Cornell University
Library
Cornell UniversityLibrary

eCommons

Help
Log In(current)
  1. Home
  2. Cornell SC Johnson College of Business
  3. Charles H. Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management
  4. Applied Economics Research
  5. Dyson School Extension Bulletins
  6. Economic Analysis of the Financial Impact of the Grape Leafroll Virus (GLRV) in the Finger Lakes Region of New York

Economic Analysis of the Financial Impact of the Grape Leafroll Virus (GLRV) in the Finger Lakes Region of New York

File(s)
Cornell-Dyson-eb1015.pdf (455.23 KB)
Permanent Link(s)
https://hdl.handle.net/1813/65916
Collections
Dyson School Extension Bulletins
Author
Gomez, Miguel I.
Atallah, Shady S.
Martinson, Timothy E.
Fuchs, Marc F.
White, Gerald B.
Abstract

Leafroll is one of the most important virus diseases of grapevines worldwide, reducing the yield and quality of grapes. The present study is aimed at quantifying the cost impact of the grape leafroll virus (GLRV) and identifying the best disease management options under several scenarios of reduced yield and quality. The costs associated with the absence of response to the GLRV ranged from $9,695 (for a 30% reduction in yield and no quality penalty) to $16,014 per acre (case of 50% reduction in yield and 10% penalty). This cost impact was lowered to a range of $547-$9,336 (for GLRV incidences 1- 27%) through roguing1 and $9,384 through vineyard replacement (GLRV incidences above 27%). Using certified vines at planting limited the costs of vine-transmitted GLRV to $740. Roguing turned out to be the appropriate management method if the GLRV incidence is below 27%. Above that level, replacement was found to be the best option. However, there were two cases where ‘no intervention’ was the best management practice. The first is the case where yield reduction is less than 30%, GLRV incidences greater than 27% and no price penalty is enforced. The second is a situation of a vector transmitted infection happening beyond year 19. Beyond that age, roguing did not have a positive impact on the Net Present Value (NPV), suggesting no intervention in that case as well.

Description
E.B. 2010-15
Date Issued
2010-11
Type
report

Site Statistics | Help

About eCommons | Policies | Terms of use | Contact Us

copyright © 2002-2026 Cornell University Library | Privacy | Web Accessibility Assistance