease management” column specifies agents, such as Aureobasidium pullulans or Bacillus subtilis. The “Mechanism of action” column explains how each agent controls or disassembles fungal pathogens by resource competition, enzyme production, physical barriers, or soil microbiome enhancement. All these steps focus on how natural agents can minimize the application of chemical pesticides and promote sustainable grapevine health.

4. Challenges in the Development and Application of Plant-Based and Microbial Agents for Organic Disease Management

Challenges in plant-based organic disease management include instability, in which exposure to light, temperature, and oxygen degrades energetic compounds, hence restricting shelf life. Chemical composition varies with growing conditions and extraction strategies, which makes standardization and consistent formulations difficult [71]. Many agents are only powerful against specific pests, with a narrow spectrum of targets, and require frequent application because of their biodegradability, which increases costs, as shown in

Table 4. Challenges, solutions, and mechanisms of action for organic disease management.

Agent Type	Category	Challenge	Solution	Mechanism of Action
Plant-based	Stability	Degradation under light and temperature	Microencapsulation and controlled storage	Creates a protective barrier to prevent degradation by light and heat
	Standardization	Variable chemical composition	Standardized extraction and quality control	Ensures consistent bioactivity through quantitative analysis
	Narrow spectrum	Limited activity against specific pathogens	Combination with other agents and IPM	Broadens activity through synergistic effects
	Environmental sensitivity	UV-induced degradation	Optimized application timing and UV protectants	Minimizes photodegradation by application under low-light conditions with UV blockers
Microbial	Stability	Loss of viability during storage and transport	Lyophilization and cold chain	Preserves cell structure and viability under dry and cold conditions
	Standardization	Inconsistent formulation with adjuvants	Encapsulation, stabilization	Improves stability and compatibility under various conditions
	Narrow spectrum	Limited efficacy against diverse pathogens	Microbial consortia	Combines multiple mechanisms of action (e.g., antibiotics and competition)
	Environmental sensitivity	Sensitivity to temperature, humidity, and UV	Optimized application and UV blockers	Enhances survival under stress via timing and protective additives

. Moreover, their efficacy is mostly location-specific, driven by local pests and environmental conditions. These are problems that can be overcome with improved formulations, standardization procedures, and tailoring applications to enhance reliability and adoption in sustainable agriculture [72].

The environmental sensitivity of microbial organic disease agents means that temperature, humidity, and UV radiation can sharply limit their activity; this is especially true in hot or dry climates. Storage and transport require stringent temperature control measures and special packaging, adding logistical challenges [73]. Their narrow spectrum of activity means that they are effective only against certain pathogens, and very precise identification of the target pest is required. The development of new microbial organic disease agents is time-consuming and costly, demanding extensive research, testing, and regulatory approval. Their introduction into agricultural systems is also complex due to possible interactions with indigenous microflora and the need for farmer education in proper application for maximum benefit [74].

This comparison of microbial and plant-based methods for organic disease control encompasses the main problems faced, their solutions, and the modes of action of these methods. The “Challenges” column includes drawbacks such as instability, standardization, the limited range of action, and environmental sensitivity. The “Solutions” column shows that encapsulation, correct application timing, and microbial consortia are able to solve the above issues. The “Mechanism of Action” column defines how each technique (e.g., enhanced formulation stability, synergism with additional chemicals, and UV protection) facilitates pathogen regulation in an ecologically balanced and non-intrusive fashion. Together, the entries reveal how organic disease control can lower the use of chemicals and promote sustainable crop protection.

Under each condition, both fully plant-based and microbial organic disease management agents offer environmentally friendly alternatives to synthetic insecticides but face significant challenges that restrict their successful adoption. Fully plant-based organic disease management agents face issues of instability, standardization, limited activity spectra, and area-specific efficacy, while the major limitations noted for microbial organic disease management agents include environmental sensitivity, problems regarding storage and transportation, narrow activity spectra, and complex development and integration procedures. While these are challenges, improvements in technology, standardization techniques, and education programs for farmers can greatly improve the practicality and effectiveness of these organic disease management agents. Through addressing these issues, organic disease management can play a substantial role in sustainable agriculture development, decreasing the overdependence on chemical insecticides and maintaining environmental health [71].

In addition to plant- and microbial-based organic disease management agents, novel technological advancements are expected to further enhance grapevine disease management. Nanotechnology offers a promising approach for improving the stability, efficacy, and targeted delivery of organic disease management. Nanoparticles such as chitosan-based formulations have demonstrated the ability to enhance the penetration and retention of antifungal compounds, effectively suppressing pathogens such as B. cinerea in grapes. Another innovative strategy is RNA interference (RNAi), which enables gene silencing in fungal pathogens, thereby inhibiting their growth and development. RNAi-based biopesticides have shown potential in controlling major grapevine fungal diseases, including powdery mildew and downy mildew, by disrupting essential pathogen genes [75].

Furthermore, CRISPR-Cas gene-editing technology represents an advanced tool for improving disease resistance in grapevines. By precisely modifying genes involved in plant defense mechanisms, CRISPR-Cas can facilitate the development of disease-resistant grape cultivars, thereby reducing the need for chemical pesticides. These emerging biotechnologies, when integrated with ongoing research on microbial- and plant-derived organic disease management, have the potential to revolutionize grape disease management. Their incorporation into integrated pest management frameworks can contribute to sustainable viticulture by minimizing reliance on synthetic pesticides, promoting ecological balance, and ensuring long-term environmental and agricultural sustainability [76].

5. Benefits of Plant- and Microbial-Based Organic Disease Management in Sustainable Agriculture

While organic disease management agents are not yet able to replace synthetic pesticides in all agricultural systems, they significantly reduce chemical dependence and play a valuable role in driving sustainable pest management practice. Biotechnological innovation, combined with strong regulatory support, is enhancing the effectiveness and range of organic disease management to the stage where synthetic insecticides can be reduced or even supplanted in some circumstances. The integration of organic disease management into integrated pest management strategies not only improves sustainability, but also strengthens the ecological stability and long-term resilience of agricultural ecosystems [77].

5.1. Plant-Based Organic Disease Management

Plant-based biopesticides offer a sustainable alternative to synthetic chemicals, providing insecticidal, fungicidal, and repellent effects with minimal environmental impacts. Derived from essential oils, extracts, and other natural compounds, they align with integrated pest management and organic farming by reducing chemical pesticide use and residue risks.

Figure 4 summarizes their key advantages, as follows: compatibility with organic farming, broad-spectrum activity, environmental safety, biodegradability, synergy with other agents, local raw material availability, and improvements in soil quality. These strengths support sustainable agriculture by promoting soil health, biodiversity, and long-term productivity.

Despite these benefits, challenges remain in formulation stability, large-scale production, and field performance. Continued research is needed to improve their efficacy and facilitate wider adoption in modern crop protection strategies.

This figure captures the overall advantages of using plant-based organic disease management agents in grape production. These include their additive effect when combined with microbial or chemical agents, flexibility in displaying insecticidal, fungicidal, and repellent activity, and compatibility with highly organic farming practices. The availability of raw material in the proximity of renewable resources, as well as from agricultural residues, makes it inexpensive and sustainable. Further, these agents improve soil quality by enhancing microbial balance and fertility and offer environmental safety because of their biodegradability and lack of toxic residues, thus making them safe for soil, water, and air.

5.2. Microbial-Based Organic Disease Management

Microbial biopesticides are being increasingly recognized as a safe, eco-friendly alternative to chemical pesticides, offering targeted pest suppression with minimal environmental harm. Acting through competition, antimicrobial production, and plant immunity induction, they reduce reliance on synthetic chemicals and protect soil health. However, formulation stability, field performance, and regulatory hurdles must be addressed for large-scale adoption.

Figure 5 illustrates the following six key advantages: integration with plants (enhanced growth and resistance), compatibility in IPM systems, specificity of action (sparing beneficial organisms), natural reproduction with persistent efficacy, positive soil impact, and lower resistance risk. These features reinforce the sustainability and resilience of agricultural systems, highlighting the importance of further research and development to fully harness their potential in modern crop protection [75,78].

Microbial-based products provide an accurate, eco-friendly method for crop protection by their induction of plant growth, maintenance of beneficial organisms, and natural recycling within the ecosystem. Their efficiency in improving the health of soils by utilizing available low-input materials and checking pathogen resistance renders them fully compatible with IPM systems. Such characteristics establish them as an eco-friendly alternative to chemical pesticides, ensuring long-term agricultural productivity alongside respect for the ecosystem.

6. Conclusions

Organic disease control, based on both microbes and plants, offers effective and environmentally sound solutions to chemical pesticide use in grapevine disease control. Plant products, i.e., essential oils (thyme, rosemary, and eucalyptus), exhibit potent antifungal activity, with some causing the 100% inhibition of pathogens in the laboratory. Microbial biopesticides, i.e., Bacillus subtilis, Trichoderma harzianum, and Aureobasidium pullulans, exhibit good disease control, reducing infection levels by 60–90% under field conditions. In spite of this, challenges such as formulation instability, environmental susceptibility, and narrow-spectrum activity represent significant hurdles for both groups that necessitate further investigations into new formulations, combinatorial strategies, and large–scale field trials. Organic disease control incorporated into integrated pest management systems can enhance the sustainability of viticulture by reducing the use of chemical pesticides without sacrificing crop productivity and health. Future developments in nanotechnology, RNA interference, and CRISPR gene editing will be expected to improve the performance and stability of biopesticides. A collective approach between scientists, regulators, and the agriculture sector is needed to optimize the overall benefits of organic disease management to foster sustainable viticulture.