Far from ‘exhaustive’ but I think this piece does a good job explaining clonal selections, their history, and some misconceptions as well.
Cheers!
2 Likes
Yeah…pretty decent article. It gets most of the basics right and in a way that is understandable to most. I wish it discussed cluster morphology a bit (that phrase alone probably eliminated the topic) because I think some clones are looser and thus are more prone to certain areas while others are tighter and more prone to rot, etc. People want to hear (I think) “this clone good” and “this clone bad” but I think it is more about the site and clone match.
Adam Lee
ITB
Interesting part regarding reputation that Pinot is prone to mutations.
Great point - and even here, the cluster morphology of each clone will differ somewhat based on the conditions of the individual site.
I think the concept of ‘site vs clone’ is understated at all times - some consumers prefer one clone or another . . . often based on how it performs at a specific site. There is no guarantee that what you perceive as specific characteristics derived by a clone at, say Bien Nacido, will exhibit the same at Gary’s or some site in Sonoma.
Cheers.
1 Like
Adam - “In Germany, where official clones had been developed much earlier, growers tended to prioritize Pinot Noir clones that grew in looser bunches on the vine, because those grapes were less susceptible to botrytis rot. By the late 1980s and ’90s, both French and German selections focused on aromatic intensity alongside previously selected traits.”
They touched on it at least. Interesting article but it’s really more of an introduction than an article - whets your appetite for more info. And then what about Sangiovese?
Good stuff though and thanks for posting it Larry!
Thanks my friend.
Cheers!
It’s a, well, it’s a coffee table magazine article which is fine. Covers some basics and doesn’t get too involved which is probably perfect for the target audience.
I work with at least 12 distinct clones but also have 3 massale selection sites/blocks that may have things beyond the 12. I have everything from the Big 2 of Pommard and Wadensvil to a small selection of Dijon clones, California based clones and a couple of Oregon clones. Some are sourced across a few vineyards and soil types. A few are from a single location. Some seem to work exceptionally well in one soil type and fine in another. Some seem to transcend the soil. There’s no one answer. We bottle a few individually as clonal selections, some wines are clonal selections simply because that’s all that is there. They are a part of terroir in their own way but are not static in the ways in which they interact with their environments. We have 84 individual selections in the 2021 cellar based on vineyard, block and whole cluster level (to say nothing of barrels use). It is educational even for me at this point.
Jim,
Thanks for your post - truly appreciated. It certainly is a ‘complex’ subject and I agree that the article is pretty simplistic - but it does give a nice overview, including the fact that the ‘Pommard’ clones were propagated at UCD by Olmo and NOT brought in directly from the Pommard region. Perhaps there are cuttings you can get directly from there now, along the lines of the Dijon clones? Not sure but I know that you’ll know . . .
Cheers
Pretty good article.
I always went by the “clone trumps site until the vineyard is old enough for the site to trump the clone” philosophy.
Growing different clones on one site is important as to not have everything in bud break, bloom, version, harvest at the same time. Having different blocks that can vary up to 2 weeks does not put all your eggs in one basket should frost hit early or if there is a rain and/or frost event during bloom. Also allows pick dates to vary up to 2 weeks to help with logistics of picking, trucking, winery sorting etc.
Our 3 dijon clones tend to set a smaller crop and come in a litter earlier, our 3 Pommard 05 blocks tend to set a touch larger crop and I like them just at touch riper, 2-4 days.