sign in sign up
<<
Home , Cabernet Franc, Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot

Cabernet franc: experiences from for the Fingerlake industry

Pr. Cornelis (Kees) van Leeuwen Bordeaux Sciences Agro What does look like?

2 Cabernet franc plantations in

40000

30000

20000 Hectares

10000

0 1958 1968 1979 1988 1998 2006

3 Cabernet franc around the world

40000

30000

20000 hectares 10000

0 France California Chili South New Africa Zealand

4 Some great made with a high proportion of Cabernet franc

5 Proportion of Cabernet franc in Bordeaux

CépagesRed varieties rouges 1988 2000 2007 2013 (ha) 44180 61438 69138 69416 Merlot (%) 52% 58% 62% 65% Cabernet-Sauvignon (ha) 24677 29210 28347 24627 Cabernet-Sauvignon (%) 29% 27% 25% 23% Cabernet franc (ha) 13356 14100 13218 11013 Cabernet franc (%) 16% 13% 12% 10% Côt () (ha) 2120 1060 974 1077 Côt (Malbec) (%) 3% 1% 1% 1,0% (ha) 389 479 677 Petit Verdot (%) 0,4% 0,4% 0,6% Carmenère (ha) 38 Carmenère (%) 0,04% Total (ha) 84333 106107 112156 106933 %% of du total total 77% 86% 89% 88% 6 Characteristics of Cabernet franc at Cheval Blanc compared to Merlot and

Data collected from 1996 - 2003 Break around April 1st

Data 1996 - 2003

120 110

100 a b 90 c 80 70 Bud break (julien day) (julien break Bud 60 Merlot Cabernet franc Cabernet-Sauvignon

Flowering around June 1st

Data 1996 - 2003

180 170

160 a c b 150 140 130 Flowering (julien day) (julien Flowering 120 Merlot Cabernet franc Cabernet-Sauvignon 8 during the first decade of August

Data 1996 - 2003

240 230 a 220 c b 210 200 190 Veraison (julien day) (julien Veraison 180 Merlot Cabernet franc Cabernet-Sauvignon

Harvest late September or early October

• Around 50 days after veraison • One week to ten days after Merlot • One week to ten days before Cabernet- Sauvignon

9 weight

Data 1996 - 2003

1,5 a 1,4

1,3 b b 1,2

Berry weight (g) weight Berry 1,1

1 Merlot Cabernet franc Cabernet-Sauvignon

Grape sugar

Data 1996 - 2003

230 a Potential alcohol between: 220 b 13 and 13.5 for Merlot 210 12.5 and 13 for Cabernet franc 200 c

11.5 and 12 for Cabernet- (g/L) Sugar Sauvignon 190 180 Merlot Cabernet franc Cabernet-Sauvignon 10 Total acidity

Data 1996 - 2003

7 a 6 b content c 5 Data 1996 - 2003 4 3,0 a

Total acidity (g tartrate/L) (g acidity Total 3 2,5 Merlot Cabernet franc Cabernet-Sauvignon 2,0 b c 1,5 1,0 Malic acid (g/L) acid Malic 0,5 0,0 Merlot Cabernet franc Cabernet-Sauvignon pH

Data 1996 - 2003

3,6 a

3,5 b pH b 3,4

3,3 Merlot Cabernet franc Cabernet-Sauvignon 11 content

1,00

Data 1996 - 2003 0,95 a 0,90

0,85 b b Anthocyanin (g/kg) Anthocyanin

0,80 Merlot Cabernet franc Cabernet-Sauvignon

12 Clonal variability of Cabernet franc

Data: 2008, private clonal selection Clonal variability in Cabernet franc

• Clonal variability is high in Cabernet franc • Obviously, no high quality clones are available • Some estates carry out their own clonal selection • This is what Cabernet franc should look like: – Loose bunches – Small beries

14 Clonal variability in berry weight

1,80

1,70

1,60

1,50

1,40

1,30 Berry Berry weight (g) 1,20

1,10

1,00 D B C E O Q J L G P R A I F N M H K

15 Clonal Variability in

2000 1800 1600

1400 1200 1000 800 Yield (g/vine) 600 400

200 0 L I O R M P N A K H Q F E J C G D B

16 Clonal variability in sensitivity to Botrytis

6%

5%

4%

3%

Botrytis (%) Botrytis 2%

1%

0% C O I F B E D K G N R A Q P J L M H

17 Clonal variability in berry sugar content (expressed in potential alcohol)

14

13,5

13

12,5

12

11,5

Potential alcohol Potential 11

10,5

10 Q E A R P L C B D J O G M F N I K H

18 Clonal variability in total acidity

8,0

7,5

7,0

6,5

6,0

5,5

5,0

4,5

4,0 Total Acidity (g tartrate/L) Total Acidity 3,5

3,0 D B C A H J P N G Q I F E K L R O M

19 Clonal variability in Isobutyl Methoxy Pyrazines (IBMP)

19

17

15

13

11

9

IBMP (ng/L) 7

5 below detection threshold 3

1 N Q I M B O L A C D E F G H J K P R

20 Rating (loose bunches, small , no shatter, good taste…)

9

8

7

6

5

4

3 Rating (1 to 10) Rating (1 2

1

0 D B C E G F Q R P A O I K N M H J L

21 Selecting a clone: a combination of criteria

• Clone L is very low yielding, sentive to Botrytis and produces with high IBM content • Clones K produces big berries with low sugar content • Clone D obtains high ratings, and produces small beries, with average sugar content and low acidity and is not sensitive to Botrytis

22 Cabernet franc: a variety that reacts strongly to the soil type

23 Cheval Blanc has three different soil types

Gravel Sand Heavy clay 24 Rôle of environmental stress

• Some form of environmental stress is needed to produce great Cabernet franc • This can be water deficit • Or limited nitrogen availability

25 Vine water status is highly variable on these three soils

Stem water potential for Cabernet franc planted on three different soils at château Cheval Blanc in 2006

June July August September 0,0 -0,2 -0,4 Gravel -0,6 -0,8 Sand -1,0 Clay (MPa) -1,2 -1,4 -1,6 -1,8 Stem water potential potential water Stem Level for moderate water deficit 26 Vine nitrogen status is also variable

Yeast Available Nitrogen at ripeness for Cabernet franc on three soil types (château Cheval Blanc, 2006) Moderate nitrogen status 200 Low nitrogen status 160

120

80 (mg/L) 40

0

Yeast Available Nitrogen Nitrogen Available Yeast Gravel Sand Clay

27 Berry weight at ripeness for Cabernet franc on three soil types (château Cheval Blanc, 2006)

1,30 Small berries 1,25 on gravel, high 1,20 sugar on clay 1,15

1,10

1,05 Berry weight (g) weight Berry 1,00 Gravel Sand Clay sugar at ripeness for Cabernet franc on three soil types (château Cheval Blanc, 2006)

240

220

200

180 Grape sugar (g) sugar Grape

160 Gravel Sand Clay 28 Total acidity at ripeness for Cabernet franc on three soil types (château Cheval Blanc, 2006)

7,0 Total acidity is 6,0 high on sand 5,0 4,0 and low on 3,0 gravel 2,0 1,0 0,0 Total acidity (g tartrate/L) (g acidity Total Gravel Sand Clay

pH at ripeness for Cabernet franc on three soil types (château Cheval Blanc, 2006)

4,0

3,8

3,6 pH 3,4

3,2

3,0 Gravel Sand Clay 29 Total at ripeness for Cabernet franc on three soil types (château Cheval Blanc, 2006) Anthocyanins 1700 1600 and tanins are 1500 high on clay 1400 1300 and mg/L) 1200 moderately low 1100 1000 on sand Total anthocyanins (ApH1, (ApH1, anthocyanins Total Gravel Sand Clay

Total phenolics at ripeness for Cabernet franc on three soil types (château Cheval Blanc, 2006)

80

75

70

65

60

55

Total phenolics (D280) phenolics Total 50 Gravel Sand Clay 30 Effect of water deficit stress

Data set: - Cabernet franc grown at Cheval Blanc -on three soil types -Data from 4 (2004 – 2007) Effect on shoot growth slackening

Correlation between minimal seasonal stem water potential and shoot growth cessation (Cabernet franc)

250 R2 = 0,60 230

210

190 (julien day) (julien 170 Shoot growth cessation cessation growth Shoot 150 -2,5 -2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 Minimal seasonal stem water potential (Mpa)

32 Effect on berry weight

Correlation between minimal seasonal stem water potential and berry weight (Cabernet franc)

1,4 1,3 1,2 1,1 1,0 R2 = 0,68 0,9 0,8 Berry weight (g) weight Berry 0,7 0,6 -2,5 -2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 Minimal seasonal stem water potential (Mpa)

33 Effect on grape sugar

Correlation between minimal seasonal stem water potential and grape juice sugar content (Cabernet franc)

240

230

220

210

200 Sugar content (g/L) content Sugar

190 -2,5 -2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 Minimal seasonal stem water potential (Mpa)

34 Effect on acidity

Correlation between minimal seasonal stem water potential and Correlation between minimal seasonal stem water potential and total acidity in grape juice (Cabernet franc) grape malic acid content (Cabernet franc)

7,0 3,0

2,5 6,0 R2 = 0,54 2,0

5,0 1,5 R2 = 0,62 1,0

4,0 (g/L) acid Malic 0,5 Total acidity (g tartrate/L) (g acidity Total 3,0 0,0 -2,5 -2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 -2,5 -2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 Minimal seasonal stem water potential (Mpa) Minimal seasonal stem water potential (Mpa)

Correlation between minimal seasonal stem water potential and grape juice pH (Cabernet franc)

3,8

3,6 R2 = 0,65 pH

3,4

3,2 -2,5 -2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 Minimal seasonal stem water potential (Mpa) 35 Effect on anthocyanin

Correlation between minimal seasonal stem water potential and grape extractable anthocyanin content (Cabernet franc)

250

200 R2 = 0,41 150

100

50 Anthocyanin (mg/L) Anthocyanin

0 -2,5 -2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 Minimal seasonal stem water potential (Mpa)

36 Quality factors for Cabernet franc

• Limit vine vigor (use devigoration ) • Favor grape exposure ( removal is essential in cool climates) • Exposed Leaf area / weight > 1.5 m2/kg • Good clonal material • Environmental stress – Either water deficit stress – Or limited nitrogen – Or both

37