Perhaps a silly question, but?

[Jonathan_Loesberg]

I have resigned myself to the persistent misuse of “varietal” for “variety” on this board. I have reluctantly given up reacting to the misuse of “begs the question” as well. But Otto corrected me for not knowing the difference between a variety and a varietal as if “varietal” meant some other taxonomic distinction, instead of being a misused adjectival synonym for variety. That was a new one on me. By the way, if that word comes to designate a distinction between variations from the same clonal stock, I’d be happy to accept that usage as we are clearly in need of a sub-variety distinction here, though the grammarian in my will still get the creeps at this nouning of an adjective. If that meaning comes to pass, I vote that the OED attribute it to Otto.

[John_Morris]

[jcoley3]

@Wes Barton

@jcoley3

Which raises the question - has anyone ever made a Pinot Meunier still white wine?

Pretty sure I touched on this fact a post and two above this. Read the whole thread first.

At least I said “raises” instead of “begs” the question!

[Jay_Miller]

@Jonathan Loesberg

I don’t know why this question is addressed to me since Otto is the one who asserted that pinot blanc, pinot meunier, etc. are the same variety. And I doubt the question is being asked ingenuously. I will nevertheless answer like a straight man. For the most part, and, for instance, on Wiki, Chardonnay, Pinot noir, etc. are identified as different varieties. So I would vote that you are right. But, Otto’s assertion has impressive backing in the form of this statement by Carole Meredith:

“A variety starts out as a vine that grows from a single seed. All vines that are propagated from that original vine by cuttings or buds will be that same variety. Over centuries of time and many thousands of vines, small spontaneous genetic changes will arise in individual vines and be perpetuated in any subsequent vines propagated from those individual vines. In that way, clonal variants will emerge, some visible or discernible by tasting and some not. No matter how many changes occur to separate these clones, they will always be clones of the original variety. They will never diverge into separate varieties. And this is clearly detectable by DNA analysis. Even dramatically different clones of Pinot Noir, for example, have the same DNA profile. And Pinot Gris, Pinot Blanc, and Meunier also have the same DNA profile as Pinot Noir. They are all clones of the same variety: Pinot.”

So, I guess, the answer to your question is, depends on who you listen to.

This is interesting, not how I had thought of it but I’m certainly no expert. Thanks!

[Jay_Miller]

@jcoley3

@Wes Barton

@jcoley3

Which raises the question - has anyone ever made a Pinot Meunier still white wine?

Pretty sure I touched on this fact a post and two above this. Read the whole thread first.

At least I said “raises” instead of “begs” the question!

And many of us applauded.

[David_Glasser]

It’s so pleasant around here when we all heed mom’s advice to “Use your words.”

[Otto_Forsberg]

@Jonathan Loesberg

I don’t know why this question is addressed to me since Otto is the one who asserted that pinot blanc, pinot meunier, etc. are the same variety. And I doubt the question is being asked ingenuously. I will nevertheless answer like a straight man. For the most part, and, for instance, on Wiki, Chardonnay, Pinot noir, etc. are identified as different varieties. So I would vote that you are right. But, Otto’s assertion has impressive backing in the form of this statement by Carole Meredith:

“A variety starts out as a vine that grows from a single seed. All vines that are propagated from that original vine by cuttings or buds will be that same variety. Over centuries of time and many thousands of vines, small spontaneous genetic changes will arise in individual vines and be perpetuated in any subsequent vines propagated from those individual vines. In that way, clonal variants will emerge, some visible or discernible by tasting and some not. No matter how many changes occur to separate these clones, they will always be clones of the original variety. They will never diverge into separate varieties. And this is clearly detectable by DNA analysis. Even dramatically different clones of Pinot Noir, for example, have the same DNA profile. And Pinot Gris, Pinot Blanc, and Meunier also have the same DNA profile as Pinot Noir. They are all clones of the same variety: Pinot.”

So, I guess, the answer to your question is, depends on who you listen to.

I really can’t understand how you make this sound like an opinion.

Of course Pinots Blanc, Gris, Meunier, Noir etc. are treated as different varieties in everyday wine talk for clarity’s sake. I do that, all the professionals do that, everybody does that.

However, if you want to get technical, color mutations or aromatic mutations are not different varieties per se, but instead only mutations. This is not just me and Carole Meredith, ask any wine professional worth their salt. Or just consult Wine Grapes by Robinson, Vouillamoz et al.

So while normally regarded as distinct varieties because of their VERY obvious differences in the resulting wines, these several varieties are, in effect, only one:
Pinot Blanc
Pinot Gouges
Pinot Gris
Pinot Meunier
Pinot Noir
Pinot Noir Precocé
= Pinot

Gewürztraminer
Savagnin
Savagnin Rosé
= Savagnin

Garnacha Peluda
Grenache Blanc
Grenache Gris
Grenache Noir
= Garnacha

and so forth.

I agree that it is much easier to treat them as separate varieties and that’s what I do. However, the current definition for a grape variety is one that is genetically different from both its parents, so if you want to be exact, these above examples are not a dozen or so different varieties, but only three. You have to remember that a mutation still retains the DNA of its original grapevine and as a scion it doesn’t have parents, so by this definition (which is agreed upon by wine professionals) it isn’t actually a distinct grape variety. However, we really don’t need to argue what they are in technical terms, as everybody is still going to keep treating them as separate varieties. I just think this is an interesting and important piece of information worth knowing.

[John_Morris]

@Otto Forsberg

I really can’t understand how you make this sound like an opinion.

Of course Pinots Blanc, Gris, Meunier, Noir etc. are treated as different varieties in everyday wine talk for clarity’s sake. I do that, all the professionals do that, everybody does that.

However, if you want to get technical, color mutations or aromatic mutations are not different varieties per se, but instead only mutations. This is not just me and Carole Meredith, ask any wine professional worth their salt. Or just consult Wine Grapes by Robinson, Vouillamoz et al.
…
I agree that it is much easier to treat them as separate varieties and that’s what I do. However, the current definition for a grape variety is one that is genetically different from both its parents, so if you want to be exact, these above examples are not a dozen or so different varieties, but only three. You have to remember that a mutation still retains the DNA of its original grapevine and as a scion it doesn’t have parents, so by this definition (which is agreed upon by wine professionals) it isn’t actually a distinct grape variety. However, we really don’t need to argue what they are in technical terms, as everybody is still going to keep treating them as separate varieties. I just think this is an interesting and important piece of information worth knowing.

Otto - This whole argument began because you kept insisting that pinot Gouges is pinot blanc. But now you’re admitting it’s more useful to speak of it as a different grape, even if that’s not genetically correct.

Sheesh!

[Gerhard_P]

@Jonathan Loesberg

…

I don’t know why this question is addressed to me since Otto is the one who asserted that pinot blanc, pinot meunier, etc. are the same variety. And I doubt the question is being asked ingenuously. I will nevertheless answer like a straight man. For the most part, and, for instance, on Wiki, Chardonnay, Pinot noir, etc. are identified as different varieties. So I would vote that you are right. But, Otto’s assertion has impressive backing in the form of this statement by Carole Meredith:

“A variety starts out as a vine that grows from a single seed. All vines that are propagated from that original vine by cuttings or buds will be that same variety. Over centuries of time and many thousands of vines, small spontaneous genetic changes will arise in individual vines and be perpetuated in any subsequent vines propagated from those individual vines. In that way, clonal variants will emerge, some visible or discernible by tasting and some not. No matter how many changes occur to separate these clones, they will always be clones of the original variety. They will never diverge into separate varieties. And this is clearly detectable by DNA analysis. Even dramatically different clones of Pinot Noir, for example, have the same DNA profile. And Pinot Gris, Pinot Blanc, and Meunier also have the same DNA profile as Pinot Noir. They are all clones of the same variety: Pinot.”

So, I guess, the answer to your question is, depends on who you listen to.

Thanks, for my daily use it´s been well answered …

[Otto_Forsberg]

@John Morris

Otto - This whole argument began because you kept insisting that pinot Gouges is pinot blanc. But now you’re admitting it’s more useful to speak of it as a different grape, even if that’s not genetically correct.

Sheesh!

I have repeatedly said that it makes sense to speak of it as a distinct grape variety, even though it is technically identical to a Pinot Blanc (i.e. a color mutation of Pinot Noir) and - even more accurately speaking - they all are one and the same variety.

Just to make everything clear, here I quote myself (post #21):

@Otto Forsberg

What I meant was that it is technically Pinot Blanc (them both being white mutations of Pinot Noir), but of course it makes sense not to call it such, because it is so distinct from the variety people normally associate with Pinot Blanc. It would be quite misguiding to call it Pinot Blanc, so I’m cool with the Pinot Gouges name.

[Jonathan_Loesberg]

Some people just won’t take yes for an answer. In any case, Gerhard, you see whence your question comes.

[Wes_Barton]

@Jonathan Loesberg

First of all, the word “varietial,” in English to identify a variety of grape is an erstwhile grammatical error, now becoming, alas, standard usage only in the area of wine. Used properly, the seemingly adjectival word form, “varietal,” is only used as a noun to identify a bottle of wine made from only one variety of grape. I expect the distinction you are looking for is the one between a clonal variety and naturally occurring varieties that don’t all occur from one original vine…

It is, of course, not true that varieties only occur from crossbreeding. You need to go back and read basic evolution and the modern synthesis. Varieties occur from genetic mutations changing genetic populations within different groups of the same species. Further, if two groups are genetically identical, then they would be indistinguishable. To the extent that they are distinguishable, either from crossbreeding or environmental isolation, it will because one of those factors has led to genetically distinct populations. Whether the distinctions are large enough to want biologists to separate them as varieties is another question. The distinction between clones and varieties in grape nomenclature occurs, I expect, because of the widespread human activity in grape breeding and the fact that cross breeding in flora, as opposed to fauna, can produce fertile offspring.

And all of this goes back to the same question: the fact that two genetic populations, from two different stocks of the same variety, underwent a mutation that let to the loss of color pigmentation, does not show them to be the same varietation, regardless of whether that mutation occurred through crossbreeding or not. They would be the same variety, I guess in the way that Pinot Blanc and Gewurtztraminer are the same variety, but that was not the issue under discussion.

You are very very confused. Grape mutation is somatic, meaning growth on a vine past the point the mutation occurs replicates as the mutation. On the particular vine the mutation occurs, depending where it occurred, you could have both Pinot Noir and Pinot Blanc clusters. Propagation is through choosing to graft or plant the mutated material, the new clone. This has zero to do with breeding, by definition. Breeding creates a new variety, not clone.

[Wes_Barton]

There was a discussion here recently on when it’s best to use a standardized variety name and when using differing names for distinct clones is better. It gets messy.

The OP is about (still) blanc de noir, not blanc de blanc, so this is all a tangent. As I noted upthread, none of the blanc de noir Pinots I’ve had resembled any Pinot Blanc I’ve had. (Of course, needing to avoid color is a constraint one has to deal with that doesn’t exist in making a white wine from white grapes.)

[John_Morris]

@Wes Barton

The OP is about (still) blanc de noir, not blanc de blanc, so this is all a tangent. As I noted upthread, none of the blanc de noir Pinots I’ve had resembled any Pinot Blanc I’ve had.

Nor does the Gouges blanc, which is tastes more like a blanc de noir. That’s why I brought it up in the first place!

[William_Kelley]

Martin Ray (subject of another recent thread) used to make one and claimed that it was the only wine to pair with Turkey.

Since ripening flavors and phenolics in synchrony is such a challenge in CA Pinot Noir, I have often wondered why more people don’t make whites. Guess the answer is obvious, however.

[Jonathan_Loesberg]

Can you please explain to me, Wes, how realigning the alleles from the parent vine into another vine creates a new gene? Only genetic mutation does that. Mendel can plant and replant those beans, but he’s only going to get the same genes unless something mutates. Now, of course, replication by itself induces mutations, which are really not much rarer than typing errors, since that, in essence, is what causes them. So you may mean that mutations induced by crossbreeding are the only ones that cause variation, but that would be a different claim.

[GregT]

Varietal is an adjective. People mean “variety” but they don’t know or think it’s cooler to use the adjective “varietal” instead.

Really they mean “cultivar”, which is a variety that humans have cultivated.

Some cultivars originate as sports or mutations - a lot of roses have been propagated after appearing first as a sport. Some originate as hybrids.

Varieties can reproduce true to type so if you plant the seed, you get the same plant. But that’s not the case with cultivars - if you plant the seed you don’t know what you’ll get. So you propagate by rooting cuttings, which is what they do with grape vines.

Naming conventions differ for the two. But on this forum it doesn’t matter - people use lower case for grape names and surely wouldn’t use any horticultural naming convention.

Sports can occur multiple times and they may look the same to us. So a red rose or red grape can have a sport that’s white, and then many years later a red version can have another sport that’s white. On one hand, they’re all the same, but on the other, they’re three cultivars if you keep propagating them. And cultivars can be mixtures of genotypes, depending on whether the plant comes from outcrossing or inbreeding.

[Jonathan_Loesberg]

Greg, how does planting a seed from a cultivar not get you the same genome as the cultivar? Now I can understand how you might not know what you would get because you didn’t yet know all the genetic features of the cultivar, but that’ a different issue. Is there something about cultivars that changes normal plant reproduction?

[Otto_Forsberg]

@Jonathan Loesberg

Greg, how does planting a seed from a cultivar not get you the same genome as the cultivar? Now I can understand how you might not know what you would get because you didn’t yet know all the genetic features of the cultivar, but that’ a different issue. Is there something about cultivars that changes normal plant reproduction?

I’ve advised you to read this article in the past, but as repetition is the mother of learning:

(T)he accumulation of mutations can’t produce a new grape variety. You might have several clones of Pinot Noir developing each with quite different characteristics, but they will remain Pinot Noir. A new variety is only produced with a mother and a father (vine sex), resulting in a seed that is then grown.

There’s an interesting point here. You could take the parents of a particular variety, where they are known, and cross them, but you wouldn’t get the same variety from this cross. Let’s use Chardonnay as an example. Its parents are Pinot and Gouais Blanc. If you cross Pinot and Gouais Blanc, however, you won’t get Chardonnay. You’ll get a new variety: the genetic mixing up that took place to produce Chardonnay was a unique event; in a similar way, I’m different to my sisters and brother, and even if my parents had had 3000 children they would never have had me again. [As an aside, if you cross Pinot Noir with Pinot Noir and grow a seed from this cross, you won’t still have Pinot Noir. There will be some genetic mixing up in the sex process that will result in a new variety.]

http://www.wineanorak.com/wineblog/wine-science/what-is-a-grape-variety-what-is-a-clone

[Jonathan_Loesberg]

It helps to quote the whole passage to see what he is actually saying:

"Most of these mutations will be invisible, and most will be neutral or deleterious. But occasionally they will be both visible and desirable. When it comes to taking cuttings for propagating, some vines might be just a little better than their neighbours, and if this is because of subtle genetic differences (rather than, for example, small differences in terroir that then influence the vine’s growth), then these will be captured by the propagation process.

This sort of selection results in a new clone of the variety. Over enough time, a range of such clones might be developed. Sometimes, however, clonal differences reflect nothing more than differing levels of virus infection (the infection will be passed on with the cutting), or perhaps epigenetic differences (heritable changes that aren’t based on DNA sequence changes).

But the accumulation of mutations can’t produce a new grape variety. You might have several clones of Pinot Noir developing each with quite different characteristics, but they will remain Pinot Noir. A new variety is only produced with a mother and a father (vine sex), resulting in a seed that is then grown."

It is, of course, true that mutations ALONE won’t produce a new variety if all you do is clone the mutated individual. All that entails is the pretty self-evident claim that sexual reproduction is a necessary element of genomic change. Goode doesn’t state that sexual reproduction is a sufficient cause. The same is true of mutation: it is a necessary cause but not a sufficient one.