Ohio Grape~Wine Short Course 1993 Proceedings Horticulture Department Series 63 5 The Ohio State University Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center Wooster, Ohio
'·
T · H · E OHIO SD\TE UNIVERSITY ~------~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This page intentionally blank. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 :'\ Horticulture Department Series #635 October 1993
Proceedings of the 21st OHIO GRAPE-WINE SHORT COURSE
February 28 - March 2, 1993 - Columbus, Ohio Edited by Roland Riesen
I.) tc
Sponsored by Department of Horticulture - The Ohio State University In cooperation with Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center~~ Ohio Cooperative Extension Service Ohio Grape Industries Committee Ohio Wine Producers Association With the contribution of Bonnie Franks Margaret Latta Lloyd Lemmermann Judy Stetson This page intentionally blank. PREFACE More than 150 persons attended the 1993 Ohio Grape-Wine Short Course, which was held at the Columbus Marriott North, Columbus, OH on February 28-March 2. Those attending were from 15 states, not including Ohio, and represented many areas of the grape and wine industry. This course was sponsored by the Department of Horticulture, The Ohio State University, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, Ohio Cooperative Extension Service, Ohio Wine Producers Association and Ohio Grape Industries Committee.
All publications of the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center are available to all potential clientele on a nondiscriminatory basis without regard to race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, sex, age, handicap, or Vietnam-era veteran status. 10/93-500
i This page intentionally blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Class by the Glass-A Marketing Approach to Introduce Wines Into Major Restaurants by Karyl Hammond...... 1 Geographical, Geological, and Climatic Mapping of Ohio by Thomas W. Schmidlin...... 4 The Dynamic Growth Cycle of the Grape Vine by W.A. Erb, D.M. Scurlock, T.A. Koch and G.R. Johns ...... 17 Nitrogen Dynamics in the Grapevine--A Matter of Life and Death by G. Stan 1ey Howe 11 and Eric Hanson...... 26 The Development and Ripening of the Grape Berry by Diane D. Miller...... 36 Wine Growing in British Columbia-The Ultimate Challenge to Cold Hardiness by Andrew G. Reynolds ...... 40 Production of Young, Approachable, Yet Complex Red Wines by Don Neel...... 55 The Truth About Wine and Health by Tom Qui 1ter...... 61 Strategies for Insect Control in the Nineties and Newest Trends in Bird Protection by Roger Williams, Sean Ellis, Dan Fickle, Judy Stetson & Roland Riesen. 68 Fungicides for Control of Downy Mildew of Grapes by Michael A. Ellis ...... 71 Biology and Control of Black Rot and Phomopsis Cane and Leaf Spot of Grapes by Michael A. Ellis ...... 74 The Perfect Vineyard Soil--Considerations Prior to Establishing A Vineyard by Jeff Burkho 1der...... 81 Adaptive Nitrogen Management as Influenced by Soil Water, pH, Fertilizer, and Cover Crop by Stan Howell ...... 85 Training System as a Function of Soil, Topography, and Tradition: A New Look At European Practices by Andrew G. Reynolds...... 90
i i i This page intentionally blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Page Options for Juice Clarification by Claudio Salvadore...... 115 Sanitation in a Small Winery by Tony Carlucci...... 117 Film Yeasts and Brettanomyces-The Beauty or the Beast? by Roland Riesen and Judy Stetson...... 121 An Update on Sparkling Wine Production-Practical Application and Evaluation of Non-Vinifera Varieties by Carl E. Shively...... 129 Winery Trails: A New York Success Story by Liz Stamp...... 140 Breaking Into the Restaurant and Retail Market: 1993 Program by Doniella Winchell...... 141
v This page intentionally blank. f. ..
ClASS BY THE GlASS - A MARKETING APPROACH TO INTRODUCE WINES INTO MAJOR RESTAURANTS Karyl Hammond New York Wine and Grape Foundation Penn Yan, NY "Class by the Glass", just one small segment of the New York Wine and Grape Foundation's promotional program, was designed to educate the public about wines made in their own backyards. When the Foundation was founded in 1985, a series of market surveys that questioned retailers, wholesalers, restauranteurs, and consumers indicated that, contrary to popular belief, New York wines were not suffering from a negative image--a poor quality, jelly--jary or foxy reputation. Instead the surveys indicated that New Yorkers knew very 1 ittle about their State's wine industry, and their failure to buy the products was because of this lack of knowledge. "Class by the Glass" was conceived because it was a total program--one that involved all segments of buying public--retailers, restaurants and consumers. It also fit well with the Foundation's philosophy that wine is a food that is best when served with other foods, and it also allowed consumers to try several New York wines at a relatively low cost. It is based on the theory that, "A taste is worth a thousand words". In summary, "Class by the Glass" was a month-1 ong program that required participating restaurants to pour a minimum of 3 New York wines by the glass. The promotion usually involved 70-150 prestigious restaurants in 5-7 markets (New York City, Brooklyn, Albany, Westcheste~, Binghamton, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, Corning/Elmira/Ithaca). The Foundation supported the promotion with newspaper, television, and radio advertising, public relations activities and P- 0-S materials. The program's effectiveness was tracked through a series of very comprehensive restaurant surveys done at the conclusion of the program. The surveys indicated that over $250,000 of New York wine sales could be directly attributed to "Class by the Glass". WINERY ROLE Participation in the "Class by the Glass" program was limited to Foundation members (our membership represents about 90% of the State's total production), and the wineries were charged a modest participation fee of $25 per market. Each winery was allowed to enter up to 3 wines per market and was required to submit samples to be used in restaurant tastings. Wineries also supplied extensive information about the price, availability, and distribution of their wines, as well as other factors such as sweetness, food pairings, medals won, etc. This information was compiled into a tasting booklet by the Foundation to be used by restauranteurs at special tastings where they chose the wines their restaurant would feature by the glass. Wineries were also asked to submit the names of any restaurants they wished to be a part of this program.
1 RESTAURANTS The Foundation has an excellent business relationship with the New York State Restaurant Association, which proved invaluable in the execution of this program. The Restaurant Association provided the Foundation with their member mailing list which was used to invite restaurants to participate in "Class by the Glass". Invitations were also placed in the Restaurant Association's magazine, Food Service Forum, and other trade journals. Using the mailing list, the ads and the recommendations from wineries, the Foundation was able to contact nearly every restaurant in the State. There was no participation fee required of restaurants for "Class by the Glass". If a restaurant chose to participate, the management filled out a questionnaire asking their hours of operation, what credit cards they accepted, if they currently served New York wines, and if they served wines by the glass. They were also asked if they had a cruvinet, if they needed one (we provided 25 across the State) and what quantity of P-0-S material they would need to support their promotion of New York wines. Restauranteurs also had to agree to attend a special tasting of New York wines, to pour a minimum of 3 wines entered in this program by the glass for an entire month, and that of these 3 wines, one could not currently be on their list. Finally, the owner of the restaurant had to sign a release form that allowed the Foundation to use the above information in its advertising of this promotion. The Foundation would then chose a restaurant in the market as a site for the restauranteur's tasting. No winery personnel were allowed at these tastings. Only Foundation officials were present to answer questions about the wines or the winery. Wines were not grouped by brand, but by type, col or, and taste characteristics. When restaurants picked their wines, they left their choices with the Foundation representative. FOUNDATION To kick off "Class by the Glass .. in each market, the Foundation organized gala consumer tastings that took place 1-3 weeks before the promotion opened in each market. These were usually organized in conjunction with public television stations or some other charitable organization. Essentially the charity would coordinate the event, sell the tickets and do all the advertising. They also kept all profits. The Foundation secured the participation of the wineries who donated and poured their product. Many of the participating restaurants in each market sent their chefs to the tasting and prepared and donated the aperitifs. Consumers attending these tastings received a standard tasting booklet and a brochure listing participating restaurants and the wines each was pouring by the glass. The brochures also included complete information on the restaurant (obtained on the questionnaire sent to restauranteurs) and an educational section on serving wines with food. Press releases were sent to media contacts in each market to announce the 11 11 beginning of Class by the Glass • The Foundation ran a full-page ad in the key newspaper in each region announcing the program and 1 i sting participating restaurants. The Foundation also ran daily ads on local radio stations that advertised "Class by the Glass", and each day featured one of the participating 2 restaurants. The final step in the program tied retailers to the program. To reach every retailer in the State, the Foundation purchased a mailing list from the statewide Retailer Association and again asked our member wineries for the names of retailer contacts. In addition to a mailing that explained "Class by the Glass", and the role retailers could play in the promotion, the Foundation also took out ads in retailer trade journals to prepare retailers for the P-0-S kits that were sent to them. These kits contained a response card that allowed retailers to order extra materials and also allowed them to participate in "Class by the Glass" by featuring New York wines for the one month period and by organizing in store tastings of New York wines. (Only New York wines can be tasted in New York retail stores.) The Foundation office received a 20% response to this bulk mailing--which is far better than the 8% average. In addition to the support we gave retailers through P-0-S materials, we also ran full-page ads in each market that listed participating retailers. "Class by the Glass" was an extremely effective promotional program, and the results have been lasting. Almost all of the restaurants involved in the program continue to offer an ever expanding selection of New York wines, and most continue to offer a small selection by the glass. The only complaints the Foundation received about "Class by the Glass" were from restaurants and retailers who did not choose to participate, either consciously or because they didn't read their mail, and then decided they had really missed the boat. These restaurants and retailers were among the first to sign up when the program ran in their market the next year.
This program in the form described above was ex~remely expensive--$55,000 was spent on the promotion itself and another $50,000 was spent on advertising. It was also very expensive if the amount of staff time spent coordinating all the aspects was considered--this program was a logistical nightmare. (The Foundation also felt it was necessary to hire a consultant to work the New York City market, which was a very difficult arena for New York wines, and this was an added expense.) However, "Class by the Glass" can easily be scaled down for smaller organizations. For example, when restauranteurs became more familiar with the New York products, it was no longer necessary to do tastings for them in each market. This saved thousands of dollars. It was also possible to simply announce the program to restaurants and then let the wineries do the leg work of signing them up and helping them select the wines. This saves a great deal of administrative work and lets really aggressive wineries get exclusive--and a much larger share of the profits. It was also possible to cut down on advertising to some extent. It was the advertising, however, which was the rea 1 hook for restaurants and retailers, but not all ads had to be full page, and most states did not have to pay New York Times' advertising rates. There were several promotional programs that were developed as spin-offs of this program, and they include the New York Wine Line--a free computerized service to New York restaurants that helps them select wines for their restaurants based on such criteria as price, color, availability, etc. (supplied to the Foundation by the wineries), and the New York Wine Course, used to educate wine educators and restaurant staff about New York wines.
3 I;
.I \ r / \ \.,../ GEOGRAPHICAL, GEOLOGICAL, AND CLIMATIC MAPPING OF OHIO Thomas W. Schmidlin Certified Consulting Meteorologist Department of Geography Kent State University, Kent, OH 44242
I appreciat~ the opportunity to participate in the 1993 Ohio Grape-Wine Short Course. My relationship with Ohio grape and wine producers has been productive and informative for me in the eight years since I returned to Ohio. Arnie Esterer and I embarked on collaborative research on winter cold protection at Markka Vineyard soon after I came to Kent, and this continues today. I have had the benefit of some early financial support from the Ohio Grape Industries Program, and many of you have welcomed my students to your facilities in the workshop I teach on "Environment of Wineries and Vineyards of Northern Ohio". For all this I am appreciative. Any commercial endeavor, such as yours, that utilizes the land, climate, consumer trends, population patterns, marketing, and tourism to make a profit in a regulated industry must use maps. Maps show us the patterns that pages and tables of numbers cannot depict. Maps show trends through time and across space and almost give life to otherwise lifeless data. This morning I will first make a few general comments about modern mapping and some resources in Ohio for map and information products. Then I will spend most of my time giving examples of the climatic maps I am most familiar with. Finally I will say a few words about climate change and how the grape-wine industry may be affected. Geographers and earth scientists live by maps. We use them to understand our data, to document our findings to our colleagues, and to explain and convey our research to others outside of our narrow fields. Techniques of mapping have come through a revolutionary change in the past decade. Desk-top computers and mapping software have put the power of huge data bases in the hands of anyone who requires this information. This new science of Geographic Information Systems, or GIS, utilizes layers of data from which the user selects the information needed, at the scale and in the location desired. These may be developed by township, county, state, or globally. Examples of data in GIS include terrain or elevation, soils, groundwater, land use, public utilities, highways, political boundaries, population, income, public services, and anything that can be mapped. State governments use GIS to track changes in land, forest, and water resources, such as extent of wetlands, to monitor highway use and park needs. Municipal governments use GIS to follow trends in suburban growth and public services such as hospitals, fire and police, and water lines. Corporations use GIS to monitor their facilities and distribution networks. Marketing consultants use GIS to follow U.S. census trends in population, income, education, and
4 consumer indicators at the neighborhood scale. Hand mapping is still done, of course, for small tasks or where computers and expert systems cannot yet accomplish a task, but all large-scale projects are now done by a computer and GIS. Small businesses may not have the resources or needs to justify owning their own GIS. In that case, it is useful to know where information can be obtained. Several state agencies in Ohio have sophisticated geographic information systems with data available at the county scale. These may be found by inquiring at the agencies here in Columbus. Many county or city planning agencies have some GIS capability or may obtain map products from the state. In any case, these local government agencies are usually very helpful in providing map information needed by local businesses. Most state universities have a department of geography or geology with an operating geographic information system. These may be research or applications oriented. University professors are usually happy to know of someone with a use for their GIS capabilities and are happy to cooperate to answer your questions or solve your problems. Finally, there are many published atlases and other map products at the county and state scale that may be useful. These are available in any large library. I brought the cover page of two recent Ohio regional or state atlases and a few maps along as ex amp 1es. Among ex amp 1es of information from these atlases, figure 1 shows the classic landform map of Ohio. Figure 2 shows the influence of large cities in Ohio as indicated by newspaper circulation. This has obvious uses in advertising and tourism. Figure 3 depicts patterns of family income across the eastern Great Lakes, and figure 4 shows traffic flow into Ohio on our interstates. From the atlas of northeast Ohio, figures 5 and 6 show patterns of population change and education attainment. These are just a small selection of the types of information available and scales of depicting data for the region. Next, I would like to shift to a subject that I know a little more about, and that is Ohio's climate and climatic mapping of Ohio, especially climate as it relates to wine grape production. Ohio presents a number of opportunities for grape production, as was discovered along the Ohio River 140 years ago. Our midwestern climate also presents a variety of challenges to the industry. Through careful site selection and other more aggressive procedures, many of these challenges may be overcome. A few general climate maps will be given first. Annual precipitation across Ohio (Fig. 7) is controlled by elevation, Lake Erie, and proximity to Atlantic and Gulf storms. The southern counties and northeast snowbelt are wettest, while the northwest is driest. We could also look at seasonal precipitation and probabilities of exceeding various amounts. Average daily low temperatures in January (Fig. 8) are generally colder towards the north, of course, with some moderation along the lake shore. The 5 coldest winter mornings are normally in the continental northwest corner of the state. Sub-zero nights are least common, less than 5 per year, along the lake shore and in the Ohio River Valley (Fig. 9). Much of inland northern and western Ohio has 10 to 15 sub-zero nights annually. Spring comes early in extreme southern Ohio with April daytime temperatures in the upper 60's in Lawrence County (Fig. 10). On the other hand, cold waters of central Lake Erie keep April days 10° to 12° colder along the Lake County and Ashtabula County shore. The moderation of spring frosts along the lake shore is well known. Figure 11 shows the mean date for the last spring freeze in mid April along the Lake, compared to early May or mid-May across most of Ohio. Figure 12 shows that temperature on July days is rather uniform across Ohio in the mid-SO's, except on the northeast lake shore, where cool waters keep summer days near 80°. The shallow western basin warms quickly in summer, so the islands are 3° warmer than Ashtabula on summer days. Similarly, hot days, 90° or above, occur only once or twice a year along the northeast lake shore (Fig. 13). Temperatures reach 90° on 10 days per year on the islands and 30 to 40 days annually along the Ohio River. The reservoir of heat in Lake Erie slows the advance of autumn. October nights (Fig. 14) along the lake shore are 6° to 8° warmer than in most of Ohio and are similar to temperatures along the Ohio River. Moderation of autumn nights along the shore delays the first freeze by two to three weeks (Fig. 15), so freezes come to the islands last of any place in the state. My research has centered on the winter cold hazard to wine grapes. Some of these are the result of a dissertation on extreme minimum winter temperatures in Ohio completed last year by Dennis Edgell, a graduate student in our department. There has been a lot of discussion lately on greenhouse warming, its reality, causes and impacts. I will make a few comments on that later. In that context, we examined mean winter temperatures across Ohio over the past century. Figure 16 shows the mean winter temperature in Ohio from 1883 to 1990. Any trend of change is weak, but is fit best by a fourth-power polynomial regression line, shown as a solid line through the data. Ohio winters are highly variable. The points in figure 16 show an overall range of ll°C (or 20°F) in winter temperatures. The cold winters of 1903-04, 1917-18, 1962-63,1976-77, and 1977-78 stand out. The curved line indicates cold winters near the turn-of-the-century, warm winters through the 30's and 40's, colder winters again in the 60's, 70's and early SO's and warm winters in the late 1980's. Mean winter temperatures are less important for the grapevine than the coldest night or two of winter. Therefore, in figure 17 we look at the coldest temperature of winter at one location, Wooster. Here we find some resemblance to the average winter temperatures, but there are many exceptions. Cold winters have occurred with a relatively warm extreme low, and mild winters have occurred 6 in which the lowest temperature of winter was extremely cold. To generalize across the state, figure 18 shows the average coldest temperature of winter for the past 30 years. The average coldest temperature of winter is -12°F or colder in the shaded areas. The average coldest temperature of winter is warmer than -6°F along Lake Erie and Ohio River and as warm as -5°F at Put-in-Bay and -3°F at Ironton. We can take the time series of the lowest winter temperature for 30 years at several dozen stations across Ohio and estimate return periods for certain critical temperatures. For example, figure 19 shows the return period for a temperature of -17°F. This temperature is relatively common, expected every 5 to 10 years in much of Ohio, and has prevented wide production of tender fruits such as vinifera grapes and peaches. However, along the Ohio River and along Lake Erie, the return period for -17°F is over 50 years, making it a rare event. Similarly, the temperature at a specific return period may be estimated. Figure 20 shows the 20-year return period temperature. These temperatures have an annual probability of 5% and would be expected about five times in 100 years. Shaded areas, most of Ohio, have a 20-year return period temperature of -20°F to -25°F. The warmest 20-year return period temperatures are -13°F at Portsmouth and -14°F to -15°F along the lake shore. Figures 21, 22 and 23 show temperatures in Ohio during three of the most severe cold waves. In each case, areas of Ohio cooled to -25°F to -30°F, and a large area below -30°F occurred in 1899. Ohio River Valley temperatures cooled to -20°F in each case, but the lake shore remained warmer. The shores of Lake and Ashtabula counties remained 2° to 3° warmer than the islands, perhaps because ice covered the western basin, while some open water remained in the central basin. In 1987, Arnie Esterer, Orchard-Rite, The Ohio Grape Industries Program, and Kent State embarked on a project to assess the feasibility of using a wind machine to protect vinifera from winter cold. With wind machines in place and a 50 ft. instrumented tower, we waited for winter cold. We anticipated minimum winter temperatures in the -l0°F to -l5°F range along the lake in Ashtabula County, as had been experienced in the early 1980's. However, as the project ran for several winters, critically cold temperatures did not occur. While Arnie was not disappointed in avoiding cold damage to his vines during these winters, I found the lack of cold temperatures frustrating to the research. To look at these recent mi 1d winters in the context of a 1anger record, the 1owest temperature of the winters of 1927 to 1992 were plotted for Erie, Pennsylvania (Fig. 24). Some remarkable trends are evident. Compared to the average coldest temperature of winter of -2.5°F, the last seven winters have been mild with no temperature below -l°F at Erie. Prior to 1986, 9 of 10 winters had minima below average, including three that are the coldest in the period of record. A mixed record characterized the period 1956 to 1975, while the years prior to 1956 were mostly warmer than average with many winters having no temperatures colder than 5°F.
7 Finally, a few words on climate change. The past 15 to 20 years have been full of discussions and arguments on our changing climate. Is it changing? If so, how, and how fast, and why? In the late 1970's, we saw the climate had been cooling for 30 years, we were headed for the next ice age, and prestigious national science societies were making recommendations on how society should spend billions to reverse the cooling or adjust to it. Cooling would be catastrophic, some segments of society could not adjust, and industrial nations were causing the cooling by pollution which blocked sunshine. And then the mid-1980's brought a warming climate. Whoops! Now industrial nations are causing warming by the greenhouse effect, it will be catastrophic, some segments of society will not adjust, and we must spend billions to reverse this warming. I am a skeptic. Yes, the climate is changing. It always has and always will. Ice ages have come and gone several times in the past million years. All of this without the help of industrial human society. Yes, we may be contributing to a changing climate. But some areas of the earth are warming and some areas are cooling. Computer models are in wild disagreement about which areas of the earth will get wetter or drier in a greenhouse climate. As I indicated earlier, mean temperatures of individual winters have varied by 20°F in Ohio over the past century. Yes, weather sensitive industries such as your's should be prepared for a variety of weather conditions and types of years. Should you spend one-half million dollars preparing for catastrophic greenhouse warming in the next 50 years? I don't think so. The pessimistic climate forecast for the year 2050 is generated by the same super-computer running roughly the same computer program that produced the forecast today for this Thursday. How much are you willing to bet on today's forecast?
8 FIGURE 1.
B c
0 40 mtles Un•v. of Akron. Dept. of Geog .. Unu,. of Akron. 19n. M. Ge•b Dept. of Geog .. Unrv or ...... 1972. M. G••b O.Ot of Geo 1972 M Gt!• 1. Youngstown 6. Eiyroa 2. Warren 7 Sandusky Canton J. 8 Sprongfoeld 4. Z•nesvdl~ 9. ltma FIGURE 2. 5 Lora•n 10. Fondlay
Influence areas of larger Ohio cities, as determined by newspaper circulation, 1970 (Dutt and Harrity, 1971 ·
9 fiGU\'S 3.
FAMILY INCOME
D 7,000 to 13.'>00 D 13.501 10 lh.SOO BE]. 11>.801 '" 14.4~1 l~A51 IO 1~ "0(1
1fi."Xl0 20 40 "" 22.XOI 40 00 '" I\J"--=.....i._S"'-L.....I.._L-.L-L__.:r:__..J..-LJ..._L__1,.....2::.L::::_--"'"T-==:.:...... :.-__;__~ ~•nurct"!o Cu!!!'IY •nd C•ty O..to~ Boot I'MJ U 5 Ot.·pt ot Comrn<·rn· Hurr•u of- Uw Cf'MW 1983. Ct"nsu"' ~~~~- (,..~n••·j,•_ Sl'l('("tPd )i.I("I.Jl •nJ - '""'
1-75
1-80 t ~---·-·--·-·• i i i i i i i i i FIGURE 4. j Traffic Flow into Ohio --+-:r- l;,:o t;..._ on Interstate Highways ,~f
Source: ODOT 1989 10 FIGURE 5. RATE OF POPULATION CHANGE 1980-1986
CllARt\CTFIW;TlCS OF CITIES t\ND TCl\\'\JSHIPS R \ ( E <:.,q:~rnii(Jn:Lrn•,th L A K E 1 Over IOO'Je I ~ \1odC'T.IH' Growth -~(Jl~t"l\1\l'\1 D St.able (1U'f.t~i-30"')
Sl~ndlc.ll'\1 ["")(-(lin<'
~ ()v,·r -10 () '\ I
Ill
Source 1980 C~ns.u> ol l'opul•non Son~l •nd Eronormc (h<~UC1f'Ttstl~. 196.3 •nd "J'opul.1t1on Uum•ceo<. lor pJSt,- Dt_.c 1987. US [)rop.lrtrnn1t ol (omrtW'f
FIGURE 6. EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT: 16 YEARS OR MORE
PERCENT
D 20to87
D 88to157 ~ J;8to250
- 25lw3;o
- 3Slto4t\;
f.o~o;tl•rnCr('.II(.JI..("<.A\f'f,l~~· 100'"".:
'" ~I'
l'*io(l (t•r.,u~ 11! l'i•pul,llu•ll, >._~ Figure 7. Average annual precipitation (inches). AVERAGE JAN MIN ANNUAL DAYS 0°F OR BELOW 14 16 18 20 Figure 8. Average daily low te•perature in January. Figure 9. Average annual nuaber of days o°F or colder. 12 AVERAGE APRIL MAX AVERAGE LAST SPRING 32°F May 1 58 May 10 60 ....,_~'""=~=.;..;~--1- 58 ~~~--~~~ 60 May 10 62 May 1 64 66 Apr 20 Apr 20 Figure 10. Average daily high temperature in April. Figure 11. Average date of the last 32°F in spring. AVERAGE JULY MAX ANNUAL DAYS 90°+ 86 Figure 12. Average daily high teaperature in July. Figure 13. Average annual nuaber of days 90°F or hotter. 13 AVERAGE OCT MIN AVERAGE FIRST FALL 32°F 40 42 44 Figure 14. Average daily low te•perature in October. Figure 15. Average date of tbe first 32°F in autumn. OHIO WINTERS QUARTIC POLYNOI.IIAL 5 5 4 Figure 16. Average teaperature (°C) of winters 3 3 1883-1990 in Ohio. (Dec-Feb) u 2 .. 2 0 &.J .. cr 0 0 :;) ... -1 -1 < cr -2 . . -2 &.J .. 0.. -3 -3 :::f ...... , -4 -4 -5 -5 -6 •• -6 -7 WOOSTER 10 90 Ten Year l.loving Average 1883-84TO 1989-90 1883-84 TO 1989-90 -12 -12 -14 -14 ~ -16 -1 E· u ':...... -18 •• . -18 loJ •. cr -20 -20 ::> ...... _22 -22 < cr -24 -24 &.J l 0.. j ~ -26" -26 &.J l ... -281 -28 •O i -~,_. 1 -JO Figure 17. Lowest t ..perature (°C) of winters 1883-1990 I at Wooster. -~21~·~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - J2 eo 90 1900 10 20 lO 60 70 ao 1990 1 II AVERAGE COLDEST OF WINTER 1960-90 -6 1 2 -1 Figure 18. Average coldest teaperature (°F) of winter. RETURN PERIOD FOR -17°F 20-YEAR RETURN PERIOD TEMPERATURE 10 -20 20 50 -15 Figure 19. Return period in years for a -17°F teaperature. Figure 20. Teaperatures (°F) at a 20-year return period. 15 FEBRUARY 10, 1899 JANUARY 21, 1984 - 15 20 -20 -20 -25 Piqure 21. Low teaperaturss in Ohio on February 10, 1899. Piqure 22. Low teaperatures in Ohio on January 21, 1984. The low of -39 in Perry County was the coldest ever recorded in Ohio. JANUARY 21 , 1985 -20 Figure 24. Lowest teaperatures of the winters 1927-1992 -25 at Brie Pennsylvania. The horizontal line at -2.5 6 F is the average coldest teaperature of winter. -12 ERIE, PA 10 5 -16 () -18 0 LL 0 ._,.0 ...:...... (/) -20 (/) Fiqure 23. Low teaperaturea in Ohio on w -5 w , January 21, 1985. 0 0 ...J _, 0 -22 0 () () -10 -241 -26 -15 WINTER THE DYNAMIC GROWTH CYCLE OF THE GRAPE VINE W.A. Erb, D.M. Scurlock, T.A. Koch and G.R. Johns Department of Horticulture The Ohio State University/OARDC Wooster, OH INTRODUCTION The grapevine is a perennial plant that survives from year to year by producing shoots that harden in the fall and become canes which go into a state of rest before severe cold weather occurs. Because it is a perennial plant, it is developing flower clusters for its next crop while flowering and maturing its current crop. A grapevine is always carrying 2 crops (current and future). The current season's crop becomes the cinnamon brown canes containing the buds to develop next year's crop. STAGES OF GRAPEVINE DEVELOPMENT The stages of grapevine development for Ohio grown vines are illustrated in Figure 1. In Ohio, rest for grapevines is usually satisfied by late December or early January. After rest is satisfied, the buds produced the previous year are ready to start growing as soon as temperatures rise to a daily mean of 47-50°F. Vines are in a state of dormancy unt i 1 March when temperatures rise and met abo 1 ism starts to occur in the buds. Met abo 1 ism cant i nues as 1ong as temperatures are above the minimum, and by mid-April bud burst usually occurs. The flower clusters developed the previous year start to develop their individual flowers by late April, and by about the first week of June in northern Ohio and earlier in southern Ohio flower development reaches the bloom stage. If conditions are favorable, pollination occurs within a couple of days and fruit set occurs about one week after bloom. Approximately 2 weeks following bloom, unpollinated ovaries drop from the cluster. If weather is adverse during pollination, fruit set can be low and fruit drop excessive. Flower cluster initiation for next year's crop starts about a week before bloom, and this continues until just before harvest in mid-September. Color change (veraison) in the berries usually occurs around early to mid-August. Harvest usually occurs in late September and October. In late November, leaf fall occurs but it could be earlier depending on the first hard frost which causes the leaves to drop. 17 STAGES OF GRAPEVINE DEVELOPMENT I I I I I I I Cluster Thiming Leaf Removal Vine Covering CULTURAL Balanced Prun1no Fertilization\ j9-oot Positioning PRACTICES t I I I I I Flower Cluster Development FOR 1113 I I FRUITINQ Fruit Set Drop Flo~) /Fruit Color Development\ Change Harvest 1912 FRUITINQ I ~~I Bud Blrst MOST ACTIVE GROWTH Leaf Fall VEGETATIVE GROWTH I I DORMANCY REST I I I I J I I I I I I JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUQ SEP OCT NOV DEC Figure 1. Stages of grapevine development for Ohio grown grapes. This figure is a modification of a similar figure presented in Cahoon, 1974. ANNUAL GROWTH CYCLE OF THE VINE The annua 1 growth eye 1e of the vine in terms of morpho 1og i ca 1 deve 1opment and physiological processes will now be discussed and related to stages of development. Aspects of the annual growth cycle of the vine are graphed in figure 2. There are 4 different graphs, and the numbered arrows represent when bud burst (1), bloom (2), fruit drop (3), veraison (4) and harvest (5) usually occur in Ohio. In early March dormant buds start to grow when they receive some mean daily temperatures in the range of 47 -50°F. As temperatures start to rise in the spring growth is slow at first when the cells of young shoots are actively dividing. The starch and sugars that were produced last year and stored in the canes and shoots are metabolized and converted into energy and protoplasm to support the developing shoots and new plant tissue. Accumulated carbohydrates start to drop in March, slowly at first, and more rapidly as the shoot starts to rapidly increase its growth rate after bud burst. 18 As the shoot starts to increase in size, the leaves expand and flower clusters become visible. About the time leaves are 1/3 developed, they are producing as much carbohydrates as they are consuming, and after this point, the shoot really starts to grow. The rate of photosynthesis in leaves is dependent on light intensity, temperature, C02 concentration, nutrients and moisture. The main limiting factor to photosynthesis in the spring is a low leaf temperature. The optimum leaf temperature for rapid photosynthesis is 77 to 80°F. Growth in the spring is also slowed because respiration (the process of obtaining energy from organic material) and transpiration (the loss of water vapor through the stomates of the leaf) are reduced during cool weather. The ·combination of transpiration and respiration being low causes translocation of nutrients from the soil to the developing shoots to be reduced. Energy from respiration is required to move nutrients into the cells of the roots, and transpiration is necessary to move the nutrients from the roots to the developing shoots. Vines growing on sandy soils and south facing slopes will grow faster in the spring than the ones on loam and clay soils and north facing slopes because sandy soils warm up faster in the spring and south facing slopes receive more sunlight. At bloom shoot growth rate is at its maximum and accumulated carbohydrate levels are generally at a minimum (figure 2). After this point, the size and number of leaves have developed sufficiently to return some of the carbohydrates to the vine. The accumulation of carbohydrates starts in the midsection of the shoot and progresses downward and upward during the remainder of the season. The carbohydrates that accumulate are mainly starch, and the rate of accumulation is affected by such factors as amount of crop, time the fruit ripens, health of the vine, the status of shoot growth, and the climatic conditions. Both overcropping and continued rapid shoot growth can delay accumulation of starch, and this will seriously affect next year's crop potential. Cluster initiation and development also begin at bloom in the newly developing buds on the new shoots. After fruit set, shoot growth drops off and starch starts to accumulate more rapidly as vegetative growth begins to slow down and the fruit begins to grow. Around the time of fruit drop, day temperatures are optimum for photosynthesis, and the longest days of the summer are occurring. Between fruit drop and veraison, the main limiting factor in vine photosynthesis is leaf shading as the canopy thickens. Occasionally, excessively high temperatures (above 86°F) can limit photosynthesis, with the process practically stopping at 113°F. Photosynthesis is also reduced when the moisture level in the soil drops to a critical level, which causes stomates in the leaf to close. Warm nights (70°F and above) can cause night respiration rates to be excessive which causes more energy from photosynthesis to be used to maintain the leaves, stems, developed fruits and roots that currently exist, thus less is available for growth of new tissue and storage into buds, fruits and roots. If too much fruit was left on the vine, then shoot growth should be significantly slowed, and less leaf material will be produced which causes less carbohydrates to be stored in developing buds and fruits. Excessive fruit removal can cause the vine to become very vegetative which causes too much shading. 19 ANNUAL GROWTH CYCLE OF THE VINE A ---· B ...... c --- D 2.20 28 2.00 1 2 3 4 5 26 ID 1.80 _J______!~ ______1______~ 24 e! !> 1.60 22 > 1.40 20 I I I 1.20 18 u 3 :z: 1- 1.00 I' 16 / 3- ~ \ / \ I 0.80 I \ 14 i I \ i 1- 0.60 \ f 12 I \"., I I i 0.40 I \ . 10 I!! I I I ' 0.20 / ' 8 / -- ,_J __ / ------0.00 -- 6 MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT Figure 2. Annual growth cycle of a grapevine growing in Ohio. The numbered arrows represent when bud burst (1), bloom (2), fruit drop (3), veraison (4) and harvest (5) usually occur in Ohio (A = growth of shoots in inches; B = starch and sugars in percent dry weight; C = berry size increase in ml; and D =degree Brix of the fruit). This figure is a modification of figure IS in Winkler, 1962. By mid- to late September the fruit is mature. Before harvest vegetative growth slows significantly, and the shoots start to harden and become canes. Accumulation of starch is most rapid as shoot growth stops and canes start to harden. After harvest, with low temperatures and short days, translocation of carbohydrates, nitrogen and other organics from the leaves is rapid. With the first hard frost, leaf fall occurs, and by late November the canes are again at rest and the cycle is complete. 20 FACTORS INFLUENCING DRY MATTER YIELD Dry matter accumulation for any plant is dependent on two physiological processes--canopy photosynthesis and canopy respiration (figure 3). Once a particular cultivar is chosen, leaf photosynthesis and canopy respiration become fixed components of dry matter yield for a given location. However, canopy photosynthesis is determined by i rradi ance interception in addition to 1eaf photosynthesis (figure 3). Irradiance interception is the area where increases in yield and quality can occur if the proper training systems and cultural practices are used. Irradiance interception can be broken down into: amount of available irradiance, leaf light absorption characteristics, leaf arrangement on the plant, plant arrangement in the field, non-laminar light interception, leaf angle and leaf area index (which is a measure of leaf area per ground area). The goal is to intercept as much light as possible within a row without having too many multiple layers of leaves. Growers can impact irradiance interception: 1) by changing plant spacings which influences leaf distribution; 2) by using a particular training system or shoot positioning within a vine which changes leaf angle of exposure to irradiance; and 3) by dormant pruning and shoot and cluster thinning which impacts l~af area index, the fruit to leaf area ratio, vine vigor and development of the buds for the next year. GRAPES GROWN IN OHIO Four different types of grapes are grown in Ohio (American juice or wine grapes, seedless table grapes, French-American hybrid grapes and straight vinifera grapes). The most adapted to Ohio conditions (winter temperatures, sunlight, soil moisture, humidity, pest problems, and summer temperatures) are the American juice or wine grapes. The least adapted are the straight vinifera grapes, because primarily they are most sensitive to the cold winters which can occur in Ohio and the Midwest, and as a group they are more susceptible to diseases and insects that are common to Ohio. Because Ohio is a marginal growing area for viniferas, they require the best sites and rootstocks, and they have the highest cultural requirements. The best choices for vinifera cultivars are those that are early maturing (115 days or less) and that are the hardiest of the group. Seedless table grapes and French-American hybrid grapes are in-between in their adaptability to Ohio's conditions. In grapevine development, the American juice or wine grapes and the seedless table grapes will bloom first, followed by the French-American hybrids, and finally the viniferas. However, within each group there is a range of cultivars which force bloom earlier or later. When it comes to harvest, the seedless table grapes take the shortest amount of time to develop, next would be the French American hybrids and American juice and wine grapes, and usually the last grapes to be harvested are the viniferas. The key to achieving good annual yield of quality grapes is the balance between vegetative growth and fruit production. This balance is accomplished by applying the proper cultural practices to a given type of grapes, so that the environment has as little detrimental effect on yield and quality as possible. 21 DRY MATTER YIELD I I I CANOPY CANOPY PHOTO- RESPIRATION I SYNTHESIS I l l DARK [ Photorespiration RESPIRATION Leaf IRRADIANCE Photosynthesis INTERCEPTION I I I LEAF Leaf I c1 Leaf cb AMOUNT AREA Angle Distribution OF INDEX IRRADIANCE Figure 3. Flow diagram illustrating the factors affecting total dry matter yield. The size of the boxes indicates relative importance (A • non-laminar light interception and B • leaf light absorption characteristics). This figure is a modification of figure 2.24 in Gardner et al., 1985. 22 WOOSTER 'CONCORD' STUDY Data collected in 1991 and 1992 from a 'Concord' vineyard in Wooster will be used to illustrate how proper cultural practices keep grapevines balanced and yield and quality high as environmental parameters fluctuate. In 1991, mean monthly temperatures were higher than in 1992, and% relative humidity was lower (figure 4). Precipitation was also lower in 1991, and levels of irradiance were higher (figure 5). These environmental data indicate that in 1991 grapevines were under more environmental stress than in 1992. The warmer temperatures Wooster Mean Monthly Temperatures & % Relative Humidities for 1 9 9 1 & 1 9 9 2 t1H -- t1L ---· UH ---· UL --- t1R · · · · · · · ttR 100 100 tO to 10 .. .. 10 :, .. >. ';..;. ...;.:_ :.. : .... :.:. '-: -.-- , / 70 70 :0- Cl ·e .. :::J :::J :::1: Ill •o •o / .. Cl - / Cl ~ / > 10 / 10 :;:: E / / Ill Cl / 1- / ~ / 40 / 40 a: / / / #. 10 / 10 / tO to 10 10 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Figure 4. Mean monthly temperatures and% relative humidity for 1991 and 1992 in Wooster, Ohio (H = high temperature; L = low temperature and R = relative humidity). 23 Wooster Average Daily Means for Precipitation & Light for 1 9 9 1 & 1 9 9 2 t1PR · · · · · · · t1LT ---· tlPR --- tiLT 0.10 170 0.11 110 0.21 410 ->. -.5 - 0.11 uo c -c 0 0 ::::: ::::: II 0.11 no :e;• Cll ·aQ.- a: C) 0.11 270 ~ ~ Cll ~ 0 UJ 0.01 110 0.04 110 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Figure 5. Average daily means for precipitation and solar radiation for 1991 and 1992 in Wooster, Ohio (PR = precipitation and LT = solar radiation). caused the vines to bloom earlier in 1991 (5/29 versus 6/7), and the fruit to ripen over a shorter period of time (92 days versus 120 days). The grapevines in this 'Concord' study were trained to a Geneva Double Curtain system and were dormant pruned using a 30 + 10 method (60 buds maximum). In both 1991 and 1992 the vineyard was fertilized with 82 lbs/acre of nitrogen. The main treatment imposed on some of the vines in this vineyard was shoot positioning and no shoot positioning. Shoot positioning occurred at 2 different times, mid-June and mid-August. 24 The main difference between the treatments was that the shoot positioned vines had an increased number of clusters/vine which caused yield/vine to be higher {Table 1). Table 1. Wooster 'Concord' Study - 1991 and 1992 Harvest Measurements. Cluster l bs/ Cluster Ber/ 100 % Prun Treatment Year # vine wt. cluster BWT ss wt. Shoot Positioning 1991 185 33.3 0.18 23 348 16.4 4.2 1992 271 66.6 0.25 36 320 13.5 3.8 No Positioning 1991 114 18.2 0.16 21 347 16.4 5.3 1992 191 44.2 0.25 35 320 13.6 5.5 Pruning weights were higher for the non-shoot positioned vines, indicating that fruit production did significantly slow down vegetative growth. The drier and hotter environment of 1991 significantly reduced the number of clusters, cluster weight, berries/cluster and total yield. The treatment difference in yield was almost double for the shoot positioned vines in 1991 and a third larger in 1992. This increase was 4.2 tons/acre in 1991 and 6.1 tons/acre in 1992. Berry size was larger and% SS were higher in 1991. The increased berry size in 1991 was due to the reduced number of berries/cluster. The increase in% SS is typical of what occurs during dry years. The reduced amount of moisture available concentrates the sugars in the fruit. Shoot positioning and balanced pruning in 'Concord' help to keep vegetative growth and fruit production in balance even when environmental conditions are quite variable from year to year. Other types of grapes growing in Ohio can also benefit from certain vine manipulation cultural practices which keep the vine in balance from year to year, regardless of the environmental conditions. Shoot and cluster thinning is very beneficial for French-American hybrid grapes and some vinifera grapes, and shoot positioning is necessary for most vinifera grapes grown in Ohio. LITERATURE CITED 1. Cahoon, G.A. 1974. Physiology of grape production. Ohio Grape-Wine Short Course. The Ohio State Univ/OARDC Hart. Dept. Ser. 425:68-74. 2. Gardner, F.P., R.B. Pearce and R.L. Mitchell. 1985. Physiology of crop plants. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames, Iowa p. 327. 3. Winkler, A.J. 1962. General Viticulture. Univ. of California Press, Berkeley, CA. p. 633. 25 NITROGEN DYNAMICS IN THE GRAPEVINE--A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH G. Stanley Howell and Eric Hanson Department of Horticulture Michigan State University E. Lansing, Michigan INTRODUCTION Why are we today interested in nitrogen nutrition of grapevines? Why did the American Society for Enology and Viticulture sponsor an international symposium on the topic in 1991? We have known since earliest agricultural development that animal manures had strong positive impact on plant growth and productivity. Equally, as our understanding has grown, we have learned that N may be fed to grapevines in a number of ways, including inorganic forms, with strong subsequent impact on vine performance. Further, part of this question is economics. When one calculates the cost of N applied as percentage of the variable and fixed costs of annual production, one learns that it is not a large component per acre (about $20 or 0.014%). Given this status, I would offer several reasons why this discussion and the subsequent discussion on "Adaptive Nitrogen Management in the Vineyard" should be of interest to us all: 1) while N costs are relatively small, the cost of energy is only going to rise and that will drive N cost up; 2) there is a growing sense of concern about the role that those of us in agricultural enterprises play in the measured increases in NO in ground water. The current situation in Germany, France and Switzerland (2,3) is a portent of our future in Great Lakes viticulture, and we may well find restrictions on N-fertilization that mirror our current experience with pest control chemicals; and, finally, 3) early research indications show that fine-tuning our vine nutrition at key times during vine growth can have a positive influence on development of leaf and cluster diseases; indeed, similar suggestions are being put forward about insect attack and population development. Information of this kind will be of great value as we slowly (or quickly) evolve into a greatly reduced usage of pesticides in Great Lakes viticulture. These three (and perhaps others) offer immediate or future benefits to us and encourage a greater study of the soil:vine nitrogen relationship, and how we might most effectively use the knowledge gained to produce the crop at reduced cost and improved quality with no loss of tonnage, while placing ourselves on the positive side of environmental concerns. It is obvious to those of us involved in grape production that the soil-vine interface is continuous. For simplicity's sake, however, I will separate them for this discussion. Seasonal Changes in Vine Nitrogen In recent studies headed by Dr. Eric Hanson, we have excavated a group of mature, bearing Concord grapevines and determined the amount of N in the total vine and in the various vine parts (Table 1). Subexcavations were done on five different dates over the year. These data present a view of dynamic change. 26 Over the period from just prior to bud burst in the spring until harvest in late September, there was over a three-fold increase in total vine nitrogen. The data show that the harvested fruit removed 15% of that total, while the remainder was largely in the leaves and shoots (58.6%). The data a 1so show the va 1ue of the post-harvest period to tot a 1 vine nitrogen. At harvest, both roots and the above-ground permanent vine structure are 20% or more below the levels at onset of growth in the previous spring. This will need to be replenished before leaves fall. Another set of data that support this view is based on the work of Wermelinger (3) in Switzerland. Figure 2 shows the model developed by this research group, and the concepts developed there are equally relevant to us in the Great Lakes region. Dr. Wermelinger breaks the annual growing season into times of important changes within the vine. At bud burst (figure 1), the major N involved is from within vine reserves. These reserves are mobilized primarily from roots, trunks and canes. These are as organic molecules, primarily amino acids and some peptides which move to the meristems via phloem for production of new shoots and leaves. A lesser amount is mobilized and moves to the developing cluster primordia. Uptake of soil N is very limited at that time and applied soil N is playing a minimal role. By bloom (figure 2), the situation has changed dramatically. While mobilization of N reserves continues to be very important, the uptake of soil N is either as N03- or NH4+. While some amount of this N is converted to organic forms, the major path is to the leaves where the N0 - is converted to NH (amine groups) and attached to carbohydrates yielding amino3 acids. A small portion2 of the N03- is also transported to the cluster. At veraison (figure 3}, theN dynamics have much similarity with the status of bloom. Major N uptake in inorganic forms continues, but there is a strong increase in conversion by leaves into organic forms. It should also be noted that N reserves are now playing a lesser role, but the shoot and leaf transport to the fruit becomes very strong. After harvest (figure 4}, the picture has two key elements. First, the uptake of inorganic N continues at strong levels as long as leaves are active, healthy and capable of producing not only the carbohydrate skeletons, but also the reducing power and energy required to reduce the N03- and, via reductive animation, produce amino acids for storage in roots, trunks, cordons and canes. These models present some interesting points to ponder: 1) When should we apply nitrogen fertilizer? 2) How much nitrogen do we need to replace? Where did it go? We can answer these with some confidence, but some caveats must be offered. First, most of these data are in mild climates where winter damage is of much less concern. Second, there is also a major input from arid viticulture where 27 control of irrigation water is another management tool available to influence vine growth, maturation and cold hardiness. When should we apply nitrogen? The data from Zurich (3) (39" of annual rainfall) and South Africa (1) (arid viticulture) both suggest that uptake of N by grapevine roots is minimal until sometime between bud burst and bloom. The Swiss suggest that available NO- prior to development of the 5th leaf may be lost due to leaching. This would suggest that spring application should be done with this in mind, especially on sandy soils which are well- to excessively well drained. We have such soils in Michigan, but presently do not consider this factor in our application. That needs further, critical evaluation. Of special interest are the data that show a continuing uptake of N after harvest (figure 4). Nitrogen application near or post-harvest has always invoked fears of delayed vine maturity and reduced hardiness. Still, in most perennial plants (and these data support the view) most N used in onset of growth comes from reserves, and more than 40% of that comes from root reserves ( 5). The importance of vine N reserves cannot be overstated. Winkler et al. (6) say that 70% of fruit N is from previous season's reserves. The implications of that go beyond the scope of this discussion, but suffice it to say that a re-evaluation of the efficacy of fall N applications may be prudent. Equally prudent are care to practices which maintain active leaf area and a careful balance in cropping to insure adequate root storage area. How much nitrogen needs to be replaced? Where did it go? Conradie (1) suggests that a careful balance must be maintained between vegetative and reproductive growth, and this ba 1ance is cruc i a 1 to the rna i ntenance of a consistent N nutrition pattern. For healthy Thompson Seedless vines in South Africa, this means that the cluster dry weight should be at least 50% of the dry matter and 40% of the N in the aerial growth. Under South African conditions, 3.7 kg (8.15 lbs) of N are required to produce one ton (1000 kg) of fresh grapes. This may be subdivided into 1.6 kg (3.51 lbs) for clusters and 2.1 kg (4.62 lbs) for vegetative growth. The relationship appears true for potted and field vines and across cultivars. These data, when applied to Michigan Vidal blanc grapevines may look as in Table 2. The data seem to be in general agreement with Williams (4), who reported about 40 lbs of N per acre was depleted for heavily cropped Thompson Seedless vines. Since efficiency of uptake has been reported as low as 10%, the task becomes serious. It also becomes clear that we have unique situations of soil, rainfall patterns, cultural practices, etc., that may have an impact on this. Our ability to apply this information awaits critical field fertilizer experiments employing the latest in application timing and technology. We should begin now. 28 LITERATURE CITED 1. Conradie, W.J. 1991. Translocation and storage by grapevines as affected by time of application. Proc. Intl. Symp. Nitrogen in Grapes and Wine. Amer. Soc. Enol. Viticult. p. 32-42. 2. Schaller, K. 1991. Ground water pollution by nitrate in viticultural areas. Proc. Intl. Symp. Nitrogen in Grapes and Wine. Amer. Soc. Enol. Viticult., p. 12-22. 3. Wermelinger, B. 1991. Nitrogen dynamics in grapevines: Physiology and modeling. Proc. Intl. Symp. Nitrogen in Grapes and Wine. Amer. Soc. enol. Viticult. p. 23-31. 4. Williams, L.E. 1987. Growth of Thompson Seedless grapevines: II. Nitrogen distribution. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 112:330-333. 5. Williams, L.E. 1991. Vine nitrogen requirements: Utilization of N sources from soils, fertilizers, and reserves. Proc. Intl. Symp. Nitrogen in Grapes and Wine. Amer. Soc. Enol. Viticult., p. 62-66. 6. Winkler, A.J., J.A. Coole, W.M. Kliewer and L.A. Leder. 1974. General viticulture. Univ. Cal. Press, Berkeley, CA. 710 p. 29 TABLE 1. Seasonal Changes in Vine Nitrogen 0/o Total Vine Nitrogen Total Trunk, Shoots N/ Roots Cordon and Cluster Vine and Canes Leaves Dormant 55.6 (1 0) 44.4 (8) - 18 May Bloom 32.0 (8) 24.0 (6) 44.0 (11) 25 June - Pea Size 10.0 (5) 10.0 (5) 74.0 (37) 6.0 (3) 50 July Veraison 8.3 ( 5) 8.3 ( 5) 66.7 (40) 16.7 (10) 60 August Harvest 11.4 (8) 8.6 ( 6) 58.6 (41) 21;4 (15) 70 September (After Hanson and Howell, 1993) 30 Table 2. Nitrogen depleted from Vidal blanc vines. Nitrogen Depleted Vine size ( l bs) Yield (tons/acre) (lbs/acre) 2.0 4.0 14 3.0 6.0 20 4.0 8.0 30 31 Inorganic Organic N N tn ~ I ... """"' ..C1) ___I _.. tn I :::s I j~ -0 ~ ..1 ' I r I tn I I "' C1) > ___I _.. ca I C1) ~ J • ..J ' I ..1 r I ~ tn I I """"' """"' ..0 0 --t~ .c: I en ~ ~ a ..1 ' I I tn ~ I C1) I I "' ~ c: c --l.~ C1) :::s -- tn ... I C1) 1- ~ I ~ . ..1 a: ' /////////////// ///////~ I z ij////////// I ""'e .I ~~ I tn I .. ---~ - 0 I - 0 a: I I ~ I ..1 ..1 I I I ' ·--0 en Exudates' . Budbreak Reproduced from Wermelinger (1991) 32 Inorganic Organic N N ...U) / I "\ ...Cl) ___I ...._ U) I ::::s l I j l - \.. / 0 I /' U) I Cl) ca> 1 .. Cl) I _. l ~ I ~ ~ ..) • /' I "\ /' "\ U) I ...0 0 1 ... J: I l ~ ~ en \.. . ~ I U) /' Cl) I ~ ' ~ 1- c --l.~ Cl) ::::s - U) ... I - Cl) 1- • l \.. I • ~ a: //////// / ///////'i ////////////// I z 0:% U) """ ... I -- 0 1 .. -.. 0 I a: j I \. ~ ! ~ \. ~ I I I ·-- en0 Exudates' . Blooming Reproduced from Wermelinger (1991) 33 Inorganic Organic N N U) / I ~ ""' Q) I ... ---~ U) I :::::s j~ I j l - ~ 0 I '/ U) I ""' Q) as> 1 .. Q) I J l ~ ..J I ~ ' •• / I ""' / U) "' I ...0 0 --i~ r- .c -.. J l I J (/) ~ ~ I U) '/ Q) I ""' ~ ~ Q) c --l.~ r- :::::s -.. U) ~ I Q) 1- ~ ~ I ~ ~ a: ' //////////// /////''l ~///////// //// I ,, ... z ~:% U) I 1- ... ::::;;- r-" 0 , .. 0 -- a: I I jl ! ~ • ) ' ' l I - I ·-0 Exudates' (/) . Veraison Reproduced from Wermelinger (1991) 34 Inorganic Organic N N I / "'\ tn I C1) ca> 1 .. C1) I j~ ..J '- I ~ / I , r ""' / tn ""' I ...0 0 --t~ - .c I - en '- l _) I tn / C1) I , ~ ' ,_ ~ c: c C1) ::s --1~ .. tn a.. I C1) 1- ...... _ .~ I _/ a: ///////////// /////I// '/#////'77h777 / / I z W-; 1 r "' ~ tn I 1.. ...0 1 .. I• 0 I a: I I \.. ~ l __) '- ~ I I I I ·--0 en Exudates' . After Harvest Reproduced from Wermelinger (1991) 35 THE DEVELOPMENT AND RIPENING OF THE GRAPE BERRY Diane D. Miller Department of Horticulture OARDC/OSU Wooster, OH 44691 "Quality" grapes are our goal. The definition of quality is influenced by the intended use for the grapes. Unlike many other fruits, grapes don't improve, mellow, or ripen after harvest. So grapes must be picked at the desired mature stage for the intended use, whether fresh consumption, processing into juice or jelly, or fermenting into wine. To produce quality grapes, it is important to have a good understanding of how grapes develop and ripen. To diagnose and correct problems a grower must understand normal development of the grape vine and berries. The key to understanding a plant, and to solving production problems, is studying its normal development. In grape production, the goal is balance among three competing processes: vegetative growth in the current year, fruit development of the current crop, and flower initiation and development for next year's crop. All three cycles are occurring concurrently, and any action which interrupts the desired balance among cycles will result in production problems. For example, when there are problems with crop loss (due to frost, winter injury, etc), vines can become overly vigorous, and when there are problems with too heavy of a crop (due to too heavy of fruit set), vines can produce very little new growth. Most varieties don't achieve this desired balance without careful cultural care provided by a skilled grower using a range of cultural practices! The production of grape berries is a two season sequence; in year one flowers are initated and undergo some development, and in year two flowers bloom and fruit is produced and harvested. Developmentally, in year one, buds are present containing only vegetative parts in leaf axils. Grapes are somewhat unusual among fruit crops in that one dormant bud in a leaf axil will actually contain several pre-initiated buds within it on a compressed stem which will telescope out when growth is commenced. These buds within a bud scale are "dormant" but can be hormonally influenced. Under hormona 1 influence flora 1 parts are initiated on some of these buds within a bud. The number of pre-initiated buds present, and the number of those which will actually become floral are greatly influenced by cultivar (i.e. genetically determined) but can also be influenced culturally. Flower parts can first be seen in dissected buds (using a microscope) in late summer; in late summer/ early autumn rudimentary flower clusters can be seen using a microscope. Visually, dormant buds containing flower parts are large buds as vines drop their leaves in the autumn. Little or no development of initiated flower clusters occurs during the winter. Entering winter, next year's fruit crop is present as a compound bud containing a compressed shoot with one or more initiated flower clusters. Damage to these compound buds from cold winter temperatures can eliminate next year's fruit crop before the flowers are ever seen. Also, spring frost 36 damage to the elongating shoot can kill flower clusters before they expand enough to be visible. In spring of season two, flower clusters emerge with leaves as shoot growth starts and the development of flower parts continues. The calyx, corolla, stamen, and pistil differentiate after the compound bud growth commences. Male flower parts (filaments, anthers) and female flower parts (ovules, style, stigma) develop. As warm temperature continues in the spring, pollen and egg cells develop and anthesis (full bloom) occurs, normally 7-8 weeks after the first spring growth is seen. Plant development and time of bloom is very temperature dependent and can be predicted based on a heat unit accumulation chart with a base temperature of 50°F. Up until bloom the flower initiation and development sequence is "behind the scenes", but critical. From bloom on to harvest we are much more aware of the development stages because these obviously directly lead to the fruit and to harvest. These stages after bloom are: pollination, fertilization, fruit set, green stage (fruit drop/ shatter), color change (veraison), accumulation, ripe (harvest), and overripe. Pollination is the transfer of pollen from anthers to stigma. Large acreages of a single grape cultivar (e.g. Concord) are possible because grapes are principally self-pollinated, in other words pollen from a Concord flower cause fruit set in a Concord flower. This is in contrast to apples, where pollen from another cultivar is necessary for fruit set, and it is required to plant blocks containing several cultivars to ensure overlap in bloom times and compatibilities. Please note that grapes can be cross-pollinated (and are deliberately crossed in breeding new varieties), but this is not the normal scenario. Grape pollen is primarily moved by wind (but insects can also move pollen). Once pollen is present on the stigma it must be stimulated to germinate and grow through the style and fuse with the embryo sac to produce the parts of the seed (embryo, endosperm, seed coat). Rain can wash pollen off the stigma, dry winds can dry pollen out as it germinates. In general, higher temperatures increase rate and growth of the pollen tube. Factors that can result in poor set of berries in a cluster include wet weather during bloom and cold temperatures during pollination. Fruit set is due to the hormonal stimulus of seed formation. Unless this stimulus is present the unfertilized flower will drop off. Grapes, however, yields exhibit more variation, among cultivars, on seed formation than most fruit crops. Some cultivars exhibit parthenocary (functional pollen, defective embryo sac) which results in the stimulus of seed formation but fruit with no seeds. Other cultivars exhibit embryo abortion (following a few cell divisions) which results in the stimulus of seed formation, but also yields fruit with no seeds. Some cultivars exhibit empty seededness (seed coat, embryo abortion) which results in fruit but no seeds. Most cultivars exhibit normal set (filled seed; hard or soft seed coat) which results in fruit with seeds. Fruit drop (shatter) occurs in grape clusters when non-seeded berries drop from the cluster as the result of carbohydrate competition with their seeded 37 neighbors. In the normal situation grape berries need seeds to adhere to the cluster. The green stage of fruit development occurs from fruit set to veraison and is characterized by a rapid increase in berry size, low levels of sugar, and high amounts of acids. During the green stage fruits are described as hard and pea sized. The col or change (vera i son) occurs at the time the seeds are maturing. Veraison signals the inception of ripening. Other changes associated with veraison include berry softening, sugar increase, decline in acidity, and increase in berry volume. Veraison date varies year to year, among vines in a vineyard, and among berries in a cluster. Veraison is perhaps triggered by the plant hormone abscisic acid, but, as contrasted to many other fruits, is not triggered by ethylene. At veraison xylem embolism occurs implying little nutrient uptake to the berries after that time and major transport of sugar water from the phloem tissues into the berry as it sizes prior to harvest. The accumulation stage of berry development is when it increases rapidly in size prior to harvest. Sugar sources are leaves and storage tissue, and berries become strong sinks for sugars during accumulation. The transport sugar is sucrose in the phloem sap. The sugar is somehow unloaded from the plant into the berry, and is cleaved into glucose and fructose which are the main sugars of the berry. Ripeness is a culinary term and depends upon intended use. The time of harvest is determined by proper quality for intended use and is not absolute. Most decisions to harvest are made depending upon measurable berry characteristics including size (greatly affected by water availability), color (temperature and light dependent), and sugar (as measured by refractometer). Other important characteristics may include taste, aroma, and softening in texture. In contrast to many other fruits, ripening stops when the berry is picked, in other words grape clusters won't improve (or afterripen) in storage. Factors influencing time of ripening include: genetics (cultivar-determined), accumulated heat units (dependent on year and climate), and vineyard management (e.g. moisture, fertility). The physical composition of the berries at harvest is: stems (rachis, peduncle, pedicle) 2-6% weight; seeds (including tannins and oils) 10%; skin (including color, aroma, flavor, tannins) 5-12%; pulp (including cellulose, juice) 75-80%. The berry juice is composed of water 70-85%, carbohydrates 15-25% (composed of glucose 8-13%; fructose 7-12%), organic acids 0.3-1.5% (composed of tartaric acid 0.2-1.0%; malic acid 0.1-0.8%), tannins 0.01-0.10%, nitrogen compounds 0.03-0.17%, and mineral compounds 0.3-0.5%. In the berry, glucose predominates during growth and accumulation. At maturity proportions of glucose and fructose become more equal. In over-mature berries fructose predominates. In the berry, acids increase until veraison. The acid content is variable with environment. Low temperatures stimulate acid formation, high temperatures reduce acid levels (sunlight exposure of clusters reduces total acidity). Cultivars differ in total acid when ripe and also in 38 proportion of tartaric to malic acid. In the berry, pH increases very gradually during ripening. The amount of wax on the berry surface is variable depending upon exposure of the fruit. Berries in the shade develop less wax than those exposed to sunlight. Berries tightly held in a cluster develop little wax between berries, and this provides an easy entrance for fungal pathogens. Major challenges in grape research work include deciphering flavor and quantifying quality. LITERATURE CITED 1. Coombe, B.G. 1987. Distribution of solutes within the developing grape berry in relation to its morphology. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 38(2):120-126. 2. Coombe, B.G. 1992. Research on development and ripening of the grape berry. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 43(1):101-110. 3. DuPlessis, C.S. 1984. Optimum maturity and quality parameters in grapes: a review. S. Afr. J. Enol. Vitic. 5(1):35-42. 4. Lang, A. and H. During. 1990. Grape berry splitting and some mechanical properties of the skin. Vitis 29:61-70. 5. Possner, D.R.E. and W.M. Kliewer. 1985. The localisation of acids, sugars, potassium and calcium in developing grape berries. Vitis 24:229-240. 6. Reynolds, A. G., R.M. Pool, and L.R. Mattick. 1986. Influence of cluster exposure on fruit composition and wine quality of Seyval blanc grapes. Vitis 25:85-95. 7. Rojas-Lara, B.A. and J.C. Morrison. 1989. Differential effects of shading fruit or foliage on the development and composition of grape berries. Vitis 28:199-208. 8. Rosenquist, J.K. and J.C. Morrison. 1989. Some factors affecting cuticle and wax accumulation on grape berries. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 40(4):241-244. 39 \ WINE GROWING IN BRITISH COLUMBIA THE ULTIMATE CHALLENGE TO COLD HARDINESS Andrew G. Reynolds Agriculture Canada Research Station Summerland, British Columbia Back in 1987, I had the privilege to speak at Wineries Unlimited on the subject of manipulating grapevine cold hardiness by cultural practices. That article was published in Issue No. 6 of Vineyard & Winery Management in 1987. The data in that article came from work we did in British Columbia during the 1984-86 period, but the ideas I tried to promulgate are quite timeless. Many of these ideas, I should mention, have come from work done by Stan Howell, who is with us today, and can probably answer some of your cold hardiness questions more completely than I. This seminar will be an updated version of that original talk, with some more recent data from our even more recent cold episodes. The grape and wine industry in the Okanagan Valley of British Columbia comprises about 2000 acres of vineyards and 25 wineries, with a total capacity of 20 million U.S. gallons. The fact that it lies at the northernmost extreme of North American viti culture ( 40 to 50' north 1at itude), in concert with frequent cold winters, indicates that a major objective of growers needs to be maximizing grapevine tolerance to cold. Winter survivability of woody fruit crops grown in temperate regions consists of two components: avoidance and tolerance to cold temperatures. Choice of site and cultivar(s), along with appropriate vineyard management practices, impact on these two components. Avoidance of Cold Injury Site: Choice of a good vineyard site i's the first and most important decision that a grower should make. Within certain constraints, wise site selection can maximize avoidance of cold temperature injury in those cultivars subsequently chosen. Appropriate vineyard management practices enhance the desirable effects of proper site and cultivar selection to consequently optimize tolerance to cold. Many grape growing regions in the Great Lakes district, the Midwest, and the Northwest are dependent upon pro xi mi ty to 1arge bodies of water to moderate winter temperatures. In the Okanagan, we are fortunate to have a series of narrow, deep 1akes that can substantially moderate winter temperatures. Locating a vineyard any appreciable distance from these lakes can predispose the vines to winter injury. Elevation is another important consideration in marginal grape growing areas. The old rule of thumb is that temperature decreases 4°C for every lOOOm of elevation, and 0.6°C for every degree of north latitude. A cursory look at a map of the area will indicate several potentially good sites in the south Okanagan that are low in elevation (<400 m), close to one of our lakes (in this case Osoyoos Lake), and just north of the 49th parallel. Our long term experience has shown that most of our south end sites suffer less winter damage than those in 40 the north Okanagan. We are also fortunate in B.C. to be growing grapes in rugged, mountainous country. The shortcomings are many, of course, and these include the necessity for much more manual labor than in the East and Midwest, where larger, flatter vineyards are possible to establish. Locating a vineyard on sloping land, however, reduces spring frost potential and the pooling of cold air during cold episodes in the winter. We are to encourage new growers to seek out east, south or west aspects, but a few have succeeded with north-facing slopes as well. Cultivar: The best site in B.C. will still be insufficient to allow us to get some varieties through the winter to produce consistent economic yields. Choice of variety is just as important as site. Undoubtedly you have seen situations where reasonably good sites become instant headaches when an extremely cold-tender variety is planted. The varieties you choose must match the site, otherwise the entire exercise of choosing the site and those varieties has been in vain. A glance at some data from the 1989 season illustrates these basic principles of site and variety selection. We experienced a devastating cold episode in late January of 1989, in which temperatures dropped from 10°C to -26°C in about 16 hours. Some of our north Okanagan sites around Ke 1own a and Wi nfi e 1d were completely wiped out by -27°C to -28°C temperatures, whereas the southern sites near Oliver and Osoyoos suffered temperatures no lower than -24°C. Part of this difference was obviously latitude; one full degree of latitude separated many of these sites. Much of the difference was elevation; the southern Okanagan is several hundred meters lower than the northern portion of the valley. In many cases, the northern sites were close to one of our deep lakes, but a dramatic difference was noticed if a lakeside and non-lakeside site were compared for the same variety. Two of our large trials and five relatively tender Vitis vinifera cultivars (Bacchus, Pearl of Csaba, Gewurztraminer, Schonburger, and Siegerrebe) comprised several north and south Okanagan sites. Vines at the Kelowna sites suffered far greater bud damage than those in Oliver (Fig. 1). The tenderest ones, Siegerrebe and Pearl of Csaba, displayed the greatest difference between sites, while Gewurztraminer, the hardiest, showed no difference at all. We also tend to think of Bacchus and Schonburger as tender too, and indeed they suffered more at the northern sites than their southern counterparts. However, these varieties were sloping, lakeshore sites, while Siegerrebe and Pearl of Csaba were not. This shows how a good site can minimize the devastating effects of a cold episode, and can partially compensate for latitude and cultivar effects. This point is driven home even more when two north Okanagan sites are compared for Pearl of Csaba: Sperling's Belcarra Vineyards (lakeshore) and the B.C. Ministry of Agriculture site 1ocated about 6 km away. The B.C. M.A. F. F. site 1 ooked better than the lakeshore site for nodes 1, 4, and 5 only (Fig. 2). This is probably a good point to mention soil type in passing. I don't like to spend a lot of time talking about vineyard soils and how they effect cold hardiness, because I think they are secondary mediators of cold hardiness at best. A properly managed soil can produce a certain level of vigor in a vine. The vigor can go up or down depending on which rootstock, and the magnitude of 41 change is soil and variety dependent. The grower's intervention, irrigation, fertilization, and cover crops, to name a few, can further change the vigor to suit the situation. So, soil is both a medium and a mediator; it is a medium in which we grow our vines, and a material which mediates growth via rootstock, cultivar, and management decisions. Tolerat;ng w;nter Cold The various vineyard management practices that impact on vine hardiness include foliage health (as affected by canopy management, vine size, and vine nutrition); crop level; and specific techniques such as double trunking, double pruning, and retention of crown suckers for frequent trunk renewal. Foliage health is dependent upon several canopy management practices, as well as vineyard nutrition, irrigation and pest management. Influence of the latter three has been well addressed by several authors (Brusky-Odneal, 1984; Dethier and Shaulis, 1964; Patterson, 1984; Shaulis, 1971; Shaulis et al., 1968), and their discussion herein would be beyond the scope of this article. Why then, are canopy management and crop control such important determinants of cold tolerance? The explanation lies in the physiology of carbohydrate partitioning within the grapevine. During acclimation, a complex sequence of events acts upon a non-acclimated vine to lead eventually to changes in fatty acid composition and accumulation of carbohydrates, commensurate with environmental conditions and quality of vineyard management (Wolf, 1986). Carbohydrate partitioning in plants consists of a "source-sink" relationship; the source being photosynthetically productive leaves, and the sinks shoot tips, lateral shoots, second crop, senescent, shaded, and nutrient-deficient leaves, clusters, roots, trunks, cordons and canes. Adequate carbohydrate accumulation in the latter four organs is essential to ensure acceptable winter hardiness. Elimination and/or minimization of all other sinks (clusters excepted) partly guarantees this required partitioning, while limiting crop level by appropriate pruning strategies and cluster thinning further optimizes the accumulation of carbohydrates within the vine organs of greatest benefit to the grower. The expression "vine management for vine maturity is always good viticulture" (stated by Shaulis, 1971) is an astute statement that distills the physiology of vine hardiness down to the most fundamental of concepts. Vine size and its accommodation by appropriate canopy management, impacts greatly on cold tolerance. Reports by Shaulis (1971) showed a strong relationship between Concord vine size and winter injury. Own-rooted, non cluster-thinned vines (range: 0.7-1.9 kg cane prunings) had 10-17% primary bud damage, whereas grafted, cluster-thinned vines (range: 1.9-3.4 kg cane prunings) had 17-42% bud damage. Bud damage increased linearly with vine size in 3 of 4 of the treatments studied. Accommodation of the large vine size by canopy division would likely have reduced this bud damage considerably. Superior fruit composition associated with the small vines was also associated with a low degree of bud damage. These results drive home the point that manipulating and accommodating vine size is the key to minimizing winter injury in grapevines. 42 Canopy Management Shoot Positioning: Large vine size (more than 0.4 lb/ft row) needs to be accommodated by divided canopy training systems such as Geneva Double Curtain (GDC), if consistent yields commensurate with vine vigor are to be maintained (Shaulis et al., 1966). Large vine size resulting from excessive fertilization and irrigation is typical of many B.C. vineyards. For hybrids, the double curtain ("T-bar") trellising is rarely accompanied by necessary shoot positioning, despite strong local evidence for improved vine performance and winegrape quality (Reynolds and Wardle, 1989a,b; Reynolds, et al., 1992). Non shoot-positioned vines are characterized by a poor light microclimate, identifiable by a high percentage of shaded and senescent leaves, shaded fruit, and shaded shoots destined to be next year's canes or spurs. Improvement in leaf light microclimate by shoot positioning can be seen in terms of a nearly 50% increase in 1ea f exposure along with concomitant increases in cane periderm formation (cane maturation) and bud hardiness (Howell and Shaulis, 1980; Howell and Wolpert, 1978). Shoot positioning can interact with row direction to produce interesting results in regard to vine cold tolerance relative to summer hedging. GDC trained, shoot-positioned DeChaunac vines in east:west oriented rows displayed linear decreased shoot production and percent budbreak relative to severity and timing of summer hedging in cordons on the north side of the vine where light interception was limited (Reynolds and Wardle, 1989a). This response was essentially lacking on the south side of the vines where canopy microclimate was superior. Training System: Choice of a training system which is appropriate for a specific cultivar, site and vine size is a major step in ensuring an optimum light microclimate for a vine, which will ultimately maximize its tolerance to cold. Reynolds et al. (1985) found cane periderm formation in New York grown Umbrella Kniffin-(UK) and Hudson River Umbrella (HRU)-trained Seyval blanc vines was superior to that observed in five other undivided canopy training systems. Fisheye photographs taken under the vines showed that UK and HRU training maintained the most open canopies into which light was most easily admitted. Use of systems characterized by renewal zones at the top of the canopy needs to be considered carefully, however, in areas where cold temperature injury is common. Manually-pruned Okanagan Riesling vines trained to HRU or Lenz Moser (LM) systems suffered severe trunk and cordon damage during the severe 1984-85 winter (Reynolds, 1988a). Periderm formation was also inferior to vines trained to a midwire (-0.4 m high) bilateral cordon. Since mechanically-pruned counterparts suffered no less trunk and cordon damage than their balance-pruned counterparts, the large volume of perennial wood associated with the "high cordon" systems appears in this case to be the factor limiting accumulation of vine cold hardiness. The HRU and LM vines were not damaged in the 1989 winters, so in retrospect I feel that the trunk and cordon damage we saw in 1986 was a phenomenon associated with newly-established (1984) cordons. Young cordons are strong sinks that can render a vine more susceptible to cold injury. Vitis vinifera cultivars are notorious for their lack of cold hardiness. Training Riesling to a 0.6 m-high bilateral cordon rather than the cane-pruned 43 Pendelbogen has improved percent budbreak and increased yield {Reynolds, 1988b). This can be explained by the fact that hardiness first accumulates in the basal portion of the canes and subsequently works its way up {Howell and Wolpert, 1978). During cold winters, such as the one experienced in B.C. in 1985-86, cordon-trained vines pruned to two-node spurs produced full crops. In other vineyards within which experiments were located, LC-trained, spur-pruned vines were often the only ones that maintained their productivity following this disastrous freeze. Although periderm formation has tended to be somewhat reduced by LC training due to dense canopies, this has had little impact on vine performance. Revisiting this concept more recently with tender varieties shows how dramatic an impact spur pruning may have on budbreak following cold episodes. Fig. 3 (Bacchus) and Fig. 4 {Siegerrebe) are based on 10-cane samples from two north Okanagan sites. As bud position from the base of the cane increases, so does the degree of bud damage. This is more apprec i ab 1y observed in the Siegerrebe, which was located in a marginal site in east Kelowna, many km from Lake Okanagan. It is this phenomenon that causes us to recommend spur pruning, especially following cold winters. It has meant the difference between a full crop and no crop at some sites. We have since been looking at more elaborate trellises to substantially increase yields without compromising wine quality. This has involved training Riesling vines to double cross arm trellises that contain four bilateral cordons and have canopies divided both horizontally and vertically. The result is yields in the 25-30 t/ha range, but not without some winter injury. Following the 1989 winter, the double crossarm and Lenz Moser vines displayed greatest trunk damage, along with substantial bud damage {Fig. 5,6). However, the large reservoir for base shoots in the double crossarm and ''V" trellis vines allowed for crops greater than those expected from conventional vineyards following mild winters {-12-15 t/ha). Both the undivided low cordon and the divided {"V" trellis) vines had least winter injury and highest budbreak {Fig. 5,6), again emphasizing the importance of using spur pruning, especially after cold winters. Shoot Density: Shoot density is determined primarily by nodes/m row retained during pruning. New York studies {Reynolds et al., 1986) indicated that canopy shade, which increases linearly with increasing shoot density, leads to reductions in cane maturation. Those data were based on shoot densities of 7-19 shoots/m row applied to Seyval blanc vines. Work in B.C. with DeChaunac (Reynolds, 1989b) confirmed this observation when shoot densities between 15 and 21 shoots/m row were compared. Crop Level Being strong sinks, it is not unsurprising that retention of an excess number of fruit clusters/unit leaf area can lead to substantial winter injury, poor cane maturation, or even vine loss. In New York, Reynolds et al. (1986) found increased cane periderm formation as crop 1eve 1s decreased from 55 to 22 clusters/kg cane prunings. Responses of DeChaunac to crop control in B.C. were similar (Reynolds, 1989b). Overcropping effects on cold tolerance of B.C. vineyards is exacerbated by poor canopy management and the occasional onset of severe, subzero temperatures as early as mid-October. This lack of postharvest 44 vine photosynthesis only aggravates the situation caused by poor vineyard management. Shoot production in Riesling vines has responded favorably to crop level manipulation following the severe 1985 winter (Reynolds, 1989a). More recently, we observed less trunk and cordon damage in vines thinned to one cluster/shoot compared to partially-thinned (-1.5 clusters/shoot) or fully cluster-thinned (1 cluster/shoot) vines. An improvement in cane maturation in response to cluster thinning was also noticed (Reynolds, et al., 1993). Spare Parts and Special Practices No discussion of winter injury abatement in grapevine would be complete without brief mention of such specialized viticultural practices as double (or multiple) trunking, double pruning, and retaining crown suckers. They are not so much based on vine physiology as they are on common sense. At the same time, one should realize that they should be thought of as insurance practices to augment, and not replace, good canopy management, crop control, vine nutrition, and pest management. Use and frequent renewal of multiple trunks provides a vineyardist with the necessary insurance for maintaining consistent yields despite severe winters. Contrary to popular opinion, this is not simply an eastern practice; those of us out west with a bit of prudence (and a bit more eastern experience) tend to be "double trunk advocates". Success of trunk renewal depends on retaining suckers originating at or near soil level. Most Vitis vinifera cultivars are not prolific suckerers, thus it is prudent viticulture to retain at least one moderately vigorous sucker every year. Experience has taught us also that trunk renewal from sites significantly above soil level on existing trunks is unwise insofar as that renewal site will be cold temperature susceptible, and subject to Eutypa infection as well once the old trunk is removed. A Few Last Thoughts To conclude, it seems appropriate to recall: 1) the astute maxim of Nelson Shaulis (1971): "Vine management for vine maturity is always good viticulture". 2) The famous quote of Mark Twain: "The only thing anybody can do about the weather is talk about it", and 3) my own comment at 1987 Wineries Unlimited (astuteness questionable: definitely not famous): "Be good to your vines, and the winter will be good to you". Summation of quotations 1, 2, and 3 =a contented grape grower. There is always anxiety and despair in the viticultural community subsequent to a harsh winter, but this despair increases severalfold if one has serious doubts as to the quality of their vineyard management previous to that winter. If kindness is applied to the vineyard during the growing season, the grower can at least say in the spring following a harsh winter--"1 did my best; no regrets" • 45 LITERATURE CITED 1. Brusky-Odneal, M. 1984. Cold hardiness of grapes. A guide for Missouri growers. S.W. Missouri State Bul. 41:1-17. 2. Dethier, B.E. and N.J. Shaulis. 1964. Minimizing the hazard of cold in New York vineyards. N.Y.S. Col. Agric. Life Sci. Ext. Bul. 1127:1-8. 3. Howell, G.S. and J.A. Wolpert. 1978. Nodes per cane, primary bud phenology, and spring freeze damage to Concord grapevines. A preliminary note. Amer. J. Enol. Vitic. 19:229-32. 4. Howell, G.S. and N.J. Shaulis. 1980. Factors influencing within-vine variation in the cold resistance of cane and primary bud tissues. Amer. J. Enol. Viti c. 31:158-61. 5. Patterson, K. 1985. Cultural practices in relation to winter injury. Proc. Ark. State Hort. Soc. 106:144-8. 6. Reynolds, A.G. 1988a. Response of Okanagan Riesling vines to training system and simulated mechanical pruning. Amer. J. Enol. Vitic. 39:205-12. 7. Reynolds, A.G. 1988b. Response of Riesling vines to training systems and pruning strategy. Vitis 27:229-42. 8. Reynolds, A.G. 1989a. 'Riesling' vines respond to cluster thinning and shoot density manipulation. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 114:264-8. 9. Reynolds, A.G. 1989b. Impact of pruning strategy, cluster thinning, and shoot removal on growth, yield, and fruit composition of low-vigor DeChaunac vines. Can. J. Plant Sci. 69:269-75. 10. Reynolds, A.G. and D.A. Wardle. 1989a. Effects of timing and severity of summer hedging on growth, yield, fruit composition and canopy characteristics of DeChaunac. I. Canopy characteristics and growth parameters. Amer. J. Enol. Vitic. 40:109-20. 11. Reynolds, A.G. and D.A. Wardle. 1989b. Effects of timing and severity of summer hedging on growth, yield, fruit composition, and canopy characteristics of DeChaunac. II. Yield and fruit composition. Amer. J. Enol. Vitic. 40:299-308. 12. Reynolds, A.G., C.G. Edwards, D.A. Wardle, D.R. Webster, and M. Dever. 1993. Shoot density effects on Riesling vine performance, wine composition, and sensory response. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 118:MS submitted. 13. Reynolds, A.G., R.M. Pool and L.R. Mattick. 1985. Effect of training system on growth, yield, fruit composition, and wine quality of Seyval blanc. Amer. J. Enol. Vitic. 36:156-64. 46 14. Reynolds, A.G., R.M. Pool and L.R. Mattick. 1986. Effect of shoot density and crop control on growth, yield, fruit composition, and wine quality of 'Seyval blanc' grapes. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 111:55-63. 15. Shaulis, N.J. 1971. Vine hardiness as a part of the problem of hardiness to cold in NY vineyards. Proc. NYS Hort. Soc. 116:158-67. 16. Shaulis, N.J., H. Amberg, and D. Crowe. 1966. Response of Concord grapes to light, exposure, and Geneva Double Curtain training. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. 89:268-80. 17. Shaulis, N.J., J. Einset, and A.B. Pack. 1968. Growing cold-tender grape varieties in New York. NYS Agric. Expt. Sta. Bul. 821:1-16. 18. Wolf, T.K. 1986. Cold hardiness and cold injury of grapevines. Virginia Cooperative Ext. Serv. Viticulture Notes 1(5):2-5. 47 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Percentage of live primary buds in five Vitis vinifera cultivars following a cold episode, February 1989, Okanagan Valley, British Columbia. Legend: KEL=Kelowna sites (north Okanagan); OL=Ol i ver sites (south Okanagan). Cult i var 1egend: CSABA=Pearl of Csaba; GEWURZ=Gewurztraminer; SCHON=Schonburger; SIEG=Siegerrebe. Means within cultivars surmounted by different letters are significantly different, p<0.05, Duncan's multiple range test. Figure 2. Percentage of live primary buds, Pearl of Csaba, at two north Okanagan Valley (B.C.) sites, following a cold episode , February 1989. Numbers a1 ong the x- axis refer to the node position from the base of the cane. Site legend: B=B.C.M.A.F.F. (non-lakeshore site): S=Sperling Vineyards (lakeshore site). Figure 3. Percentage of live primary buds in Siegerrebe vines relative to node position (1-9) from the base of the cane. Data were collected from B.C.M.A.F.F. test plots (north Okanagan; non lakeshore site), Kelowna, B.C., following a cold episode in February 1989. Figure 5. Relative trunk and cordon injury of Riesling vines in response to five training systems, Summerland B.C., 1989. Legend: ADC = alternate double crossarm; LC = low cordon; LM ~ Lenz Moser high cordon; LV= low uvu; PB = pendelbogen. Means surmounted by different letters are significantly different, p<0.05, Duncan's multiple range test. Figure 6. Percentage of count nodes with shoots in Riesling vines in response to five training systems, 1989. Legend is as per fig. 5. Means surmounted by different letters are significantly different, p<0.05, Duncan's multiple range test. 48 ....J 0 (.9 w ....J - w c.n ~ (j) ....J z co E 0 (j) 0 .,...- I ....J ... c w u w. ~ c.n r-- - N (/) ....J 0 0::: ::> ....J ~ to w w ~ G (/)- 0 ....J N <( ::::> 0 CD co <( ....J w c.n w ~ u > -_J c.n ....J 0 ::> 0 I cf< u ....J ..0 w u ~ <( CD 0 0 0 0,...... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\ (X) \0 Lrt ..q ("() N ~ r-i (%) sona ACPt~ICJd 3/\ll 49 0') (D (j) (/) co C() (j) (D ~ - (/) ~ (D " cJj (/) (0 () (D LL (/) 0 L(') _J m 0: (/') L]S ~ (D (l_ - (/') (f) f'() 0 m :::> a:l (/') N w (D > -_J (/') ...- (D 0 0 0 0,...... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0\ co \0 Ln "¢ ('Y') N ...... (%) sons A~V'~I~d 3Ail 50 co \0 z 0 H Lt\ 1- H (/) 0 a.. (f)- 0 ::J co w > -_J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\ co ,..... \0 Lt\ "''l:t ("t') N ...... c Cfi ...... (%) sons ACjV~ICjd 3/\ll 51 00 w- ((l w a: z a: 0 w (9 w (f)- (f)- 0 ::::> N ((l w > -_J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ M N ~ ...... (fi (%) sons Acrv~l~d 3Ail 52 ·CJ- z- -z CD -& a... 1-- > fri ..J u ..J - a: w 1-z s- 53 Q) ex:> Q) ~ (!)- z- z CD - a... -& > r- 0 ...... J ~ fo ...... J - ~ (.) L1] ...... J (.) a: 0 co < 0,..... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \0 II'\ ~ ("t') N ...... ::J co (%) >i'v'3CJBOn8 (!) z -_J (f)w -a: 54 PRODUCTION OF YOUNG, APPROACHABLE, YET COMPLEX RED WINES Don Neel Practical Winery and Vineyard Magazine San Rafael, CA In the creation of a red wine for early release and consumption one of the most important questions is: What will make the red wine approachable on release? How do you make sure that the red wine you offer the consumer is ready to enjoy? What are the most important factors? Grapes? Balance? Blending? How much is up to nature, and how much is up to the winemaker? PWV presented several wineries with the above questions and received the following responses: Glen Ellen Vineyards &Winery: Glen Ellen, CA (Bruce Rector) One simple answer is, don't get too much tannin in the wine in the first place. Get the flavors and not the harshness and bitterness. Gentle handling, using a cap management technique that minimizes the shredding of the skins, and pressing early are important methods to achieve this goal. Because the tannins are big and the aromas small, using techniques for selective extraction will make a softer wine. By physical manipulation of the skins, the grape tissue can be used as a molecular sieve to leach out the small aromatic flavors and leave the big tannins behind. To produce a softer wine, winemakers must control the fermentation temperature and get the wine off the skins before the alcohol extracts too many tannins. For light red wines, the technique of using residual sugar to make the wine more approachable on release should not be used as a primary tool, but a subliminal one. If the wine is initially too tannic, as the wine ages the residual sugar will become more apparent as the tannins condense, leaving an unbalanced wine. Meridian Vineyards: Cabernet Sauvignon - Paso Robles, CA (Charles Ortman) In making our Paso Robles Cabernet Sauvignon, the grapes lend themselves to an approachable style. Our goal is to extract the maximum flavor from the grapes, without extracting harsh tannins. We differentiate between amount of tannins, and type of tannins. We use several different techniques to achieve balance. Cabernet Sauvignon is machine-harvested at night from about 9:00 p.m. until 7:00 a.m. Grapes are harvested at 23°Brix, 3.45 pH, crushed and destemmed less than two hours after harvest. By night-harvesting, the fruit is received in fermenters at very cool temperatures, allowing extraction of deep color before alcoholic fermentation. 55 Four pump-overs or punch-downs are done before the yeast is added, 36 hours after crushing. It is very important, during alcoholic fermentation, that the cap reaches a maximum temperature of 80°F. The cap needs to get warm enough to extract flavors along with tannins, but not too hot to volatilize or caramelize the flavors. Fermentation occurs in tanks smaller than 4,000 gal. Diameter and height of the tanks are very important. Our closed fermenters have such a ratio that for every foot in diameter, it goes up 1.5 ft in height. About 20% of Meridian Cabernet is fermented in open-top fermenters, which have a diameter-to-height ratio of one-to-one. The cap is punched down by an air-driven unit that has a round disk on the end. This technique is extremely soft on the skins and minimizes breaking of seeds. The extraction obtained in the open-top fermenters gives our wines concentrated flavors with a silky finish. Total skin contact time in the open-top and closed fermenters is six to seven days. Because of the softer tannin structure in Paso Robles fruit, we choose not to do extended skin contact. After pressing, the wine goes to a tank to complete malolactic fermentation. After completion of malolactic fermentation, the wine is racked (aerated) to another tank, then to barrels. Selection of barrels and the age of barrels are important. The balance of new French and new American oak influences the tannin structure. About 25% new oak is used each year, the remainder is one and two-year-old oak. Cabernet Sauvignon is barrel-aged for about 16 months. No fining is done, only a DE filtration prior to bottling. Taft Street Winery: Merlot- Sebastopol, CA (John Tierney) The 1990 Merlot (22% Cabernet Sauvignon) is a full, rich wine with soft tannins. Merlot grapes come from approximately 10-year-old vines in Dry Creek Valley (Thomas Mauritson Vineyards), and the Cabernet Sauvi~non from the Alexander Valley (same grower). The Merlot was hand-picked at 23 Brix, 3.3 pH, crushed and destemmed. Fermentation in 5, 000 gal jacketed s/s tanks took seven days. The must reached a maximum temperature of 80°F and was lowered to 75°F, to retain the fruit. Pump-overs were done twice daily (30 minutes each with a sprinkler system). The wine was pressed early at 4.5° to 5° Brix, to minimize tannin extraction. The wine went into tanks for approximately one to two months to settle and complete malolactic fermentation. The wine was racked, received a 25 ppm S02 addition (50 ppm total S02). Fieldbrook Valley Winery: Zinfandel - Fieldbrook, CA (Robert Hodgson) Fieldbrook Zinfandel is a 100% varietal wine produced from 40-year-old, non irrigated vines from the Pacini Vineyard in Mendocino County. 56 Grapes are hand-harvested at 23° to 23.5°Brix into lugs, trucked to the winery in an insulated trailer, and crushed with a Zambelli Manta destemmer (without the centrifugal pump). No S0 is added except to dust the top of the fermenter during the yeast growth ptiase.2 Prise de Mousse yeast is added immediately to the crushed fruit. Fermentations are hot and fast, reaching temperatures of 30°C. The must is manually punched down several times/day. While neither whole clusters nor carbonic maceration are employed, the fermenters have lids which maintain a CO blanket during fermentation. Once the yeast population has completed the growt~ phase, the fermentation finishes in about three days. The wine is pressed at 1°Brix and inoculated for malolactic fermentation with freeze-dried MCW. Upon camp 1et ion of rna 1o 1 act i c fermentation, the wine is transferred to oak and topped several times/month. Several sources of oak have been tried, including American oak from Tonnellerie Francaise, 'interstaved' barrels with French oak staves, and American oak from Independent Stave. Before bottling the wine is blended, fined with egg whites and bentonite (to aid filtration), and filtered. The combination of a rapid primary fermentation, complete malolactic fermentation, and barrel aging softens this young wine. The wine is released as young as nine months following the crush when the fruit is still dominant and fresh. Raspberry, spice, and pepper are the most often used words to describe this wine. Robert Mandavi Winery: Woodbridge, CA (Brad Alderson) A general answer would be that you need a source of grapes that have a lot of flavor, but a low phenolic structure. Approximately 30% of our grapes come from the North Coast and the rest are softer Lodi grapes. Not much Merlot is used in the Cabernet Sauvignon bottling, because of the softer Lodi Cabernet Sauvignon. Both Cabernet Sauvignon and Zinfandel are released young and ready to drink at 18 months and one year, respectively. Techniques that reduce hard tannin extraction are used in combination with techniques that increase soft tannin extraction. Extended maceration and very gentle techniques when you still have a mixture of skins and seeds, to avoid breaking of seeds, are most important. Very gentle flow (moyno) pumps are used at the crusher to minimize breaking of seeds. The crusher is run slowly (75 tons/hour). Low profile fermentation tanks (an increase of 1 foot in height for every additional foot in diameter) allow for a very thin skin cap, which is almost self-rolling, giving good extraction while still being gentle. Low-head, open-impeller, centrifugal pumps are used for pump-overs. Valves are placed well above the bottom of the tank so they don't pick up a lot of seeds and grind them up during pump-over. Piston pumps, designed not to break seeds, move the must from the fermenters to the tank presses. 57 It is important to get the young wine into barrels as soon as possible. Extended skin contact of up to 21 days supersaturates some of the bitter characters so that they fall out, giving the wine structure without the 'chewy' tannins. The young wines are run over a stainless steel screen for aeration right after pressing. The wines receive egg-white fining. Preston Winery: Faux-Castel -Healdsburg, CA (Kevin Hamel) Faux-Castel is a blended wine, fermented to emphasize its fruity character and avoid over-extraction. Four varietals are used: Syrah, which has spicy, smokey, plumy aromas and flavors; Mourvedre, with its earthy, leathery aromas and some raspberry notes; Carignane, giving structure to the wine and, with some bottle age, a candy-apple fruit character; and Zinfandel, contributing soft, jammy fruit of cherry/blackberry essence. Separate fermentation of crushed, destemmed fruit is conducted at maximum temperatures of 85°F to 90°F. Press wine is added back. Yeast strain L-2056 from Lallemand is used to bring out the fruity notes. A combination of pump-over and sprinkler regimen, one each per day, is used. Total skin contact time is seven to eight days. All wine lots are inoculated for malolactic fermentation, which takes place in tanks before barreling. The first two rackings for both Syrah and Carignane are aerative. The Zinfandel and Mourvedre receive an aerative racking after malolactic fermentation, and a second protective racking afterwards. There is a third protective racking after the blend is made. The wine is aged for eight months in neutral 60-gallon French oak (2/3 of the blend) and the remainder in 600-galloon oak uprights. The wine is fined with two egg whites/barrel prior to a polish pad filtration. The varietal composition and fermentation management of this wine create a complex, early drinking red wine which also has enough structure to last and improve in the bottle. Montevina Winery: Brioso - Plymouth, CA (Jeff Meyers) The vintage-dated Brioso is a proprietary blend of two different styles of Zinfandel. The blend includes 65% whole-cluster Zinfandel put through carbonic maceration, and 35% traditionally fermented Zinfandel. Brioso is an Italian term meaning a lively, spritely tune, indicative of this wine style. For the Zinfandel undergoing carbonic maceration, hand-picked grapes (22°Brix) are placed in fermenters. The inter-berry space is filled with white Zinfandel juice to exclude any oxygen from the tank. Prise de Mousse yeast is used to inoculate the juice. Fermentation temperature is approximately 70°F. A light pump-over is done twice/day. Fermentation continues for about seven to ten days until strawberry, cranberry characters start to develop. After fermenting to near-dryness, whole clusters are pressed, extracting trapped sugar and raising the Brix back up to 58 8° to 12° Brix. This juice is cold-fermented (60°F) to retain esters. This wine is sometimes lightly gelatin-fined, filtered, and cold-stabilized. The traditional fermentation component uses 23-24°Brix Zinfandel, crushed and destemmed, inoculated with Pasteur Red yeast, and fermented at 75° to 80°F for four to six days. The wine is pressed and put into 3,000-6,000 gal American oak uprights. The wine is filtered after oak aging. Both Zinfandel components complete malolactic fermentation. Fruitier lots of the traditionally-fermented wine are blended with the carbonic maceration whole-berry lot, to give the wine structure and a richer mouth feel. The whole-berry lot gives the wine a fresh, clean, cranberry strawberry aroma, making the wine complex and approachable. The finished 1991 Brioso has a pH of 3.50, 0.62 TA, 13% alcohol, 30 ppm free S02 , and 70 ppm total S02 • Robert Sinskey Vineyard: Aries Selection - Napa, Ca (Jeff Virnig) Aries Pinot Noir and Merlot bottlings are an avenue for young vineyards and for certain wine lots that do not stylistically fit into the primary and reserve blends. Younger vineyards tend to produce fruit lighter in tannin and wines fruitier, more accessible upon release. They tend to exhibit intense flavors and complexity for the price. Grapes are picked at 22.7-23°Brix. Grapes are destemmed, but only lightly crushed, leaving berries relatively uncrushed. The grapes are fermented in 5- to 10-ton fermenters using Fermivin and Bordeaux Red yeast for Merlot, and Prise de Mousse for Pinot Noir. These yeasts help to preserve the fruit qualities of the grapes. Fermentation temperatures peak at 82-84°F. The wines are lightly pressed at 1% sugar or below, allowing the wine to finish fermenting to dryness in stainless steel tanks. Wine lots assigned to the Aries label are aged in neutral 60-gal French oak barrels (three to five-year-old) for 12 to 14 months, depending on the vineyard and the vintage. Options of fining with one to three fresh egg whites are considered after blending. The goal is to allow the young vineyards to express their bright fruit character and to comp 1ement the wines with a hint of oak, thus making them approachable upon release, but having enough complexity for aging. Monte Volpe Vineyards: Barbera - Talmage, CA (Greg Graziano) The 1991 Barbera is a rich, complex wine with straight forward fruit. Barbera, which does not have a lot of tannins but high acidity, is early maturing, making it more approachable at a young age. The wine was aged for about 8 months in older cooperage, producing a soft wine with oak aromas and tones of blackberry. 59 Very ripe fruit, 24-25° Brix was used to make a rich, complex wine. Even with this high Brix, the T.A. is 0.9 to 1.0. During fermentation in open-top, 2-ton fermenters whole clusters {10% to 30%) were added, either at the beginning or placed on top after the remaining grapes were crushed, to create carbonic maceration and get less tannin extraction from the fruit. Open-top fermenters allow some of the alcohol to volatilize, leaving the wine at less than 14.0%. Punch-down of the cap is done rather than pump over. Fermentation temperature is not allowed to exceed 85°F to keep the wine fruity and extract less tannin. After the fermentation lasting about seven days, the fermenters were sealed and protected with C0 every couple of days. The extended maceration was punched down once/day to keep2 the cap wet, so it does not become volatile. The 2- to 3- week extended maceration produces a softening effect on the young wine. It also concentrates the wine and makes it more complex, which seems to hide the tannins. Residual sugar of 0.2% to 0.4% also masks some of the tannins. After pressing, the wine was put into tanks and settled, and racked off the gross lees after two weeks. The wine was transferred to neutral barrels. The wine was in contact with secondary (light) lees for eight months. Approximately 25% of the wine completed malolactic fermentation. After racking off the secondary lees into tanks, the wine was egg white fined in the tank (4 to 5 egg whites/barrel). The wine was racked off the egg white settlings and sterile filtered. McDowell Valley Vineyards: Bistro Syrah - Hopland, CA (John Buechsenstein) Similar to wines from the northern Rhone's St. Joseph appellation, this is a supple, spicy and intense fruity version of McDowell's Syrah. The wine is a result of the winemaker's experimentation with partial whole cluster fermentation to soften tannins from old-vine Syrah, while expanding the range of fruit and pepper flavors. The wine was aged in 1,900 gal German ovals, extracting little or no oak flavors from this passive oak. Contrary to McDowell Valley's Syrah, the Bistro begs to be consumed young in order to appreciate the virtues of Syrah's fruity character. The grapes are a combination of 70-year-old vines and a 10-year-old block. The wine is primarily partial-whole cluster which produces a longer, cooler fermentation in approximately 15 to 20 days. SUMMARY Everyone agrees that to make a dri nkab 1e wine you must start with good grapes. The necessary qualities must exist in the grapes to begin with, but with careful handling, management and blending, you can create a balanced red wine with complexity that will be ready to drink the moment you remove the cork. 60 l :' i \ I THE TRUTH ABOUT WINE AND HEALTH Tom Quilter Shamrock Vineyard Waldo, OH Most of you know that I am a retired physician, and although most of the literature that I have reviewed is basically internal medicine or cardiology, as a retired urologist, I found it a lot of fun doing sort of a "Deja Vu". Reporting on the potential benefits of wine can be scary. There are up-sides and there are down-sides, and nothing should be taken out of context. From the public perspective, wine and health received its first real boost from the "60-Minute" Merely Safer production of November 17, 1991, and the repeat episode of July 12, 1992. If you have not heard of the so-called French paradox, you must not be in the wine business, at least not in the red wine business, or you may not have been watching your sales. Transcripts of the program are available and I think one should go over the data carefully, in fact we will do so now. To whit Safer "there are several things that contribute to heart attacks. Diets, of course, are one of them. So why is it that the French, who eat thirty percent more fat than we do, suffer fewer heart attacks, even though they smoke more and exercise less. If you are a middle-aged American man, your chances of dying from heart attack are three times greater than those of a French man of the same age. So it is obvious that the French are doing something right, something Americans are not doing". Safer added "butter, goosefat, lard, double cream are the staples of a decent day's cooking in France. The French diet, the paradox that has begun to intrigue researchers around the world". Dr. Curt Ellison, professor in the section of preventive health and epidemiology at Boston University, is now doing a major study in several countries. "There's something about the French that seems to be protecting them and we're not sure what it is. We're looking for it". During the course of the program Dr. Monique Dumas said that the French eat just three meals a day, but in the U.S. "people are going to eat something every two hours, breakfast, 10:00 a.m., noon, 2:00p.m. and 4:00p.m., and then this way of having to eat something a11 day. I wonder if it is not one of the explanations of the French paradox." Dr. Serge Renaud observed "surveys in different countries show a very strong relationship between the intake of milk and heart disease; whereas, for cheese there is no relationship at all". Safer again observed "each French man, woman and child consumes forty pounds of cheese each year (and I hasten to add that it is not all Velveeta)". Dr. Renaud believes that it is the nature of the calcium in the milk and the cheese. "Cheese fed rats excrete virtually all the dairy fat and the milk fed rats' arteries were clogged". Now comes the clincher from Dr. Renaud " it is well documented that moderate intake of alcohol prevents heart disease by as much as fifty percent". Safer goes on to say "he means a few glasses of wine a day". Dr. Ellison went on to say "I think as a physician, we're all very much aware of the tremendous problem with excessive alcohol abuse, 61 and we know from the heart point of view, if you have your three bottles of wine (intended three per week) a11 on Saturday night, it is very bad for your platelets, it is very bad for your coronary arteries. It is bad for your health in general as well as for the health of others if you happen to be driving". Let's leave Morley Safer's pseudoscience and get on to the real stuff. But, let's not forget, and I for one don't want to be demeaning the "60-Minute" program, let's not forget that Safer's remarks did lend some public credence to a subject that needed exposure. So what is the real science? If you were reading your Journal of Enology and Viticulture (Vol 1, 1992, p.19), you would have been reading an article by Creasy and Seimann (Cornell) entitled "The Concentration of Resveratrol in Wine". Creasy had previously as far back as 1988 written that naturally occurring resveratrol in grapes was also inhibitory to certain fungus diseases and that this same substance was an active ingredient of the Chinese folk medicine "Kojo-Kon" and had been used for the treatment of dermatitis, athlete's food, arteriosclerosis, and even gonorrhea. In the orient, it is extracted from Japanese knotweed. Creasy was able not only to extract resveratrol from the knotweed, but also from the skins of grapes. Furthermore, as far back as 1982, in the Japanese literature, Arichi et al., found that resveratrol had a lipid lowering action in rats which had hyperlipemia. Kinure et al ., in 1985, found that orally administered resveratrol induced platelet hypoaggregation (made platelets less sticky). Creasy then in what I consider to be a landmark study, observed the concentration of resveratrol in various wines from France, New York, and California. The results were fascinating. There was significantly more resveratrol in the New York Chardonnays than in the California ones. New York has more moist growing climate and higher fungal disease pressure and there was a response by the grapevines to produce more resveratrol. Red Zinfandels had significantly more resveratrol than White Zinfandels. Why fermentation on the skins? Where is the resveratrol? In the skins! One other observation the amount of resveratrol decreases after veraison (will we be picking the reds earlier?). There are so many things involved, where are the grapes grown, is there disease pressure, what variety it is, how were the grapes grown, and on and on. So what we have in resveratrol is a biological fungicide, manufactured by grapes, also by peanut plants, and by Japanese knotweed, which in laboratory animals is effective in lowering blood lipids, and reducing platelet aggregation (lowering cholesterol and making platelets less sticky). This compound has not been found in beer, whiskey, or other alcoholic beverages. Now on the "Q" effect. Leighton at UCLA, Berkeley, developed a system to find anticancer substances in wine and he found Quercetin, a member of a family of plant chemicals known as flavonols. This substance is found in high concentration in certain fruits and vegetables such as red and yellow onions (not white or green and not in garlic); also, in squash, broccoli, and in grapes. Leighton along with researchers at Georgetown Medical Center took a single human cancer cell gene, put it in a normal cell and produced a malignant transformation. What does this mean? Not very much until you put one ppb of quercetin in the culture fluid and no malignant transformation occurs. Therefore, this means that there is a molecule that can inactivate (in the lab) a known human cancer gene and prevent it from exerting its malignant effect on 62 a normal cell. Natural aging of red wine reduces tannin, but preserves quercetin. It is not found in rose or white wines. It has been found that in a portion of the Chinese population that traditionally eats onions, the number of stomach cancers is 75% less. I was fortunate to contact Caryl Saunders, Executive Secretary of the Society of the Medical Friends of Wine" based in San Francisco. I was aware that Dr. Curt Ellison, whom I have quoted previously, had talked to the Society about exploring the French paradox. Ms. Saunders was kind enough to forward to me a copy of his address. Although he essentially paraphrases what I have said previously, there are some other interesting data. The lowest rates of coronary artery disease in the world are in Japan, followed by southern France, Spain, Italy. The highest rates are in northern Ireland, Scotland, and northern Karelia in Finland. This follows that the French even have higher blood cholesterols. The French consume about 35% of their calories from fat, with 14-15% from saturated fat. These values are even slightly higher than recent values among Americans. The French, however, only consume about 7.5% of their calories in snacks and in America about 20-25%. Even though wine consumption is decreasing among the French, it is still ten times as much as in America. Ellison and others are working with investigators in northern Ireland, in southwestern France to determine what protects the French from CAD. They will be studying the lifestyle habits of the French including: One. The French consume more vegetables and fruits and when cooked they are barely cooked. These foods contain antioxidants which are preserved; i.e., not destroyed by over-cooking. These antioxidants inhibit hardening of the arteries by decreasing the uptake of LDL (bad cholesterol) into the arterial wall. The French also have longer more relaxed meals and the French snack much less than Americans. Two. Meat in France is much lower in fat and smaller portions are consumed. More olive oil and goose fat are used in cooking (these are non-saturated oils). Dairy fat is used more in the form of cheese than milk. This kind of fat binds differently than that of milk. Three. The French consume more alcohol than we do at meal time and in the form of wine, and it is postulated that this increases the HDL cholesterol and reduces the LDL cholesterol. Furthermore, alcohol decreases blood clotting by reducing platelet aggregation, by decreasing fibrinogen, and increasing fibrinolysis. Alcohol in moderation increases coronary blood flow and decreases blood pressure, and reduces the level of blood insulin. Many studies in the past 15-20 years have shown the "U" or "J" shaped curve to be a good statistical model of the use of alcohol versus mortality from CAD. Two or less glasses of wine per day showed a 20 to 30% reduction in men. The moderate drinkers fared better than abstainers or heavy drinkers. Now we have data regarding the use of alcohol by women. Over 1000 females 25 to 60 years of age were evaluated in Bristol, England. Those who consumed a 63 moderate amount of alcohol (equivalent to two glasses of wine) had lower levels of triglycerides, but with a higher level of HDL than those who were nondrinkers. Studies on 50,000 male health professionals again showed the validity of the "U" shaped curve. Why am I boring you with this data? To quote Dr. Wells Shoemaker, a regular columnist in Practical Winery, "Wine beats the hell out of oatbran. This public health information is so consistent, so solid, and so meaningful that consumers have a right to know. Wineries and trade journals cannot allude to such information on a label or advertisement without violating federal statute, which prohibits information or intimation that alcoholic beverages can improve health". In my opinion though, you may refer to the scientific literature which is indisputable. Join an organization such as AWARE which will furnish you with the literature that is needed. Refer your consumers to these articles. What are other good things about wine? Dr. Paul Scholten has found that the absorption of wine is such that the maximum blood concentration is less from table wines than from distilled spirits even when the percent of alcohol is equalized because buffering agents normally present in wine retard the absorption into the blood. Food in the stomach delays intestinal mobility and alcohol is more slowly taken up from the stomach than from the small intenstine. White wine is a good diuretic, particularly sparkling, a phenomena which most of you have probably observed. Chemically wine is about 85% water, 12-15% alcohol. Usually about zero to 10% sugar in the form of fructose and glucose, many organic acids, tannins and pigments, usually more K than Na and other trace elements; Ca, Mg, P, S, Cu, Mn, Zn and Cobalt. Red wine may be a better source of iron than white, but is not as readily absorbed. What are the bad things about wine? Are there any? About 18 months ago, there was much to do about lead in wine. The EPA standard for lead in drinking water has been 50 ppb or less. Over 400 samples of CA, US, and imported wines analyzed during June 1991, showed an average lead content of 30.4 ppb. Valencia oranges, 33 ppb; spinach, 39 ppb. Lead is everywhere in our natural environment. When opening a bottle of wine which has a lead capsule, simple cleansing of the top of the bottle is all that is needed. Remember the furor about ethyl carbamate (urethane)? It is teratogenic, another way to say that it is capable in lab animals of producing a certain type of cancer. I dearly like spring mushrooms, also capable of producing teratoid tumors in lab animals. Largely due to the work of Dan Robinson, a New York state winemaker, 15 ppm of ethyl carbamate has been set as the standard not to exceed. Monitoring of American wines has consistently shown less. What about a1 coho 1? If you are an a1 coho 1 abuser or if you are a1 coho 1 dependent, you should not be drinking spirits, beer, or wine. Both alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence arise as a result of different, complex and as yet incompletely understood processes. Both genetic and en vi ronmenta 1 factors contribute to alcoholism. Adoption and twin studies have proven that genetically 64 transmitted vulnerability for alcoholism exists. Being genetically predisposed to alcoholism does not imply inevitability. Many persons having family histories indicative of risk do not develop alcohol dependence, since it is the interaction of genetic and environmental factors that define vulnerability. Italy has an alcoholism rate of only 15% of the U.S. The rate of alcoholism in the Jewish race is very low. Alcoholism in the United States runs between 5% and 10% of the ·population. The French have a higher rate, especially in the Cognac region. The Irish, American Indians, and Scandinavians, Russians have a high incidence. Heredity has a major influence. Alcohol dependence may turn out to be an inborn error of metabolism, much as diabetes or epilepsy. The dependence is treatable much like the latter two--it requires a lifetime commitment. Wine is not part of the program for treatment of alcoholism. Thomas Jefferson said it correctly "No nation is drunken where wine is cheap, none sober where dearness of wine substitutes ardent spirits as the common beverage." From all that I have had to say today, you may gather that I for one believe that wine can contribute to a healthy 1 i fe style. Much can be said from developing a holistic approach to life, good physical function, along with intellectual, emotional and social well being. The most important change in the last 20 years has been the avoidance of smoking. Dr. Keith Marton suggests that exercise, normal blood pressure, low fat diet, and eating foods known to be anticancer, high in fiber, and high in antioxidant vitamins such as broccoli, cabbage, spinach, tomatoes, asparagus, carrots, etc., are indicated. It has been shown in numerous studies that there are healthful effects from drinking wine moderately. One to two drinks per day have been shown to be more cardioprotective than no drinks per day. However, there is a downside; drinking more than two drinks per day does not make you more healthy and does not make you live longer. For me I would rather go with one or two drinks per day that contain resveratro 1 and quercetin. Peop 1e need information to make their 1 i festyl e decisions. You should have the information available to help them. As Dr. Marton has said "Life is not without risks. Not everything we do has on 1y positive health benefits, but some may have enjoyment aspects". Fine wines, good table wines, not necessarily expensive wines, have a good track record with low risk, and there are balanced scientific studies that indicate health benefits, and also, have the propensity to help us enjoy each other in a civilized way. As winemakers, let us continue to promote wine as a food, to be enjoyed with other fine food, and remember wine as the beverage of moderation; actually wine is the beverage of temperance. Gene Ford has said it so well, "Very few people drink for health reasons alone. Most of us will be satisfied with the assurance that moderate intake of wine is doing us no harm". 65 LITERATURE CITED 1. Alcohol and Health. Seventh special report to the U.S. Congress. January 1990. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. 2. Becker, Norbert. 1988. Wine in the history of civilization and in modern society. Second Intern'l Cool Climate Symp. (Auckland, New Zealand). 3. Creasy, L.L. 1992. The Grape-Resveratrol connection. Grape Research News 3(3):autumn. New York Wine and Grape Foundation. 4. Si emann, E. H. and L. L. Creasy. 1992. Concentration of the phytoa 1exi n resveratrol in wine. Am. J. Enol. Viticul. 43(1). 5. Jeandet, Phillipe et al. 1991. The production of resveratrol by grape berries in different developmental stages. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 42(1). 6. Broadcast Excerpt, 60-Minutes. The French Paradox. (Morley Safer) 11/17/91. 7. Delin, Catherine, R. et al. 1990. Wine and cardiovascular health, methodological issues. Wine Industry J., Australia. 8. Delin, Catherine, R. et al. 1990. Wine and cardiovascular health, A review of the evidence. Wine Industry Journal, Australia. 9. Delin, Catherine, R. et al. 1991. The J-shaped curve revisited: Wine and Cardiovascular Health Update, Wine Industry Journal, Australia. 10. Keys, A. 1980. Wine, garlic and coronary heart disease in seven countries. Lancet 8160:145-6. 11. Carmargo, C. et al. 1985. The effect of moderate alcohol intake on serum apolipoproteins, A-I and A-II. JAMA 253(19). 12. Shoemaker, Wells and Michael Matteson. 1989. A winegrower's candid look at alcoholism. Practical Winery. 13. Scholten, Paul. 1985. The health benefits of wine, an address to the Lake County Grape Growers Assoc. 14. Kl at sky, A. 1981. Alcohol and mortality, a ten-year Kaiser-Permanente Experience. Annals of Internal Medicine 95(2). 15. Guralnik, L. et al. 1989. Predictors of healthy aging: prospective evidence from the Alameda County study. Am. J. Pub. Health 6. 16. Kastenbaum, R. 1988. In moderation. J. Amer. Soc. Aging. 17. Razay, G. et al. 1992. Women's heart study. British Medical Journal. 66 18. Rimrn, E.B. et al. 1991. Prospective study of alcohol consumption and risk of coronary disease in men. Lancet. 19. Jackson, R. et al. 1991. Alcohol consumption and risk of coronary heart disease in men. BMJ. 20. Leighton, T. 1989. Paper presented to the Symposium on carcinogens, mutagens, and anti-carcinogenic factors in foods. ACS Meet., Dallas. UCLA Berkeley press release. 21. Graziano, J.H. et al. 1991. Lead exposure from lead crystal. ·Lancet. 22. Arichi, H. et al. Effects of stilbene components of the roots of Polygonum cuspidatum on lipid metabolism. Chern. Pharm. Bul. 30. 23. Kimura, Y. et al. Effects of stilbenes on arachidonate metabolism in leukocytes. Biochem, Biophys. Acta. 24. Ford, Gene. The Benefits of Moderate Drinking. 67 \ - ' :' {.' TRENDS IN BIRD PROTECTION Roger Williams, Sean Ellis, Dan Fickle, Judy Stetson and Roland Riesen Departments of Entomology and Horticulture The Ohio State UniversityjOARDC Wooster, OH Researcher's Look at New Compound to Control Birds in Vineyards Nets, perching owls, hanging owls, firecrackers, propane guns, shotguns, avalarm, mesurol, scarecrows, silver strips, Mylar strips, etc.--How can we control birds in vineyards that are in flyways such as the Bass Islands of Lake Erie--between Ontario and Ohio? Since mesurol was taken away a few years ago, the approaches of bird management have shifted from chemical to mechanical, even including the birds-eye balloons. Probably the best way to use any of the mechanical means is to remember that birds become accustomed to them and will move in to feed if the approach is too methodical. It only takes the birds a day or two to realize that the threat is minimal if the device remains in the same place and/or gives off the same nose in a consistent manner. In order to fool birds, it is necessary to keep moving the devices. They will need to be moved every other day in order to accomplish their mission. Also, in the case of alarms, it is important to change the frequency and message of the device. In addition, to control birds in the vineyard setting, it is imperative to concentrate on the control early, before the birds get started, and later when the fruit is fully ripe and is particularly vulnerable. In the last couple of years a new compound has been studied by a researcher from Pullman, Washington. He was visiting a vineyard a few years ago at harvest and noticed that the Vinifera grapes were being ravaged by birds, yet the Concords in an adjacent block were not being touched. Searching for a reason for the birds' preference, he decided to look into olfactory agents. He decided to look at methyl anthranilate, one of the dominant compounds which gives Concord grapes their typical fruity flavor, as a probable bird repellent. Methyl anthranilate has a very characteristic odor and is used in the flavoring of foods and especially that of bubblegum. The thought was, that since it is a food additive, it would be acceptable by the EPA as a spray material. IR-4, a federal program to label products on minor crops, asked us to collect residues of methyl anthranilate on grapes in Ohio. The only stipulation was that it should be tested on a cultivar other than Concord. So we decided to test it on the French hybrid Seyval, since it is a fairly common cultivar in the NE and was available at the Grape Research Branch at Kingsville. The three treatments were: 1) a low rate of methyl anthranilate of 1.37 lb active ingredient per acre applied in 60 gallons of water per acre; 2) a high rate of methyl anthranilate- } gallon of the formulated product per acre in 100 gallons of water; and 3) an untreated control. Three applications were made for each treatment 21, 14 and 7 days before harvest. In cases with multiple harvests they recommended that additional sprays be made after the first harvest and approximately 7 days before the next harvest. 68 The product we used was called "Bird Shield". It has approximately 2.3 lbs active ingredient per US gallon. It does not have EPA registration yet. However, registration has been fi 1ed for cherries, blueberries and grapes. Ultraviolet light breaks down methyl anthranilate and thus gets rid of its odor and flavor. However, there is some concern that if the sun does not shine between application and harvest some odor and off-flavor would be detectable. Since we did not have any bird damage in the vineyard, we were not able to evaluate for efficacy in repelling birds. However, we did hear reports that on cherries there was no off-flavor or odor remaining at harvest in most instances. However, in one case where methyl anthranilate had been applied and it was cloudy three days before harvest, there was a certain amount of residue and a decision was made to leave the fruit in the field for two additional days which eliminated the problem. We decided that we would make wine from the three treatments of Seyval grapes and determine through a "sniff" panel if residues were detectable. Wine samples were prepared by the enology section of the Department of Horticulture at OARDC in Wooster. Triangle and ranking tests were conducted to determine if residual levels of methyl anthranilate in the Seyval wines could be detected. Results from the tests indicated that individuals were able to detect (smell) residual levels of methyl anthranilate in wines from both treatment levels and were able to distinguish both treatments from the control which contained no methyl anthranilate. However, the ability of an individual to distinguish between the two treatments was not significant. It should be noted that an individual's proficiency to detect methyl anthranilate seemed to improve with experience. 69 METHYL ANTHRANILATE EXPERIMENT - SENSORY EVALUATION Triangle Test: Pic~ the odd one Rep I: 14 judges contra l + level I: 8 correct answers: ns control +level II: 9 correct answers: significant @0.05 level Rep II: 12 judges contra l + level I: 8 correct answers: significant @0.05 level control +level II: 12 correct answers: highly significant Reps I+ II, overall: 26 judges control +level I: 16 correct answers: significant @0.01 control + level II: 21 correct answers: significant @0.001 Ran~ing Test: Ran~ in order of increasing methyl anthranilate aroma Rep I: 14 judges 1 correct answer: ns control as lowest level: 7 correct answers: ns Rep II: 14 judges 4 correct answers: ns control as lowest level: 14 correct answers: highly significant Reps I+ II, overall: 28 judges 21 correct answers: significant @0.001 level Comments 1. Judges seemed to improve with training 2. No repeatedly distinguishable difference between levels I and II 3. There was enough residue with level I to be noticeable significantly 70 ( FUNGICIDES FOR CONTROL OF DOWNY MILDEW OF GRAPES r ) Michael A. Ell is Department of Plant Pathology The Ohio State University/OARDC Wooster, OH 44691 The wet weather of 1992 resulted in an epidemic of downy mildew throughout much of the grape production region in the northeastern United States. This epidemic combined with the recent registration of Ridomil for use on grapes has raised questions by many grape growers as to which fungicides are best for controlling downy mildew. The purpose of this paper is to review the fungicides that are currently available for downy mildew control in Ohio. Captan, Mancozeb, Ridomil and copper fungicides (fixed coppers and Bordeaux mixture) are all currently registered for use on grapes, and all of these fungicides are considered to be highly effective for control of downy mildew. Of these fungicides Mancozeb, Captan and copper fungicides are only effective when used in a protective spray program. They are all non-systemic protective fungicides and will not provide post-infection or curative activity against downy mildew. Ridomil is a systemic fungicide and will provide some post-infection curative activity. Of the protective fungicides mentioned above, my first choice would be Mancozeb. Mancozeb is the only fungicide rated as highly effective against downy mildew, black rot and phomopsis cane and leaf spot. One problem with Mancozeb is that it can not be applied within 66 days of harvest. Even with this restriction, Mancozeb remains an excellent protective fungicide for early season disease control, and can also be used on later maturing varieties for post bloom disease control (within 66 days of harvest). Captan is excellent for downy mildew and phomopsis cane and leaf spot, but is somewhat weak for controlling black rot. A good approach to using these fungicides for downy mildew control is to use Mancozeb early, then switch to Captan within the 66 day pre-harvest interval for Mancozeb. Currently Captan has a 14-day pre-harvest interval for grapes (cannot be applied within 14 days of harvest). NOTE: Captan has a 4-day re-entry restriction. The following information is taken from the Captan label: "Do not allow persons to enter treated areas within 4 days following application unless a long-sleeved shirt and long pants or a coverall that covers all parts of the body except the head, hands and feet, and chemically resistant gloves are worn. Conspicuously post re-entry information at site of application.•• Remember, always read the label. If these restrictions prevent you from using Captan, then Mancozeb, Ridomil and copper fungicides are your only alternatives at present. Ridomil (Metalaxyl) was registered for use on grapes in June 1993. Ridomil is by far the most efficious fungicide available for control of downy mildew. Unfortunately, it also has a strong potential for fungicide 71 resistance development by the downy mildew fungus. For this reason, the manufacturer (CIBA) has registered its use only as a package mix. The two formulations available for use on grapes are Ridomil MZ58 (10% Ridomil and 48% Mancozeb) and Ridomil/Copper ?OW (10% Ridomil and 60% Copper Hydroxide). The purpose of the package mix is to delay the development of resistance to Ridomil. Although Ridomil is very effective, the current label recommendations greatly restrict its use for downy mildew control in Ohio. The current label reads as follows: Ridomil MZ58: "Make one application of Ridomil MZ58 at 1 1/2 - 2 lbs/A at pre-bloom only. For season-long control, post-bloom applications should be made with Ridomil/Copper control, or another recommended fungicide according to label instructions". "Do not apply within 66 days of harvest". Ridomil/Copper ?OW - "Apply 1-2 lbs. of Ridomil/Copper ?OW at early bloom, 1-2 lbs at late bloom, and 1-2 lbs. at cluster closing. Use lime with each Rodomil/Copper 70 Wapplication according to its label and individual state recommendations. For late season downy mildew control apply other registered fungicides." "Do not apply within 66 days of harvest". Note: Other restrictions also apply. Always read the label. Based upon the above recommendations, Ridomil will not be of much use to us for downy mildew control in Ohio. It is the late season disease control that we need. In seasons when downy mildew is a problem, any post-bloom applications of Ridomil will probably be beneficial; however, additional fungicide protection will probably be required within the 66-day pre-harvest interval for Ridmil/Copper ?OW. The only alternative fungicides are Captan and copper fungicides. Copper fungicides are highly effective against downy mildew and are rated as moderately effective against powdery mildew. Copper fungicides are weak for controlling black rot. My biggest concern with the use of copper fungicides is the potential for phytotoxicity or "vine damage". I would prefer not to use copper fungicides on grapes if possible. NOTE: Certain food processors, such as National Grape Cooperative, will not accept grapes treated with Mancozeb past the initiation of bloom, and the use of Captan is not permitted at any time. If growers cannot use Mancozeb or Captan, Ridomil/Copper 70W or copper fungicides are the only other chemical alternatives for downy mildew control. Thus, copper is an important fungicide for producers of processing grapes that have these fungicide restrictions. The best information on the use of copper fungicides on grapes that I have found, is in a paper by Dr. Thomas Zabadal (Southwest Michigan Research and Extension Center) and Or. Thomas Burr (New York State Agricultural Experiment Station). The paper is entitled "The Use of Copper and Lime on Grapes". The following summary of recommendations is taken from this paper: 72 1. Do not make a season-long spray program with only copper fungicides. 2. Use fungicides other than copper whenever possible. 3. When using copper fungicides, delay their use as late in the growing season as possible. 4. When using copper fungicides, avoid the use of copper sulfate. Always use a "fixed" copper formulation. 5. The recommended rate of application for copper is 2 pounds actual copper per acre in all post-bloom applications. 6. Use the full recommended rate of lime (8 lbs./acre) in all post-bloom applications) whenever possible. Current research may help to identify a safe-but-reduced rate, for use with "fixed" coppers. Never eliminate the use of lime completely, unless the pesticide label indicates that lime should not be used. 7. Remember that cool, wet weather enhances the risk of copper injury. Be especially certain to use adequate lime levels during such periods or switch to other fungicides. 8. Make sure that any material you tank mix with copper is compatible. Many materials are incompatible (cannot be tank-mixed) with copper. 9. Avoid copper and lime sprays on fruit destined for fresh market. NOTE: Growers interested in obtaining a copy of Dr. Zabadal's and Dr. Burr's papers should contact Mike Ellis. NOTE: Aliette and Ziram should be close to being registered on grapes for downy mildew control. These fungicides are highly effective for controlling downy mildew. By the time you read these recommendations, these materials could be registered. Contact your local extension specialist for information on the registration status of these fungicides. 73 BIOLOGY AND CONTROL OF BLACK ROT AND PHOMOPSIS CANE AND LEAF SPOT OF GRAPES Michael A. Ellis Department of Plant Pathology The Ohio State University/OARDC Wooster, OH 44691 INTRODUCTION Diseases represent a major threat to the commercial production of grapes throughout the Northeastern United States. Climatic conditions are highly conducive to the development of several major grape diseases including: Black rot, downy mildew and powdery mildew. Each of these diseases has the potential to destroy the entire crop under the proper environmental conditions. In addition, there are several other diseases (Phomopsis cane and leaf spot, Botrytis gray mold, Eutypa dieback and crown gall) that can also result in economic losses. It is important to note that most of these diseases can occur simultaneously within the same vineyard during the growing season. Developing a disease management program that successfully controls all of these diseases simultaneously presents a unique challenge. In order to accomplish this, all available control methods must be integrated into one "overall" disease management program. The disease management program must emphasize the integrated use of disease resistance (if applicable), various cultural practices, a knowledge of disease biology, and the use of fungicides if necessary. The purpose of this paper is to review the biology, disease cycles and current control recommendations for Black Rot and Phomopsis Cane and Leaf Spot of Grapes. Blac~ Rot Black rot is caused by the fungus Guignardia bidwellii. The disease can result in complete crop loss under the warm, humid environmental conditions that are common in many grape producing regions around the world. Symptoms: All green tissue of the vine may be infected. Leaves are susceptible for about 1 week after they unfold. On leaves, symptoms first appear as small, yellowish spots. These spots develop into brown to reddish brown lesions with irregular margins. Minute, black, spherical fungal fruiting bodies (pycnidia) form within the lesions. Pycnidia often are arranged in a ring pattern just inside the margin of the lesions. Pycnidia are small but can usually be seen by the naked eye. Pycnidia can be clearly observed by using a hand lens with a lOX magnification. The fungal fruiting bodies contain thousands of spores (pycnidiospores), which can cause new infections. Lesions may also appear on young shoots, clusters, stems, and tendrils. The lesions are purple to black, oval-shaped, and sunken. Pycnidia also form on these lesions. 74 Berries are susceptible to infection from bloom until they begin to ripen. When berries reach 6% to 8% sugar (oBrix), they are no longer susceptible to black rot. Fruit symptoms often do not appear until the berries are half grown. Small, round, light-brownish spots form on the fruit. The rotted tissue in the spot softens and becomes sunken. The spot enlarges quickly, rotting the entire berry in a few days. The diseased fruit shrivels and becomes small, hard, black, and wrinkled. The diseased fruits are called mummies. Pycnidia are also formed on fruit mummies, which usually remain attached to the cluster. Black Rot Disease Cycle: The fungus overwinters in mummified fruit in the trellis or on the ground (figure 1). Spring rains trigger release of airborne ascospores from the mummies, and primary infections on green tissue result if temperature and length of leaf wetness are conducive. Recent research in New York and Ohio indicates that the majority of ascospores are discharged from mummies on the ground within the period of 1 inch shoot length to 10-14 days after bloom. If mummies are allowed to hang in the trellis, they can discharge ascospores throughout the growing season. Thus, sanitation is very important in controlling this disease. All mummies must be removed from the trellis. All green tissues of the vine are susceptible to infection. Brown, circular lesions develop on infected leaves, and within a few days the black, spherical fruiting bodies (pycnidia) form within the lesions. Each one of these pycnidia can produce a second type of spore (pycnidiospore). These pycnidiospores are spread by rain splashes, and can cause secondary infections on leaves and fruit throughout the growing season if temperature and length of leaf wetness are conducive. The time from infection until the appearance of lesions is about 1 week. Within an additional 3 days, pycnidia and pycnidiospores are produced. It is important to EMPHASIZE that a single ascospore can cause a primary infection (leaf lesion). Within each leaf lesion (primary infection), many pycnidia form. Each pycnidia can produce hundreds of thousands of pycnidiospores, each of which can cause another infection (secondary infection) later in the season. Thus, it is extremely important to control the early season primary infections by ascospores, because one ascospore can result in the development of millions of secondary pycnidiospores in the vineyard. The fruit infection phase of the disease can result in serious economic losses. Berries are susceptible to infection from bloom until they begin to ripen (5 to 8°Brix). Infected berries eventually turn into shriveled, hard, black mummies. These mummies also serve as a source of secondary inoculum (pynidiospores) later in the growing season and are the primary means by which the fungus overwinters. Control of Grape Black Rot: In order to effectively control black rot with minimal fungicide use, you must control primary infections by ascospores. If ascospores are prevented from infecting fruit and leaves early in the season, no further black rot control measures are needed after the supply of ascopores is depleted. However, if early season infections are not 75 controlled, additional fungicide protection may be needed throughout the remainder of the growing season to protect the fruit against secondary infections by pycnidiospores. The number of pycnidiospores produced in just a few early season leaf lesions is tremendous. Resistance: Grape varieties that are completely resistant to black rot are currently not available; however, varieties differ greatly in their degree of susceptibility. Where the disease is a problem, growers should avoid the use of highly susceptible varieties. Cultural Practices: Sanitation is critical to successful black rot control. As mentioned above, mummies are the main location for the overwintering of the black rot fungus. The fungus can also overwinter in lesions on infected canes. If all mummies and infected canes are removed from the vineyard, there is no source of primary inoculum in the spring and, thus, the disease is controlled. Any practice that removes mummies and other infected material from the vineyard will be beneficial to the disease management program. If all mummies cannot be removed from the vineyard, it is extremely important that they are not left hanging in the trellis. As mentioned previously, mummies on the ground appear to discharge their ascospores early in the season, while those hanging in the trellis may discharge ascospores throughout the growing season. Grapes should always be planted in sunny, open areas that allow good air movement. Proper row orientation to prevailing winds and good weed control beneath the vines also enable plants to dry out more quickly after wet weather periods. Also beneficial are practices that open the canopy, so that air circulation and spray coverage are improved. Fungicides for Controlling Black Rot Protectants: Mancozeb and Ferbam are both highly effective against black rot. These fungicides are strictly protectants. They must be applied before the fungus infects or enters the plant. They protect fruit and foliage by preventing spore germination. They will not stop lesion development after infection occurs. I feel that Mancozeb provides an excellent foundation for a protective spray program for grapes in the Northeastern U.S. It is a good protective fungicide that will provide good to excellent control of downy mildew and Phomopsis cane and leaf spot in addition to black rot. The major problem with Mancozeb in the United States is a 66-day preharvest interval (PHI} on grapes. It cannot be applied within 66 days of harvest. Mancozeb is available under many trade names and formulations. Ferbam will provide excellent control of black rot, but is not highly effective against the other grape diseases. In addition, there are restrictions on the number of applications that can be made in the United States. Captan, Benlate and Copper fungicides (fixed copper or Bordeaux mixture} are only slightly to moderately effective against black rot and will probably not provide adequate control under heavy disease pressure. 76 Sterol Inhibiting (SI) Fungicides The systemic fungicides, Bavleton and Nova, are also highly effective against black rot and will provide some post-infection (curative) activity on the disease if applied at the higher rates and within 72 to 96 hours (2 to 4 days) after the initiation of an infection period. Post-infection or curative control must be achieved prior to symptom development on leaves or fruit. Once the symptoms are present, these fungicides will not eradicate or burn out the fungus. Both Bayleton and Nova also provide good protective activity against black rot if applied at the lower rates in a protective program. These fungicides also have an excellent activity against powdery mildew. However, they are not effective against other grape diseases. Rubigan is another SI fungicide that is registered for use on grapes in the United States. It will provide moderate control of black rot if applied in a protective program. Rubigan is in the same general class of fungicides as Bayleton and Nova; however, it does not provide adequate curative or post infection control of black rot. Nova and Bayleton are the preferred SI fungicides for black rot control. Phomopsis Cane and Leaf Spot For many years, the grape industry in the eastern United States has recognized a disease called "dead-arm", which was thought to be caused by the fungus Phomopsis viticola. In 1976, researchers demonstrated that the dead arm disease was actually 2 different diseases that often occur simultaneously. Phomopsis cane and leaf spot (caused by the fungus Phomopsis vitico7a) is the new name for the cane and leaf-spotting phase of what was once known as "dead-arm". Eutypa dieback (caused by the fungus Eutypa armeniacae) is the new name for the canker-and shoot-dieback phase of what was once known as "dead-arm". Scientists now propose that the name "dead-arm" be dropped. Growers should remember that Phomposis cane and leaf spot and Eutypa dieback are distinctly different diseases, and the control recommendations vary greatly. Disease incidence of Phomopsis cane and leaf spot appears to be increasing in many vineyards throughout the Northeastern United States. However, only under conditions of very high disease pressure does crop loss due to this disease occur. The most commonly observed symptoms are on shoots. Although this phase of the disease can appear quite severe, crop loss due to shoot infections has not been demonstrated. Heavily infected shoots are more prone to wind damage. Although shoot infections may not result in direct crop loss, it is important to remember that lesions on shoots serve as an extremely important source of inoculum for rachis and fruit infections in the spring. Fruit infection is the phase of the disease that is of most concern in relation to crop loss. Symptoms: The infection of shoots is the most common phase of the disease. Small, black spots at the base of developing shoots are the first sign of infection. These spots are most common on the first 4 to 6 basal internodes. The spots may develop into elliptical lesions that may grow together to form irregular, black, crusty areas. Under severe conditions, 77 shoots may split and form longitudinal cracks. Leaf infections first appear as small, light-green spots with irregular, occasionally star-shaped margins. In time, the spots turn black and develop a yellow margin. Leaves become distorted and die if large numbers of lesions develop. Infections of leaf petioles cause leaves to turn yellow and fall off. Usually only the lower 1 to 4 leaves on a shoot are affected. Lesions developing on the first 1 or 2 cluster stems of a shoot may result in premature withering of the cluster stem. Infected clusters that survive until near-harvest often produce infected or poor-quality fruit. Berry infection can occur under the proper environmental conditions if the disease is not controlled early in the growing season. Berry infections first appear close to harvest exhibiting a light-brown color. Black, spore producing structures of the fungus (pycnidia) then break through the berry skin, and the berry soon shrivels. At this advanced stage, Phomopsis cane and leaf spot can be easily mistaken for black rot. Growers should remember that the black rot fungus does not infect berries as they start to mature (6° to 8° Brix). Fruit infection by Phomopsis generally does not appear until this stage. Severe fruit rot has been observed in several Ohio and Michigan vineyards close to harvest. Phomopsis Cane and Leaf Spot Disease Cycle: The fungus overwinters in lesions or spots on 1- to 3- year-old wood infected the previous season, and requires cool weather and rainfall for spore (pycnidiospore) release and infection (figure 2). Conidia are released from pycnidia in early spring and are spread by rain to developing shoots and leaves. Shoot infection is most likely during the period from budbreak until shoots are 6 to 8 inches long. Lesions appear 3 to 4 weeks after infection. The critical period for fruit and rachis infection is early in the season as well. The rachis and young fruits are susceptible to infection from the time they are first exposed until temperatures after bloom become high enough to prevent infections. The fungus does not appear to be active during warm summer months. Thus, the critical period to provide fungicide protection against fruit infection is when the clusters are first exposed until 10 to 14 days after bloom. The tiny green fruits that are infected during this period may appear normal. The fungus "sits" in these fruits as a "latent" infection. Not until the fruit starts to ripen near harvest, does the fungus become active and cause fruit rot. Thus, fruit rot that appears at harvest may be due to infections that occurred during or shortly after bloom. Although the fungus does not appear to be active during the warm summer months, it can become reactivated during cool, wet weather resulting in late season infections. Control of Phomops;s Cane and Leaf Spot Cultural Practices: Select planting sites with good air drainage, and orient rows to take full advantage of it. Cultural practices that increase the vineyard's air circulation will reduce wetting periods and should be 78 beneficial. Prune out infected canes and destroy them. Select only strong, healthy canes that are uniform in color to produce next season's crop. Fungicides for Phomopsis Control: At present Captan and Mancozeb are the fungicides recommended for control of this disease. They are ranked as moderately to highly effective. Benlate has also been shown to be very effective. Proper timing of early season application is important for control. Fungicide tests indicate that the sterile inhibiting (SI) fungicides (Bayleton and Nova) are not effective. Copper and sulfur fungicides also appear to be ineffective. mummified fruit with perithecia containing ascaspores ascospores are ejected into air during spring rain a c:;PD~\J ascospores black fruiting bodies'fiE]···· · ~ .: ·:.': · ~~oD (pycnidia) form wJthm lesions ~ lesions develop on young shoots and leaves Figure 1. Disease Cycle of Grape Black rot. 79 black fruitin9 bodies (pycnidia) I pycnidia protrude overw.nter on /:J.I, through cane surface infected dormant cones · ~ I' ~4: _..J...-A. - ~ pycnidiospores - ...-.- ~·------~~--==-~ .exude from pycnidia [:_=:;;:-- c== ~__£ _ l ~// in humid weather ripe fruit becomes infected "" during prolonged "" "" pycnidiospores rain periods - - '" spnng pycnidiospores ore rain-splashed to developing ripe fruit shatter shoots, leaves and clusters fungus is inactive during summer Figure 2. Disease Cycle of Phomopsis Cane and Leaf Spot on grape. 80 THE PERFECT VINEYARD SOIL- CONSIDERATIONS PRIOR TO ESTABLISHING A VINEYARD Jeff Burkholder New Connecticut Farm Geneva, OH It doesn't require a tremendous background in viticulture to answer correctly the question posed. Why are some vineyards clustered in specific areas, while others are spread out like black dots on a dalmatian? The answers are many, yet few; diverse, yet similar; practical, yet sometimes void of any common sense. If we wade through the swamp of why's, where's, and because's, we will come to the solid footing of knowledge. And, after that point is reached, the answers will come easily. When considering why vineyards are where they are, it is best to identify what makes a plot of land a good place to plant vines. Listed below are 8 priorities to consider when choosing a vineyard site. The list is presented in order from 1 (most important) to 8 (of lesser importance). A potential site or an already existing planting, however, should contain the majority of these priorities for that vineyard to become consistently profitable. 1. Good soil drainage 2. Length of growing season and winter minimum temperatures (tie) 3. Proper air circulation and plenty of sunlight 4. Slope of land 5. Soil types 6. Water availability 7. Suburban encroachment 8. Proximity of labor and markets 1. Good Soil Drainage Why number one? Well, the other seven priorities can all be enhanced by other means such as: a. growing shorter season varieties b. growing hardier varieties c. growing more disease resistant varieties d. using different rootstocks The fact remains, however, that all grape varieties do not like wet feet. Yes, it is true that soil drainage can be improved by tiling. Tile installation should be seriously considered before planting a new vineyard. But, to repeat an old saying, "You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear", means that a poorly drained, waterlogged piece of land will never be suitable (even with tiling) for grapevines. Grapevine roots require oxygen in the soil to grow and expand. With water clogging up the air's ability to reach the roots, the roots die. Hence, the vine will never reach its potential and may even die itself. Recognizing whether or not a site drains well is not difficult. It would be a wise move, though, to contact your area soil and water conservation office. They can, in addition to identifying the 81 site's drainability, determine soil depth to rock or shale. This is also very important to the vine's long-term viability as soils must be deep enough to allow for root expansion. 2. Length of Growing Season and Winter Temperature Minimums (tie) Why a tie? Because both will, for the most part, determine which varieties can be successfully grown on a site. The growing season (days from last spring freeze to first fall frost) should number at least 180-200 days to ensure that the finer wine varieties can fully ripen their fruit and mature their wood. Winter temperature minimums also need to be moderate in order to grow the more delicate vinifera varieties that most feel make the world's finest wines. Temperatures not lower than -5°F each year and not below -10°F only once every 10 years are crucial for successful cultivation of vinifera vines. Temperature swings or fluctuations need to be tempered by large bodies of water because even temperatures in the single digits (Fahrenheit) can kill grape buds and split trunks, if only hours before the temperatures were in the SO's and 60's. Most trunk splitting occurs in late winter or early spring (March) when sap runs up the trunk during early warm spells. Then, when the cold weather returns, the sap filled trunk freezes. 3. Proper Air Circulation and Plenty of Sunlight Proper air circulation around the vineyard is essential for control of fungi as the foliage and fruit will "dry out" faster after a rain or morning dew. "The more sunlight the better" is one of the ultimate truths in grape growing. Vineyards located east or north of wooded ares will experience a reduction in fruit and wood maturity as well as a reduction in bud fruitfulness. Also, wooded areas adjacent to vineyards provide a wonderful breeding ground for fungi and insects. 4. Slope of the Land Vineyard land should slope enough to allow good water and air drainage away from the vines. But, it should not be so steep as to cause severe erosion or that equipment such as tractors cannot travel safely across it. The most desirable slope direction in this part of the country is one facing southwest. Slopes facing west or south are also excellent. While north-sloping vineyards have the advantage of later bud break, they also ripen later. If your site is relatively frost-free, there is no advantage to north sloping vineyards. Those vineyards facing southwest, west, or south bud earlier, dry out faster after rain or dew, and ripen fruit and wood earlier and more completely. All because the south and west facing slopes maximize the daily allotment of sunshine and prevailing summer breezes. 82 5. Soil Types Vines will grow for the most part in all types of soil as long as pH levels are adjusted for different varieties. Those varieties in the labrusca family such as Concord, Catawba, Niagara and Delaware function best at pH levels between 5.0-6.0, with 5.5 being ideal. The vinifera and French American hybrid varieties are happiest with slightly higher pH levels of 6.0- 7.0 with 6.5 being the target number. The two types of soil most often encountered are clay and sand/gravel. Each soil type has advantages and disadvantages that the grower needs to plan for and deal with. First the advantages: Sand/Gravel: provides for excellent root growth, as soil particles are large, thus allowing deeper penetration of air below the soil surface. As it is easier for the roots to move downward in the looser soil of sand/gravel, it is also easier for surface applied fertilizers to be carried by water to the root system. Clav based: reduces vine vigor and size because soil particles are smaller, making air unavailable for root growth beyond certain depths. Less vigorous vines tend to be hardier in winter, and cropping these vines lighter may produce superior fruit. Now the disadvantages: Sand/Gravel: vigorous growth of vines may lead to more winter damage, as control of vigor is more difficult on these soils. Also, sand/gravel soils tend to be more droughty, causing vines that are growing well to suddenly show stress. Residual herbicides will also penetrate this soil more easily causing damage to vine roots. Clay types: vigor may be reduced to below desirable levels. Closer vine spacing may be necessary for commercial production, thus adding time and labor to pruning, tying, and hoeing. Also, hilling up to grafts in clay soils is more difficult, as large clumps can snap young trunks. Some fertilizers, especially potassium, can become bound up in heavy clay, so more is needed and banding the fertilizer becomes necessary. 6. Water Availability In Ohio you have to deal with whatever mother nature decides to give you. Most of the time we receive too much rain. However, the summers of 1988 and 1991 have provided very little precipitation. To combat that problem, irrigation is an expensive, but viable option. 7. Suburban Encroachment How fast is the area in which you are located growing? Will you be able to conduct the normal activities necessary in a vineyard such as spraying, mulching, harvesting, etc., without complaints from neighbors? Spray drift, dust, manure application odors and noise from equipment are problems for 83 growers next to newly transplanted suburbanites. When possible, provide a "buffer zone" of land between your operation and your neighbors. This will reduce the frequency of complaints and may insure a future for your vineyard. Be considerate of your neighbor by recognizing wind direction before applying spray, manure, or working dry soil (dust). Avoid using loud equipment near neighbors after early evening, if possible. Remember, pesticides are already under attack by those not familiar with agriculture. Don't fan those flames with the irresponsible and inconsiderate use of your sprayer and the accompanying drift it creates. Make sure that the property you are looking at is zoned for agriculture. Also, push for an agricultural district designation. It will be well worth the effort. 8. Proximity of Labor and Markets While this could possibly be priority number one, in the context of the topic this article covers, it is not of as much importance in growing vines as the other seven. That is, provided the majority of labor involved in the growing of these vines is yours and your family's. The markets you sell to will determine how close you need to be to them. If a retail winery is in your plans, then the vineyard and winery should be located in areas advantageous to each. The use of trucks to transport grapes makes it easier to locate vineyards away from their markets. What must be considered is the time from harvest to market, so that the highest quality can be maintained. While certainly every aspect associated with vineyard location has not been explored in this article, it is hoped that the eight priorities discussed here will point a prospective grower in the direction that he or she needs to go. 84 / ADAPTIVE NITROGEN MANAGEMENT AS INFLUENCED BY SOIL WATER, pH, FERTILIZER, AND COVER CROP Stan Howell Department of Horticulture Michigan State University East Lansing, MI As noted in the previous discussion on nitrogen dynamics in grapevines, there are a number of good reasons for our interest in nitrogen nutrition of grapevines even though there are fairly useful general recommendations in place. Those reasons will not be repeated here. Here, rather, the goal is to consider the other half of the vine: soil dynamics with the aim to understand current practices and to consider some novel approaches being used in other viticultural regions with good success. It is standard practice in most Michigan vineyards to apply N fertilizer to vineyards prior to the onset of bud burst (1). This has some problems. Many Michigan vineyards are planted on sandy soils that are both deep and well drained. Soluble forms of N may easily be leached as a result of either snow melt or rainfall. The low organic matter and low pH (5.0-5.5) of such soils, coupled with a clean-cultivation management means that there is minimal opportunity for such N to be trapped on soil particles and subsequently released for later vine utilization. The title of this discussion may have misled some of you as to the nature of this presentation. For those of you who had anticipated a discussion of the chemical-physical relations of N in the soil:soil water:plant root interfaces, I apologize. Those are interesting topics and worthy of consideration. Similarly, I will not dwell on types of N carriers or methods of fertilizer application (broadcast, band or fertigation), while recognizing that these, too, are very interesting and deserve the scientist's and grower's attention as we seek to maximize efficient use of applied nutrients. I will say this before leaving this area, however, we will grow grapes in the Great Lakes Region in a more intensive way (much greater attention to vine growth and condition) than in the past. Economic forces are going to drive grape production off marginal sites and acreage will likely decline. The acreage remaining, however, will be farmed so intensively that the impact on total tonnage produced may be scarcely affected. Effective fertilizer application will be a part of that intensive viticulture. Intensive Vineyard Floor Management One of the most striking observations that I made while on research leave with Dr. Werner Koblet at the Federal Research Station in Wadenswil, Switzerland, was the degree to which they manipulated their vineyard flora to control soil N available to grapevines. 85 Figure 1 is a reproduction of a slide I took, which was the best bar graph I ever saw. At a Station Field Day, two pallets were set up showing sacks of N fertilizer which represented the previous recommended N application based on clean cultivation viticulture and the new recommendation which was made in conjunction with the flora mobilization program. The Swiss researchers were able to reduce annual N fertilization by 75% with no reduction in vine growth, yield, fruit composition or hardiness. They were able, in fact, to more carefully control vine tissue N levels with the newer technology than with the previous approach, even when the previous approach employed multiple applications. How did they do this? Phase I: Search for Cover Crop Leads to Oil Radish Mr. Peter Perret, a research associate at Wadenswil, told me that the current vineyard floor management methods had evolved through three phases. In phase one, they were looking for a cover crop that would improve soil organic matter not only in the top 8 to 12 inches of soil, but also in the top 3 to 4 feet of the soil. Since viticulture in the Lake Zurich region is characterized by high rainfall (about 47 inches per year compared to 36 inches per year in Michigan), they were interested in a plant having a high water use. They found this in the oil radish (Raphanus sativus var. aliformis, rapeseed). Oil radish also had other advantages. It had a deep, rapidly penetrating root that extended more than 3 feet and was capable of penetrating clay layers otherwise impervious to roots. This characteristic yielded increased organic matter in subsoils and created root channels for grapevines when the radish was planted the year prior to grapevine planting. I expect that the use of oil radish has potential for Great Lakes viticulture, and I will discuss those uses later. Here, however, it is mentioned as the key component in phase one. It was effective in lowering soil moisture prior to harvest, a characteristic of considerable interest to us, as well. Phase II: Capitalizing on Predator Mites The second phase was an intermediate one which involved the use of oil radish prior to planting, or in specific cases, of soil compaction, and then natural annual flora were allowed to develop. The latter approach was based on the value of predator mites in their vine insect control. The interaction of predator and prey species is well understood and is a classic relationship demonstrated in figure 2. Briefly, the outbreak of a damaging prey species provides lots of food for the predator. The predator population increases until it overshoots the prey species and both then plummet. Then, after a lag period, the process begins again. The key breakthrough came when Swiss entomologists learned that predator mites could subsist on pollen when prey species populations were low. This would allow a high level of predator mites to be maintained and thus, keep the vine-damaging prey species at low, economically acceptable levels. 86 But where would the pollen come from? Natural annual populations of plants have some blooming flowers throughout the entire season, so the solution was to allow these natural populations to develop in the row middles. Phase III: Controlling Nitrogen Amounts in the Soil Phase three came when P. Perret and W. Koblet began to assess the fate of nitrogen in vineyard soils. In many agricultural areas, water analyses from village wells showed increasing levels of nitrate in the water, and a national effort was initiated to assess the agricultural contribution and to find ways of reducing levels where they were excessive. Fifteen years ago, the rate of nitrate fertilizer applied in vineyards in the Lake Zurich region was about 100 lbs of actual N per acre. The current rate of annual application has declined more than 70%; they apply only 30 lbs of actual N per acre and there is no reduction in vine growth, yield or fruit quality. How? The current methods involve the use of the annual flora to build up nitrogen in the root zone. They "store" nitrogen in these flowering annuals and release it by "mobilization" via mowing and varying degrees of cultivation. This can be fine-tuned by treatments given to alternate row middles as in Table 1. Swiss data suggest that the accumulation of nitrogen in the root zone is accomplished in the autumn. Warm rains in the fall have the capacity to leach soil nitrogen unless it is fixed in the biomass. Deep-rooted, rapidly growing plants in late summer are the key. I asked about oil radish, since I thought its water use characteristics might be useful in Michigan. Perret said it was good, but they preferred the mixed flora. Another important component is the nitrogen that comes with the rainfall. In Wadenswil, this amounts to 40 to 45 lbs of N per acre. The primary form is as ammonia, and air pollution is the main source. As an aside, the ammonia also comes with snowfall, and evidence exists that this is causing a change in mountain flora. I also asked about establishing the vineyard floor flora. The most important factor is the avoidance of perennial weed problems. Perret proposed using oil radish pre-plant. In their experiments, it is superior to alfalfa. Grasses are undesirable because they tend to compete for nutrients in the root zone of newly planted vines. When planting oil radish, apply 40 lbs of N to encourage plant growth. The oil radish root is already more than 3 feet into the soil when the above ground plant is still in a rosette stage. Oil radish does best in soils with good moisture. It penetrates wet clay pans easily, using water to help create cracks in the subsoil. It is also important to keep the area around young vines free of plants; they should have no nitrogen or water competition. Cultivate the middles at the 3- to 4-leaf stage. Seed annuals are usually early germinating, while the 87 root- or tuber-based perennials are later germinating. The goal is to create a seedbed for the annual seeds whose early establishment provides strong competition for the perennials. To assess vine nutritional status, observe the annual plants. Delayed growth, weak growth and/or light color may mean that supplemental N is needed. The composition of the vineyard floor should reflect the natural annual plant populations in open areas near the vineyard. In typical Lake Zurich region vineyards, there are more than 80 species that bloom over a vine's growing season. Since some species may produce more than one cycle per year, there are commonly 15 to 20 species in bloom at any one time. During establishment, they avoid use of herbicides since it will delay full population development. Use of compost or well-rotted manure is encouraged. Both help the annuals' establishment. Mobilizing Nitrogen Not a Precise Business Mobilizing N held in the vineyard flora is not a precise business. Of critical importance is soil moisture status. Cultivation or mowing is effective only if there is rainfall or irrigation to take the mobilized nitrogen on the soil surface down to the grape root zone. Water is also important to encourage the immediate recollection of that N not used by the vine, or it will percolate into the groundwater. Mobilizing N is also problematic because it has major implications on fruit set. In European, Californian, Australian and New Zealand vineyards, high N at bloom has led to necrosis of the cluster rachis and reduced fruit set. These have been given various names: waterberry, shanking, stiellahme and late rachis die-back. I have never seen it in Michigan vineyards, but that may be because I have not looked very hard. To avoid the problem of stiellahme, the Swiss do their first cultivation for N mobilization at the 3- to 4-leaf stage. With favorable rains (a real concern I have for transferring this technology to Michigan and other Great Lakes regions), theN is available at times favorable to both growth and fruit set. Subsequent mobilization is based on: 1) leaf symptoms and 2) water in soil. In Wadenswil, the early season mobilization is all that is done until veraison. Veraison mobilization is a key to the rapid growth of flora to compete during the ripening period. One other basis for cultivation was mentioned. If the summer is dry, then a higher soil N level is required than under moist conditions. Now you can see just how sophisticated a Swiss grower has to be; and, I predict, how we are also going to have to become. The summer cultivation is very tricky. They are on the conservative side and mow or cultivate only alternate rows. The amount of rainfall for most effective mobilization is about 1.5 inches. This program has much that commends it. The cost of N is only going to increase. The concerns about agricultural inputs into groundwater are only going to increase. In Wadenswil, they apply zero N per year. They hold some N available for use if necessary, but only if symptoms occur. 88 Some Major Concerns for Great Lakes Viticulture Concerns! First, this is a methodology that has been defined for a climate very different from the Michigan and other Great Lakes Region climates. We are typically short of rainfall in May and June and have excess in September. We, quite obviously, cannot apply this experience directly to Michigan without serious risks. We know, for instance, that dandelions are a large component of the natural flora in Switzerland and are likely to be so for us. Plant pathology research has shown that dandelions are carriers of important virus diseases. So, this is not without question and concern. It is clear, however, that we should evaluate it and make decisions based on our data. LITERATURE CITED 1. Howell, G.S., E.J. Hanson and J.A. Wolpert. 1987. Culture of grapevines in Michigan. Mich. State Univ. Ext. Bul. E-2025. 11 p. Table I. Varying degrees of N mobilizations Method N Mobilized Mow alternate rows Low Mow every row Mow alternate, light cultivate alternate Light cultivate every row Light alternate, heavy alternate Heavy cultivate every row v High 89 i ' TRAINING SYSTEM AS A FUNCTION OF SOIL, TOPOGRAPHY,AND TRADITION: \ A NEW LOOK AT EUROPEAN PRACTICES Andrew G. Reynolds Agriculture Canada Research Station Summerland, B.C. Between May 29 and June 21, 1992, I had the opportunity to visit several winegrowing regions in Germany, Luxembourg, Switzerland, and France. This report summarizes my activities during those three weeks, and also includes some of my impressions of central European viticulture and enology in general. This report also attempts, as the title suggests, to put European winegrowing practices into context with those in the New World. I have purposely avoided any general descri pt i ens of the wi negrowi ng areas visited; these can be found in any respectable book on wine such as Hugh Johnson's "World Atlas of Wine". GERMANY Mosel In Germany, and particularly in Mosel, Riesling is the most well-regarded variety. Good appreciation for German viticultural practices can be had from touring vineyards in the Mittelmosel in the area of Zeltingen (where we stayed), Wintrich, and Menzel/Kesten. Most of the vineyards are planted on steep slopes along the Mosel River. The soil is predominantly slate. Most vines have been traditionally spaced at 1.1 x 1.5 m (vine x row), trained to individual 3m stakes, and are pruned to the traditional einzelpfahl or looped cane technique. Some vineyards were also trained to unilateral cordon, pendelbogen, or Lenz Moser systems, although the latter was shown to be unsuccessful due to fruit shading and the attendant problems with Botrytis bunch rot. New vineyards are planted at 1.1 x 1.7 m to allow some mechanization. Pruning level is usually based on nodes per square meter; for Riesling in the Mosel, we were told that this was around 9-11. At the traditional spacing, this suggests about 15-18 nodes per vine, and about 17-21 nodes per vine under the new spacing. Wider row spacing at the same node number per square meter increases mean shoot density from 15 to 17 per meter of row, and potentially increases fruit shading. When I asked why pruning is based on a per square meter formula, thus increasing the possibility for shade with wider row spacing, I could not obtain a meaningful answer, other than the desire for number nodes per hectare, and hence yield, needed to be kept the same. This may help explain why "wide spacing" has been blamed for reducing wine quality in some parts of Europe. No Riesling is grown in the Upper Mosel area, unlike the Mittelmosel and the other regions of Germany. Spacing is similar to the Mittelmosel, although usually vines are spaced 1.4 rather than 1.1 m apart. Row spacing is around 1.7m. Training is the European arched cane or pendelbogen. Many vineyards are managed with alternating row middles in sod and the others clean-cultivated, to provide some competition for water and nutrients. Totally sodded vineyards are usually too weak, and vines frequently show nutrient deficiencies. 90 BADEN The Kaiserstuhl area in Baden is famous for its Rieslings. Most of the vineyards have been terraced, a gargantuan task that was not entirely successful due to inadvertent removal of topsoil from some areas. Most vines were spaced 1.2 x 1.7m (vine x row), and trained to the flachbogen (flat cane) system, rather than the hal bbogen and/ or pende l bog en sys terns that we saw in Upper Mosel , Luxembourg, and wider-spaced Mittelmosel vineyards. This was perhaps the first area where I felt that cultural practices fit the site; vines were not excessively vigorous, and node number, training system, and spacing seemed appropriate. RHEINPFALZ I will make only brief comments about cultural practices in the Pfalz. Spacing, training, pruning level, etc., appeared to be similar to Upper Mosel. Most of the vineyards we visited were relatively high in vigor, with substantial fruit shading. General Comments, Mittel- and Upper Mosel, including Luxembourg; Baden; Rheinpfalz: I had come to Europe under the impression that cultural practices were those which had evolved over centuries of grape growing, and although determined through trial and error, they were nonetheless optimal for each cultivar, site, and mesoclimate. I was shocked to see that this was not always the case. Many of the vineyards in the Mittel- and Upper Mosel were highly vigorous, and could benefit from modifications in training and vine spacing. Most were hedged frequently (2-3 times per year), and leaf removal in the fruit zone was often done to control bunch rot. Tradition has locked most growers into a set of cultural practices which preclude anything innovative. Cost of production is high. Everything is done by hand, including hedging, leaf removal, pruning, and harvesting. Spraying on the steep slopes is done by helicopter, but weeds are hand sprayed, removed manually by hoes, or cultivated with the aid of a winch and cable installed at the top of the slope. The most surprising observation is the lack of correlation between wine quality and vine management. Some superb wines were produced from high-vigor sites. The celebrated vineyards of Bernkastel-Doktor and Sonnenuhr in the Mittelmosel produced Rieslings of great intensity and complexity, despite vigorous vines, shaded fruit, and narrow spacing. Growing Riesling in North America: Our approach to growing Vitis vinifera in North America is a combination of copying European "recipes" with a bit of local research thrown in. For example, in our area, Riesling is usually spaced at 1.3-1.5 m between vines and -2.4 m between rows. They tend to be cane-pruned (pendelbogen or halbbogen), although quite a few growers are now using cordons. Vertical trellises are the norm. Shoots are positioned by hand or machine, and hedged once or twice a year. A few practice leaf removal in the fruit zone to control Botrytis and to improve fruit quality. Some clean-cultivate; some maintain permanent sod alleys. 91 We have tried to do lots of applied research with Riesling over the last 9 years, to provide options and answers relating to: shoot density, crop level, trellising, vine spacing, and basal leaf removal. There isn't sufficient time to discuss all these projects in detail in one seminar, but I'll try to provide some highlights. Shoot Density and Crop Level: The shoot densities in Germany (Kiefer and Crusius, 1984) are directly regulated by yield limits that are often <80 hl/ha (-5.3 tons/a). Many New World vineyards can sustain much higher yields, and often need to do so to keep vegetative growth balanced. Our work has found that shoot densities -25 shoots/m row can increase yields without compromising fruit quality; in fact, the canopies we worked with were more desirable than ones based on -16 shoots/m--leaves were smaller, lateral shoots were shorter, and overall growth was more balanced (Table 1). The lesson we learned was that canopy shade was not directly proportional to shoots/vine (Smart, 1988), but was more of an inverted bell-shaped curve. Shoot density and crop level go hand-in-hand, because 1-3 clusters are added for every shoot added. But, within a given shoot density, we can still manipulate crop level (clusters/shoot) to improve winegrape quality. With cluster thinning of Riesling, Brix and pH levels are always higher, titratable acidity is often lower, and levels of certain flavor compounds (terpenes and C6 compounds) are altered (Table 1). Although our growers do not cluster thin Riesling, it is still worth considering if wine quality can be markedly improved. Trellising: Some of our most dramatic results in simultaneously increasing Riesling yield and winegrape quality have come from trellising research. Divided canopies such as our wide "V" and double crossarm trellises have sustained yields of 30 tons/ha without reductions in winegrape quality (Fig. 1). In fact, the double crossarm produced fruit with highest levels of terpene flavor compounds (Fig. 2). Our observations indicate that most clusters on double crossarm vines are well-exposed to sunlight, mean cane weight is relatively low (Fig. 3), and bunch rot is virtually non-existent. There is naturally much discomfort among growers to venture past a short trunk and two canes (selling bilateral cordons has been a chore!), and transferring this technology to our growers has been slow. However, a few have been very keen to try. Vine Spacing: The general conception seems to be that narrow spacing reduces vine vigor. Now, I am an advocate of 2.3-2.4 m wide rows (7'-8') if you have the right equipment, but I've also seen too many vineyards on rich soil with vines planted 1.3-1.5 m spacings in the row. This gives the vine inadequate trellis space to accommodate the high vigor. We have found that mean cane weights on wider spaced vines (1.8-2.4 m) go down proportional to vine spacing--this is the opposite effect to what many assume should happen (Fig. 4). Sure, vines can compete with one another when planted close together, but not to the degree where shoot vigor is reduced. The close spacing fad is a perfect example of how European technology cannot be adapted carte blanche to North America without first understanding how it evolved in the first place. In many parts of Germany, vines are not vigorous enough to fill 2m of trellis, so they are planted at an appropriate spacing to accommodate their vigor. It is unfortunate that a combination of tradition and 92 law forbids growers on new sites from modifying spacing and other viticultural practices that fit the site and variety. Basal Leaf Removal: We began experimenting with leaf removal in Riesling in 1988. We have consistently lowered titratable acidity and increased potentially volatile terpenes (PVT). Brix and pH have not been consistently affected {Table 2). The interesting thing about leaf removal is that it appears to be effective even in "ideal" canopies (eg. double crossarm). SWITZERLAND The Swiss Federal Research Station for Viticulture and Fruitgrowing (Engl. transl.) at Wadenswil, and in particular, Werner Koblet and colleagues, have done excellent research over the last 25-30 years on translocation in grapevines, and have made great breakthroughs in understanding how carbohydrates are produced in vines, where they are translocated, and how the source-sink relationship changes during the growing season. Other projects include comparison of high and low cordons for mechanization of pruning and harvesting, nitrate availability under various floor management systems, effects of defoliation in vines with differing amounts of "old" wood (a carbohydrate reservoir), and influence of mite feeding on translocation. We had the opportunity to visit a small winery, H.Schwarzenbach Reblaube, near Wadenswil. This and most Swiss wineries allow all wines to undergo a malolactic fermentation. Most of the wines tended to be bone dry, complex but not fruity, and somewhat acidic. Their yields are maintained at 7-9 tons/ha. Some interesting cultivars included the old Roman one, "Completer", and another ancient one, "Rauschling" (pronounced ROY-schling). Across the Alps to Nyon, one will find the Station de Recherche, Changins. Maigre and colleagues have done some excellent work with shoot density, crop level control, and vineyard floor management. The research station at Changins employs about 25 scientists in viticulture/enology. Their work involves both research and service work. The enology labs were active with research into effects of yeast strains on wine turbidity, flavor and aroma, fermentation time, and many other variables. Similar work was being done with malolactic fermentation bacteria. An impressive quality control lab was set up for analysis of wines destined for export; about 1% of all submissions are rejected due to high sulfites, volatile acidity, etc. Standard quality control and analysis is done for all the research station wines. A "segmented continuous flow" analysis technique is used for many of these wines and their initial juices, to measure sugar, total acid, malate, tartrate, and a host of other compositional variables. About 20-30 samples can be run per hour with two technicians, for an average of 4 hours per day. The rest of the day is preparation time. The cost was 200,000 Swiss francs. Dr. Aerny, one of the wine chemists, is doing interesting work on C6 flavor compounds in musts and wines, and how they can be manipulated by viticultural practices. His lab was a maze of gas chromatographs. His tentative results show that 0.05 to 3.5 mg/1 of these various compounds may be found in Chasselas must, but very low quantities of unsaturated C6 compounds are present. 93 Dr. Maigre showed us some of their viticultural trials, which included a floor management trial consisting of four treatments: tilled, non-tilled, permanent sod, and annual cover crop. This large experiment was split to include 0 to 100 kg N/ha fertilization levels. They have published some preliminary results. Other work includes selection and evaluation of Chasselas clones on various rootstocks, and some teaching/demonstration blocks of various training systems such as the gobelet, Lenz Moser, Guyot double, and cordon. This part of Switzerland, usually referred to as the Valais, produces some excellent Chasselas (syn. Fendant), and some good medium-bodied reds. The canopies we saw looked good; they weren't too thick like in Alsace and the Pfalz. Most vines were spaced 0.80 to 1.00 m between vines and 1.60 to 2.00m between rows. Training was primarily Guyot simple--a single 6-node cane plus one 2-node renewal spur. Canes are either tied flat or slightly arched. Growing Pinot noir in North America: The best Pinot noirs we tasted in Europe came from Switzerland. They contained body, color, fruitiness, along with the pleasant complexity that one expects from oak aging and malolactic fermentation. Pinot noir production in B.C. has been a major challenge. A combination of winter injury, poor color and tannins, and vegetal overtones has given us many topics to research. Since 1989 we have been looking at shoot densities, cropping levels, and Scott Henry training to improve Pinot noir winegrape quality. In the process of experimental winemaking, we have also learned some things about achieving good color and structure without compromising fruit flavors. Shoot Density: It seems as if the -20 shoots/m row that our growers tend to use may be a bit high. We have tested 10 and 20 shoots/m row on a vertical trellis, plus 20 shoots/m row on a Scott Henry trellis (10 shoots/m canopy). Naturally, there are associated yield differences, and the 10 shoots/m berries and juices have had higher Brix and anthocyanins (Table 3). Wines from the 10 shoots/m vines (8-10 tons/ha) are highly colored, and contain little vegetal aroma, but are very strong in cherry, ripe plum and other descriptors. The 20 shoots/m wines (11-15 tons/ha) have been identified as vegetative, with little fruit character, so this density appears to be the upper limit for Pinot noir in our area (Table 3). The 10 shoots/m row figure is close to the recommendations of Maigre and colleagues in Switzerland (6-12 shoots/m row). Crop Level: We have found consistent increases in berry and juice Brix and anthocyanins (berries, juices and wines) in cluster-thinned Pinot noir, regardless of shoot density (Table 3). Tasters have detected reduced vegetative aroma and flavor in cluster-thinned Pinot noir as well (Table 3). These results are consistent with Murisier and Ziegler (1991), who found that cluster-thinning Pinot noir vines with 12 shoots/m row could increase Brix equivalent with much lower shoot densities. Scott Henry Training: Scott Henry training takes a dense vertical canopy and divides it into two by training one canopy up and one down. The two canopies are separated by a distance of -20 em. The downward-trained shoots need to be skirted to prevent their interference with herbicide spraying, discing, etc. The differences in canopy density, wine color, aroma descriptors are dramatic in comparison with their 20 shoots/m vertical canopy counterparts {Table 3). This 94 is a good option for those who have spaced their vineyards like Switzerland, but find their vines grow like in Oregon; you may feel you have painted yourself into a corner, but the Scott Henry system gives you a door out. FRANCE Alsace Travelling south from Nittle in the Upper Mosel, through the Saarland, across the French border into Lorraine, one eventually finds Alsace, the celebrated winegrowing region situated between the Vosges Mountains and the Rhine River. Most of the cultural practices in Alsace were similar to those observed in the Upper Mosel: arched canes, 1.2 x 1.7 m spacing (vine x row), clean cultivated or 50/50 clean and sod row middles, frequent hedging and leaf removal. Vines tended to be moderately to very vigorous. Leaves were large and lateral shoots were long. The famous vineyards of Dopff and Irion just outside Riquewihr were no exceptions to these observations. The classic Alsatian cultivars include: Riesling, Pinot gris, Pinot blanc (which may contain up to 100% Auxerrois), Gewurztraminer, and Muscat (Muscat Ottonel and Muskateller). In the vineyards of Sipp-Mack in Hunawihr, one may gain appreciation for Alsatian viticultural practices. An excursion there in June of 1992 included some lively discussion on the concept of node number per square meter as opposed to shoot density, and which concept was more meaningful. Their vineyards were quite vigorous, and like Dopff and Irion, required considerable manual labor in hedging and leaf removal to maintain the canopies. When questioned as to the wisdom of these cultural practices, he shrugged and said "that is what's done", and left the discussion at that. As in the Mosel region, most of the wines from these vigorous vineyards were quite exceptional. Dr. Christopher Schneider of INRA station de recherche, Colmar, is pursuing studies with innovative vine training systems, fruit set disorders, yield forecasting, and several other areas. He presented us with an overview of his research program and some genera 1 information on A1 sace viti culture. He indicated that yields cannot exceed 100 hL/ha, and usually fall below 80 hL/ha (-40 for vendanges tardives). This will gross about $20,000/ha. About 600 h/ha of labor is required (-$5400/ha). Price paid per ton is -$2000. These figures are based on 4 t/acre. 95 I have already alluded to the cultivars grown in Alsace, but here are the figures, provided by Dr. Schneider: Cult i var Hectares Percentage Riesling 2900 22% Pinot blanc* 2600 20% Gewurztraminer 2500 13% Sylvaner 2400 10% Pinot noir 950 7% Pinot gris 800 6% Muscat** 400 3% Gutedel 300 2% Others 400 3% Total 13000 *Includes Auxerrois. **Includes Muscat Ottonel and Muskateller The field experiments near Rorschwihr included a vine x row spacing trial based on 10-11 shoots per square meter; treatments included 1.4 x 1.5m (standard), 1.4 x 2.0m, and 1.05 x 2.0m. I asked him about how he addressed the confounding factor of differing shoot density at the different spacings (15, 20 and 20, respectively). He responded by saying that it was more important to keep yield/ha the same for the comparison. Unfortunately, this automatically places the wider-spaced treatments at a quality disadvantage due to the changes for increased shading. Their Pinot noir clonal trial included Dijon clones 114 and 115, Colmar clone 162, and Loire clone 528, all trained on the classic low head Burgundian system. Schneider also showed us trials with divided canopies (the lyre system), using considerably wider rows than the traditional 1.5 m. The objective of the trials is not to increase yield simultaneously with wine quality, but simply to deal with the shoot density problem resulting from widening rows at an equal node number per square meter as in narrow rows. Thus, the full benefit of utilizing canopy division to accommodate high vigor, while simultaneously increasing yield and wine quality, is not a possibility under the restrictive wine laws in France which limit yields to 100 hL/ha. Canopy division can only be a way to spread out a dense canopy, while allowing mechanization through provision of wider rows. We visited the Domaine du Tonnelier Louis Hauller in Dambach-la-Ville. Some Riesling vines were growing in their vineyards on lyre system and the vigneron was very pleased with vine performance and wine quality. Most of the vineyard was spaced at 1.3 x 1.5 m (vine x row) with about 20 nodes per vine (-15 shoots per meter; 10 nodes per square meter). Training was similar to other vineyards in Alsace--halbbogen (arched cane). [Pendelbogen (similar but with a sharper arch) is used to maintain the same node number per square meter when row spacing is increased to facilitate mechanization.] Growing Gewurztraminer in North America Gewurztraminer has been a challenge in some parts of North America, but it seems to thrive in B.C. In fact, it grows like a weed! Controlling vigor has been our biggest problem. We have compared traditional European practices such 96 as hedging and leaf removal on several sites, to see how they might affect winegrape quality. As with Pinot noir, we have learned some things in the winery as well, in the process of making our experimental wines. Hedging: Hedging vertically-trellised Gewurztraminer seems to be a necessity, albeit a necessary evil. Our work (Reynolds and Wardle, 1989) with hedging has shown that Brix is often reduced, but so is titratable acidity and pH, while PVT are often increased (Fig. 5). Hedging has also resulted in some very positive effects on certain wine descriptors (Fig. 6). It is classic "bandaid" viticulture that will work under certain circumstances. Again, one needs to ask himself/herself: "why am I spending money to grow vines, and then spend more time and money to remove 20-50% of the growth?" The divided canopy solutions that have worked for Riesling and Pinot noir can also work with Gewurztraminer. Basal leaf removal: With or without hedging, basal leaf removal can consistently increase PVT (Fig. 5), and can sometimes reduce titratable acidity, pH and potassium (Reynolds and Wardle, 1989). We have also found that some wine aroma and flavor descriptors can be increased by basal leaf removal (Fig. 6). Like hedging, however, leaf removal represents a $150-200/acre bill to the grower. Amortized over the 25-year life of a 10-acre vineyard, that represents a staggering bill of $37,500-$50,000 to remove leaves that you invested more money into growing. Again, tradition may lead to quality, but there are wiser and less expensive roads. Bordeaux We stayed near St. Emilion on our first night in Bordeaux. This medieval village lies in the heart of a small viticultural appellation within Bordeaux. Most of the wines are medium-bodied compared to Medocs, but can easily age 15-20 years depending on the vintage and terroir. Vineyards adjacent to the village were close-spaced (-1.3 x 0.8m, row x vine) and the canopies were very low (-1.30m tall). Most vines were trained to Guyot simple as in western Switzerland. Trunks were old, thick, and gnarled. Many vines suffered from chlorosis, leafroll, and other maladies. The sprayer I watched could cover four rows at once using a pair of folding arms to accommodate the vine row. In the first afternoon, we met Paul Pontallier, Director of Chateau Margaux, who toured us through their facility and conducted a barrel tasting of their 1990 products. Margaux is one of the four grand crus classes that were designated in 1855. Their vineyards were not unlike St. Emilion; vines were spaced 1.0-1.2m in rows, 1.50m apart. Most vines carried 6-10 shoots, but didn't have the vigor to carry much more. The canopies were well-filled but with little or no shaded leaves or clusters. The soil looked like pure gravel, a remnant of the thousands of years of tidal activity in the Gironde River. A few of the vineyards near the chateau also were planted in heavy clay; some of these contained lots of chlorotic and leafroll-affected vines. The winery was a nice blend of new and old. The old barrel galleries contained the 1991 vintage, neatly stacked between the Doric columns. The 1990 vintage rested in a temperature-controlled cellar built in 1982. The estate controls 650 ha of vines, all but 30 of which are red. About 75% of the red 97 acreage is Cabernet Sauvignon, with 20% Merlot, and 5% Petit Verdot and Cabernet franc. Grapes from vines >35 years old usually go into Chateau Margaux, while fruit from younger vines is designated for their second label, Pavillon Rouge de Chateau Mar~aux. The 30 hectares of Sauvignon blanc are designated for Pavillon blanc de Chateau Margaux. Winery practices of note include 28-32°C fermentation temperature for all red wines, with a 3-week maceration time prior to pressing. Most red fermentations are done in large, open oak vats, although I saw considerable stainless steel tanks towards the rear of the winery. Wines are aged in 220 L center-of-France oak barrels for 18-24 months. Fining is done with egg whites. Each barrel is tasted prior to blending; each barrel represents part of an individual vineyard block and cultivar. Pontallier said there was no set format for blending, other than a lot of tasting. I spent the next day with my friend and colleague, Dr. Alain Carbonneau, the well-known viticulturist working out of the INRA Station at Villenave d'Ornon (Pont-de-la-Maye), near Bordeaux. Since the early to mid-1970's, his name has been associated with high-quality research into canopy management and microclimate measurement in grapevines. His divided canopy system for V. vinifera, the Lyre system, has been adopted in many parts of the world where high vine vigor is a problem, and its utilization in California and New Zealand has simultaneously increased yield and wine quality. The INRA station has 20 professionals working with grapes, with 100 professionals total; the 400 total personnel includes 80 technical and support staff involved with viticulture and enology. Some of their current projects include scion-rootstock-training system interactions, evaluation of >400 clones of Cabernet Sauvignon, control of vigor by hedging, water relations of vines under different training systems, and characterization of vineyard sites according to tannins and other fruit composition variables. The first research substation visited was in the Cotes de Bordeaux region,and was classified as a premiere Cotes de Bordeaux. Lyre-trained vines (Cabernet franc) were spaced 1.1 x 3.6 m (vine x row), through removal of every second row in a traditional planting. Pruning was based on 45,000 nodes/ha, or about 14 nodes per vine. Traditional plantings based on the same node number/ha usually carry 7 nodes/vine and 5,000 to 10,000 vines/ha; Lyre-trained vines are planted at 2,000 to 3,000 vines/ha. Results on Lyre training since -1976 have shown that wine quality has been improved, with more phenols and anthocyanins, and more fruit character in the wines. I was most interested in two things: 1) Why were rows so widely spaced and 2) Why wasn't node number per vine increased when canopies were divided? Carbonneau responded by saying that during the latter stages of fruit maturation, the sun angle was such that rows of Lyre-trained vines spaced <3.0 m apart could shade each other, leading to all the various consequences resulting from shaded fruit. As to the inquiry about increasing node numbers, the reason appeared to be political; yields/ha are restricted to 100 hL/ha or less, and taking advantage of high vigor by using Lyre training to increase yields could never happen under present wine laws. Therefore, an application has been made to allow increased row spacing only (from 1.5 to 3.0m), and if approved, Lyre training will 98 automatically be required to maintain node numbers at 45,000/ha. Carbonneau indicated that Lyre training has maximum impact on moderate to low vigor soils. This was also consistent with the objective of maintaining, rather than increasing yield. On high vigor sites, yield per meter of row would need to be increased for this type of canopy division to be effective. This is the whole concept of balanced pruning. If a vine is so vigorous on a single curtain that fruitfulness and wine quality are compromised, division is needed, but along with division come yield increases of up to 100% due to the doubling of canopy length. This basic principle has probably not been lost on Carbonneau in Bordeaux and Schneider in Alsace, but politics has once again caused scientific principles to be compromised or ignored. We are still allowed to embrace these principles in North America. Vive le difference! From Cotes de Bordeaux, we travelled to a vineyard, Chateau Petit Freylon, in Entre-Oeux-Mers, the rolling countryside between the Oordogne and Garonne Rivers. All wines produced in the region can only carry the label Appellation Bordeaux, or Appellation Bordeaux Superieur if probable alcohol is >12.5%. This particular vineyard that we visited was on heavy soil, and the Merlot vines were trained to S04 and 5BB rootstocks, vigorous stocks which made a bad problem worse. A section of the vineyard had been converted to Lyre, and the vigneron, M. Michel Lagrange, fermented the Lyre-trained Merlot separately for later blending with the Cabernet Sauvignon grown on site (about 90% Merlot:10% Cabernet). Lagrange described the Lyre-trained vines as having better growth, higher titratable acidity at veraison, less Botrytis, equal sugar, better color, higher polyphenols, more fruity flavor, and more homogenous ripening in comparison with traditionally trained vines. Wines were clearly superior. Malolactic fermentation was a bit more difficult to start, alcoholic fermentations were slow to finish, and must nitrogen was lower than in fruit from traditional systems. Usually poor wine was made from this Merlot block, but after Lyre training was introduced, wine quality improved. The wine tasting we had bore this out. The Lyre vines we saw were in permanent sod, spaced 1.1 x 3.6m (vine x row), and cordon-trained. Some shoot thinning was done to remove base buds. The original planting was at 1.8 m spacing; vines in Entre-Oeux-Mers are wider spaced than in Medoc, and canopies are trained higher. Also, yields are 60-100 hL/ha instead of the 40-50 hL/ha levels typical in Medoc. The afternoon was spent at Chateau Couhins, another substation of INRA located in Graves, and a site designated as an Appellation Graves Grand Cru Classe. The several hectares on this site are maintained by a permanent crew of 7, plus 30 part-time people employed during crush. It is a very interesting site in that the typical gravelly soil (hence the name Graves) is only found in the center block of the vineyard; a sandy section lies to the east and a clay section to the west. Each block is planted with multifactorial experiments that contain several variations on the common V-shaped Lyre, including the 'superposed Lyre', 'inverted Lyre', and 'Lyre pergola', designed, respectively, for terraces, steep slopes and table grapes. Cultivars include the traditional red and white Graves varieties, plus the new cultivars 'Arriloba' ('Raffiat' x 'Chardonnay') , 'Liliorila' ('Barroque' x 'Chardonnay'), 'Perdea' ('Raffiat' x 'Chardonnay'), and 'Egiodola' ('Fer Servadou' x 'Abouriou'). 'Arriloba' is a high-yielding, Botrytis-resistant cultivar that could be used for blending with 'Sauvignon 99 blanc'; 'Liliorila' is an excellent dessert wine cultivar, and 'Egiodola' is being used to produce red and rose wines in Southern France. The rootstocks being tested on the three different soils are 'Fercal' (all three blocks); 420A (high lime clay soil}, and 101-14 and 'Gravesac' (gravel and sand blocks). Lyre vines on these sites are spaced 1.1 x 3.6m (vine x row) and carry 30 nodes/vine, while the traditionally-trained vines are spaced at 1.1 x 1.8m and carry about 12 nodes/vine. Three of the most famous Medoc Chateaux can give a visitor a good appreciation for viticultural and enological practices in Bordeaux: Chateau Lynch-Sages (Pauillac); Chateau Lafite Rothschild (Pauillac); and Chateau Cos Estournel (St. Estephe). Lynch-Sages, a fifth growth estate south of Pauillac, uses eno 1og i ca 1 techniques common throughout Medoc. Red fermentations are usually at 28-32°C for 3 days, then allowed to drop to 18°C for 2-3 weeks. This long maceration period increases color, tannin, and flavor in the wine. Initially, caps are pumped over daily, followed by a final week undisturbed. Most of their fermenters are open stainless steel tanks; after pressing, wines are pumped into concrete tanks one floor below, then into oak for 12-16 months, then back into stainless steel for storage until bottling. Barrels are kept for 2-3 years, then sold; a 3-year-old barrel sells for 200 francs, and a 2-year-old barrel fetches 300 francs. New ones are 3000 francs. There are still a few wooden vats ("for the tourists ... "}, but epoxy-lined tanks have all but totally replaced the wooden ones. Red blends are 70:18:10:2 'Cabernet Sauvignon': 'Merlot': 'Cabernet franc': 'Petit Verdot', and 40:40:20 'Sauvignon blanc':'Semillon':'Muscadelle' for their whites. Whites are all fermented 'sur lie'. All grapes are crushed and totally destemmed; there is no whole cluster pressing or "stem return" to the fermentation (to increase tannins}. They routinely crush 50,000 liters per day in a 12-hour day. They taste each barrel following 3 rackings. This is quite a task with 3500 barrels! After that, a series of blends is produced with varying quantities of 'Cabernet Sauvignon', and 3 or 4 tastings are conducted until the winemaker and the estate directors are satisfied. The lees are also barrelled, and about 50% of this volume can be recovered as clear wine. Clarity of the wines in each barrel is checked by candling. Fining is done by egg whites or isinglass. The famous, elegant, and ostentatious Chateau Lafite Rothschild is perhaps the most well known of the first growths of the Medoc. We were hosted by the International Director of Operations, Gilbert Rokvamm, a very pleasant and unassuming man. Making wine at Chateau Lafite was like anywhere else in Medoc: 100% crushed berries, totally destemmed, are pumped into either stainless steel or wooden fermenters and fermented at 29-30°C for 20 days. Their laboratory is almost non-existent, and harvest data is determined mostly by flavor in the berries when the pedicels turn completely brown. They employ 6 full-time coopers, and no barrels need to be purchased. Wood for staves is shipped from the forests in the center of France, either Allier or Nevers. Their typical blends are 70% 'Cabernet Sauvignon', 20-25% 'Merlot', and the remainder 'Cabernet franc'. As for blending, most terroirs and cultivars within are kept separate until tasting, at which point blending begins. As with Margaux and Lynch-Sages, they produce a second label from their young vines. 100 The vineyards adjacent to the estate were pure gravel. About 60,000-80,000 nodes/ha are retained at pruning. Although some young blocks on the estate are trained to the Lyre system, Rokvamm is against using Lyre training; he feels fruit exposure is reduced, and water stress is increased by the high trunks. It was nonetheless interesting to know that this great bastion of tradition was dabbling with new technology. Perhaps more surprising was the fact that Lafite uses vacuum concentration to bring their musts up to 12-12.5° of probable alcohol. By removing some water, many "bad aromas" (presumably short chain polar compounds) are removed in the water fraction. Perhaps more than weather is responsible for the great vintages in 1988-90, and the very good vintages of 1982 and 1986 that will keep for 20 years! The well known Chateau Cos Estournel is located in the sub-appellation of St. Estephe. It is a second growth with an exce 11 ent reputation. Most of the winemaking practices are identical to Lafite and Lynch-Bages. The bulk of their fermentations are done in open stainless steel at 28-32°C, with a 3-week maceration period before pressing. Young vines, which produce -80 hL/ha, produce their second label, Chateau de Marbuzet, while their older vines, which yield -30 hL/ha, are designated for their first label. After bidding adieu to our host, Ms. Catherine di Costanzo, our tour of Bordeaux was complete. Growing Bordeaux Varieties in North America We are in the infancy of producing Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot and Cabernet franc in B.C., and as yet have done no research other than variety testing at different sites. We have done some leaf removal work with Semillon, to try to minimize the asparagus flavor in the wines. Our results thus far have been very favorable; leaf removal has increased the floral aroma and flavor in the wines, but there have been no adverse effects on fruit composition (Table 4). SOME CONCLUDING REMARKS Our tour of wi negrowi ng regions in Western Europe was a most exhausting itinerary that could easily have been expanded to 5 weeks instead of 3, with much left to see and learn. Although I saw few viticultural or enological practices that could be considered "innovative", it was nonetheless an extremely worthwhile experience, and one I hope to repeat occasionally during my career. Anyone in the world who works with grapes and wines should go to France and Germany, if only to put our small industry in perspective. It is also important to remember that although public sector funding for horticulture research in North America is something short of pitiful, it is here in the New World where we have the greatest opportunity to easily implement our research. The millions of marks and francs spent on research in Germany and France caul d bury our budgets to astounding depths, but evidence of the impact of their research on the industry is minimal. It is mired in politics and tradition and ignorance. It is with that single and most overwhelming impression that I returned to North America. 101 LITERATURE CITED 1. Kiefer, W. and P. Crusius. 1984. Beziehungungen zwischen Anschnitt, Mengenertrag und Qualitat bei verschiedenen Rebsorten. Mitt. Klosterneuburg 34:51-63. 2. Murisier, F. and R. Ziegler. 1991. Effets de la charge en bourgeons et de la densite de plantation sur la potentiel de production, sur la qualite du raisin et surie development vegetatif. Essais de Chasselas. Revue Suisse Vitic. Arboric. Hortic. 23:277-282. 3. Reynolds, A.G. and D.A. Wardle. 1989. Impact of several canopy manipulation practices on growth, yield, fruit composition, and wine quality of Gewurztraminer. Amer. J. Enol. Vitic. 40:121-129. 4. Smart, R.E. 1988. Shoot spacing and canopy microclimate. Amer. J. Enol. Vitic. 39:325-333. 102 Table 1. Some effects of three shoot densities and three crop levels on vine performance, fruit composition, and wine composition of Riesling, 1989 and 1990. Lateral Shoot Yield TA cis-3-hexanol Linalool 0 Factor leaf area (t/ha) 8rix (g/L) pH (~g/L)z ( ~g/L) z Shoot Densit~ (shoots/m row) 16 159 10.9 21.4 12.8 3.00 62 25 26 70 14.4 20.7 13.0 2.94 67 22 36 76 16.5 20.9 13.0 2.97 76 21 Significance L** L***,Q** L,Q* NS L*,Q** L*** L* Crop Level (clusters/shoot) 1 88 12.4 21.4 12.8 3.01 68 25 1.5 96 14.3 20.8 13.0 2.96 57 22 15.4 20.8 12.9 2.94 81 21 ~ 2 119 o w Significance NS L*** L** NS L*** L,Q*** L** *,**,***, NS: Significant at p ~ 0.05, 0.01, 0.001, or not significant, respectively. L,Q: 1 inear and quadratic trends, respectively. z1989 wines; all other data 1990. Table 2. Impact of bas a1 leaf removal on Riesling fruit composition, 1988-90. Variable and year Control Basal leaf removal Significance OSrix 1988 17.7 17.5 NS 1989 20.9 20.6 NS 1990 19.8 19.6 NS r;tratable Ac;d;ty (g/L) 1988 11.2 10.9 * 1989 13.0 12.3 * 1990 14.1 13.6 *** pH 1988 3.20 3.20 NS 1989 3.07 3.08 NS 1990 3.05 3.06 NS Free Volat;le Terpenes (mg/L) 1988 0.99 0.98 NS 1990 0.73 0.70 NS Potent;ally-Volat;le Terpenes (mg/L) 1988 2.28 2.69 *** 1990 1.93 2.27 *** *,**,***,NS: Significant at p ~ 0.05, 0.01, 0.001, or not significant, respectively. 104 Table 3. Some effects of shoot density, crop level, and vertical canopy division on Pinot noir yield, fruit composition, wine composition, and wine aroma descriptors, 1989. Yield Wine anthocyanins Wine Aroma Descriptors {tons/ha)z 0 Brixz {mg/L) Vegetative Spice Caramel Shoot Densit~LCanoQ~ Division 10 shoots/m row 8.3b 25.3a 209a 20b 22 lib 20 shoots/m row 10.6a 25.0ab 180b 26a 26 15a Scott Henry 12 .I a 24.5b 208a 16b 23 lOb CroQ Level Full 12.1 24.8 180 23 29y 13 Half 8.8 15.1 218 18 23 11 Significance *** NS *** * ** NS ...... *,**,***,NS: Significant at p ~ 0.05, 0.01, 0.001, or not significant, respectively. Means followed by 0 ~ (J1 different letters are significant at 0 0.05, Duncan's multiple range test. zl991 data. v20 shoots/m treatments only Table 4. Fruit composition and sensory scores (N = 15) for Semillon wines in response to basal leaf removal, 1989. Variable Control Basal 1e a f remo va 1 Significance 0 Brix 16.9 19.5 *** Titratable Acidity (g/L) 9.3 9.8 *** pH 3.00 3.02 ** Most floral aroma/correct 1/10 7/10 ** respondents Most floral flavor/correct 2/10 7/10 ** respondents 106 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Yield (tons/ha) of Riesling vines in response to five training systems, Summerland, B.C., 1988-92. Legend: ADC=alternate double crossarm; LC=low cordon; LM=Lenz Moser high cordon; LV=low "V"; PB=pendel bog en. Columns represent treatment means; means within years surmounted with different letters are significantly different (Duncan's multiple range test, p Figure 6. Aroma and flavor descriptors for Gewurztraminer wines (tank samples) in response to three canopy manipulation practices. Oliver, B.C. (6A) and Kaleden, B.C. (6B). "!"-shaped lines are standard errors of the difference. 107 YIELD BY TRAINING SYSTEM, 1988-92 32 30 t 28 ~ 26 0 24 ...c "'22 (/) 20 c 18 )~ -1-0 16 ) "--"" 14 0 12 _j w 10 - >- 8 6 4 2 11 I ts<1 B831XJ ~ I I ts 3.4 ~ 3.2 "" 3.0 Q) 2. 8 z y E 2.6 '-..._/ 2. 4 X X U1 2.2 w 2.0 z 1.8 __, 0 1.0 w 1.6 CL 1.4 0::::: 1.2 a w b b I- 1.0 c 0 0.8 z 0.6 0 2 0.4 0.2 0.0 FVT PVT FVT PVT FVT PVT FVT PVT FVT PVT ADC LC LM LV PB CANE WEIGHTS BY TRAINING SYSTEM, 1988-91 90 ~ 85 ()) 80 '-.....-/ 7 5 1- 70 I 65 (..9 - 60 w 55 3 50 __, __, 45 0 w z 40 <( 35 u 30 z 25 <( 20 w 15 2 10 5 0 88 89 90 91 88 89 90 91 88 89 90 91 88 89 90 91 88 89 90 91 r-- A DC ---4 r-- LC ---1 r--- LM ---1 r-- LV ---1 r--- P 8 ---1 NT~ 0) I co "'¢ co (j) NT .,.- 00 0 ...-. m C)- z- () "'¢ ~ NT (f) fo w "'¢ N NT (f)- 00. 00 w ...- 00 z -> N . ~. 0 . ~ . 00. ~. ~ . ~. ~. M . N . ~ . 0 . ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (MoJ wj6>1) 3ZIS 3NIA 111 GEWURZTRAMINER PVf BY CANOPY MANIPULATION, 1988-91 3. 0 ~ a 2.8 2.6 2. 41 t "~" §§§ IX'X"'X1 m ~ 2.2 ~ ·mn < 2.0~1 ~~~~ z 0) 1.8 ~I I l "\.. "\.. l ICXX:t I::XX1 v 1. 6 ~I y _, E I l'">""i PQQ TOTAL AROMA MUSCAT FLAVOUR CEDAR AROMA __. __. RESINOUS FLAVOU MUSCAT AROMA w I I -·- FRUITY FLAVOUR BODY TOTAL FLAVOUR --CONTROL --- HEDGE -- LEAF REMOVAL KALEDEN SITE TOTAL AROMA MUSCAT FLAVOUR CEDAR AROMA ..._ , ...... '/ ,, ' \ _, _, RESINOUS FlAVOU USCAT AROMA ~ FRUITY FLAVOUR BODY TOTAL FLAVOUR --CONTROL --- HEDGE -- LEAF REMOVAL OPTIONS FOR JUICE CLARIFICATION Claudio Salvadore Firelands Wine Cooperative Sandusky, OH This talk is about practical applications to juice clarification and new technologies being developed in the last few years. Everyone knows the importance of juice clarification to produce good quality wines. The different methods to clarify juice include: -Static -Chemical -Mechanical Static clarification The static method is by far the most economical, but it is of limited value in a hot climate where means of refrigeration are not available. In fact, most times under these conditions, a large amount of S0 is required to keep the juice from fermenting and spoiling. And it is known that2 higher doses of S0 are not desirable for producing good quality wines. 2 Chemical clarification Juice clarification by the addition of chemical agents is the method most often used. It is relatively quick, and along with clarifying the juice, eliminates undesirable components such as proteins, pectins, etc. The following agents are most commonly used: Bentonite: This is the best agent to remove proteins. It is better used on juice than on wine. The problem is if high doses are applied, flavor and aroma may be stripped as well. I normally add bentonite to a juice in fermentation at the rate of 2 lbs/1000 gal. Silicagel and gelatine: Silicagel is a silicon colloid in suspension. The combination of silicagel and gelatine has only a clarifying effect on the juice. The best clarification occurs at 48°F. The amount used depends on the amount of solids present in the juice. Pectic enzymes: The juice treatment by pectic enzymes has become very popular in the last few years. There are two types of enzymes: 1) pectic enzymes with only a clarifying action and 2) pectic enzymes with extractive and clarifying action. The first type of enzyme is used primarily for clarification of juices coming from presses. The second type is very effective in extracting aromas and, for red wines, color during skin contact. The general rules for the use of enzymes are as follows: Temperature: The enzymes are active at temperatures ranging from 45-130°F. 115 Time of Action: Generally very brief (about 10 minutes), but it is also dependent on the concentration. ~ The enzymes are produced to ensure maximum activity at the juice pH. For a pH below 3.2, I would recommend increasing the dose. SO 1. The normal dosage of S02 used in winemaking does not affect the activity of enzymes. Only concentrations above 500 ppm slow down their activity. At 2500 ppm the activity is completely stopped. Polyphenols: High concentrations of tannins can slow down the activity of the enzymes. I would suggest a light treatment with gelatin before adding the enzyme (1/2 lb/1000 gal), or increase the enzyme dose. Bentonite: Enzymes are proteins that can be adsorbed by the bentonite. As a precaution, if you are planning to use bentonite, wait about 3 hours after the pectic enzyme treatment. Gelatine: No effect. The sediments produced by mechanical clarification treatments can be removed by racking or other mechani ca 1 means, such as the use of a centrifuge. The centrifuge can be used prior to or after clarification. A good centrifuge can clarify juice to approximately 1% solis. It has the tendency to shake up the juice too much, and is of course, very costly. A new and very versatile system that has become popular in Europe and much more affordable is the rotary vacuum filter. Basically, the juice is drawn by a vacuum through a precoating of D.E. mounted on a rotating drum. A blade on the side continuously removes the sediments accumulating on the D.E. This particular filter provides 15 square meters of surface area. For small wineries filters of 1-3 square meters of surface area are available. The versatile use of this filter includes: -Filtration of juices after pressing, leaving only .5% solids. This replaces chemical treatment, and by its fast and efficient action, eliminates some of the major disadvantages associated with a lack of cooling possibilities. It is, therefore, particularly suitable for wineries in warmer climates. -Filtration of lees bottoms from clarification and fermentation. -Use as a conventional D.E. filter. -Filtration rates for heavy lees, 40 gal/hr per square meter of surface area. For press juice, 130 gal/hr per square meter of surface area. 116 ( \ SANITATION IN A SMAll WINERY Toni Carlucci Winemaker, Chalet Debonne Vineyards Madison, OH A good sanitation program in a winery is needed to abide by the rules and regulations set by state and federal governments: for aesthetic reasons and for the production of high quality wines. Wine is a food, and therefore governed by the rules and regulations set by the state and federal government. An important part of these regulations states that "wine shall be deemed to be adulterated if it has been prepared, packed or held under unsanitary conditions, whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health". Therefore, the wine for sale may be prohibited by authorities if the production area or the warehouse environment do not pass their inspection. A clean winery provides greater aesthetic appeal to customers, and this helps promote sales, ie., tours. Product longevity and consistency are closely related to the number and type of microorganisms present. Some spoilage organisms import subtle defects over an extended period of time, while others display more obvious symptoms. What is meant by sanitation? Sanitation is the adequate treatment of surfaces by a process that is effective in destroying vegetative cells or pathogenic bacteria, and is substantially reducing other microorganisms. Such treatment shall not adversely affect the product and shall be safe for the consumer. A good sanitation program requires awareness of all factors directly and indirectly involved with the production of wine. It includes the construction of walls, floors, and equipment. lighting, ventilation, water supplies and employees' work habits also need to be considered. General Sanitation Grounds and winery - The grounds surrounding the winery must be free of conditions that may contaminate the product. Proper handling of litter, waste and debris to eliminate insect and rodent harbors. Drainage must be adequate to prevent breeding places for insects and microorganisms. Equipment design - To be of sanitary design, equipment should be able to be manually dismantled and cleaned. Wine contact surfaces should be non-porous and smooth stainless steel. A moist climate is ideal for mold growth, therefore, equipment should be designed for self-draining. Insect control - Not only will wine be directly contaminated if any insect is trapped in the finished product, insects can indirectly contaminate the product by spreading microorganisms that may cause spoilage of the finished product. UV light, sticky fly tape and spraying daily during harvest and summer months. Rodents - Rats and mice are carriers of filth and can contaminate a 11 equipment and processing materials. Elimination of rodents in the winery is best accomplished by the use of poison. Sanitation should start at the grape 117 rece1v1ng and fermentation area. The press, destemmer-crusher, pumps and hoses should be washed daily. Grapes should be received in a paved area for easy washing and cleaning to prevent build up of insects, bacteria and odor. Fermenters must be filled partially to allow adequate headspace for foam. When a fermentation foams over, the spillage provides good conditions for growth of insects and the development of bacteria and odors. Most Common Wine Spoilage Microorganisms Taste, aroma and flavor balance is a delicate area in wine production. Lactobacillus is considered to have the greatest potential for wine spoilage, mainly due to its ethanol tolerance. Acetobacter may cause acidification in the cap of red fermenters. Punch-down at least twice a day. Factors that Influence the Growth of Wine Microorganisms pH - measure of hydrogen ion concentration. pH is a key indicator of a wine's resistance to microbial spoilage. Yeast cells have approximately twice the growth rate at a pH of 4.0 compared to a pH of 3.0. The lower the pH, the greater the percent of SOa in the molecular form. pH is a very important indicator for determining the maturity of grapes. T.A. - is dependent on the organic acid concentration and the extent to which those acids dissociate. Low TA's allow more bacterial growth in the wine. Wines with a TA of 0.5 g/100 ml or less are particularly subject to bacterial spoilage. Wine additives: S02 - additions to juice depend upon the fruit condition, temperature, overall sanitation and wine style desired. Potassium Sorbate - is a short chain fatty acid which together with its salt, exhibits antimicrobial properties. It is added as a yeast inhibitor in sweet wines. Potassium sorbate does not kill yeasts, but if properly employed, inhibits their growth. The effectiveness of potassium sorbate is dependent upon: 1. Wine pH - the lower the better 2. Free S02 - content 3. % alcohol 4. Sorbic acid concentration Add just before bottling! Average about 200 ppm. Alcohol - the higher the content, the more inhibition to yeast. The alcohol content of wines is an important parameter affecting the growth of microorganisms. Wine yeast: 15% by volume; spoilage yeast: 10-13% by volume; acetic acid bacteria: 14.5% by volume; lactic acid bacteria: 10-21% by volume. Oxygen- The growth of aerobic organisms can be controlled by limiting oxygen in the atmosphere above the wine. This is best accomplished by storage in completely full containers. Due to its limited solubility, N is preferred over COa as inert gas. Both acetic acid and lactic acid bacteria require very smal 1 amounts of oxygen in order to grow. 118 C0 and pressure - inhibitory effect on yeast growth is very small at 1 atmosphere2 pressure. But at pressures greater than 1 ATM, the effects are significant: example: 0 ATM - 104.3 yeast cells/ml 5 ATM - 3.2 yeast cells/ml Nitrogen compounds - needed for growth and reproduction. Cleaning eliminates this essential factor. Temperature -yeast can be acclimated to grow at temperatures below those favored by acetic and lactic acid bacteria. Chlorine Advantages of Chlorine - 1) effective against a wide variety of bacteria and spores; 2) not affected by hard water; 3) relatively inexpensive; 4) use 150-180 ppm free chlorine (1/4 cups/5 gallons of water). Disadvantages of Chlorine - 1) corrosive to many metals; 2) dissipates rapidly from solutions; 3) activity decreases rapidly in the presence of organic matter. Iodophores Advantages of Iodophores - 1) broad spectrum of activity; 2) not affected by hard water; 3) non-corrosive and non-irritating to the skin; 4) stable, long shelf-life. Disadvantages of I odophores - 1) should not be used at temperatures exceeding 120°F.; 2) very slow acting at pH of 7.0 or above; 3) less effective against bacterial spores than chlorine. Since the quality and soundness of wines are highly contingent upon the numbers and types of microorganisms present, it is very important to control the populations of spoilage organisms in the wines and in areas where they could contact wines. THIS IS A FUNCTION OF SANITATION!! Increasing a wine's longevity and quality positively affects stability of a wine. Other benefits of improved sanitation are increasing the life of equipment, overall winery efficiency, pride in the facilities and increasing workers moral. It is helpful to think of sanitation in terms of population levels of unwanted organisms. Destemmer-crusher (Amos stainless steel) The importance of prompt cleaning of surfaces following contact with juice or wine becomes very apparent when considering that, although a fresh residue may have a very small initial population of microorganisms, if it is not washed off, 100 microorganisms could easily multiply into hundreds of billions in one day!! With simple cleaning, the source of spoilage can be eliminated and the population kept under control. This allows for much easier and more effective sanitation later on. 119 Bucher Press - 4-ton press, programmable, channels come out to clean. Juice Settling Tanks- 1130 gal. Lees Filter (Fletcher filter) - chlorinate, leave with citric acid/502 solution overnight. · Stainless Steel Tanks DV BBLS - 1984 - Citric acid/S02, rinse; S02 gas when stored Pressure Washer - "Handy" 2. 2 gpm, 1. 5 hp twin pi stan Steamer - Rapid 80, sietz 112°C, 3-phase Walkashaw Pump Orion Filter- The purpose of sterile filtration is not the killing of the microorganisms, but removing them phys i ca 11 y. Therefore, one of the most important procedures during cold sterile bottling of wines is the sanitation by filtration. The very fine pores of a sanitizing filter sheet should only serve for germ removal and never be used to remove colloid and other turbid matters. Bottling Line- Sietz-Tirax, 8-spout filler, 24 bottles/min; steam sanitized Labeler - Krones Water Line Filter - dirt and rust Hose Racks Laboratory Wines Conclusion To be effective, a sanitation program should keep the winery clean, low in microbiological counts and aesthetically pleasing to the consumer. Premises and equipment should be inspected often for cleanliness. Product longevity and consistency will be increased with a good sanitation program. LITERATURE CITED 1. Amerine, M.A. 1980. The Technology of Winemaking. 4th edition, AVI Publishing Co., Inc., Westport, CT. 2. Vine, R. 1981. Commercial Winemaking, Processing and Controls. AVI Publishing Co., Inc., Westport, CT. 3. Zoecklein, B.W. Controlling Microbial Growth in Wine. Univ. of MO. 120 / \ FILM YEASTS AND BRETTANOMYCES - THE BEAUTY OR THE BEAST? Roland Riesen and Judy Stetson Department of Horticulture The Ohio State University/OARDC Wooster, OH Whereas film yeasts are accepted unanimously as spoil age organisms with detrimental effect on wine quality the contribution of Brettanomyces to wine aroma and flavor is controversial among researchers, winemakers, wine judges and consumers. This presentation and the subsequent tasting of wines affected by film yeasts and Brettanomyces is intended to provide the facts an individual assessment can be based upon. Film Yeasts 1. Occurrence Film yeasts are part of the wild yeast population in nature and are brought into the winery with the grapes. There they grow everywhere where there are nutrients and oxygen available, such as in partially filled tanks, open containers, not frequently enough topped barrels, equipment, which is not thoroughly cleaned after use, floors etc. As part of the wild yeast popu lation they help initiate the alcoholic fermentation. The fermentation strength varies widely among the genera and species but they are altogether weaker fermenters than Saccharomyces. They usually die off quickly after the beginning of the fermentation because their metabolism is strictly aerobic and the oxygen content of the must is depleted very rapidly. After the fermentation they can grow again, but only if there is oxygen available. Since the access to oxygen is an absolute requirement they don't grow in the wine but on the wine surface, forming an ugly looking and somewhat distractive smelling and tasting, continuous, remarkably stable, velvety, soft, white, creamy, chalky, wrinkly, dusty-floury film growing in thickness (fig. 13, 14). The only really effectfve way to protect a wine is to keep the oxygen away by using closed containers without leaving a headspace. Since these are practices adopted routinely by a careful winemaker film yeasts do not play a significant role in the winemaking process! 2. Classification The film yeasts occurring in wine belong to 3 main genera: -Hansenu7a: 30 species (H. anoma7a); strong ester formation, 2-phenylethanol; -Pichia: 56 species (P. membranaefaciens [fig. 15,16], P. vini, P. farinosa); aldehydic; -Candida: 196 species (C. ste11ata, C. pulcherrima, C. vini); imperfect form of Pichia and Hansenu7a; formation of higher alcohols, 2-phenylethanol, ethyl acetate; 121 3. Characterization The alcohol- and S0 -tol erance of film yeasts vary with the genera and species but are generally2 low. Wines affected by film yeasts are described as "(artificially) estery, aldehydic, lacking fruit and varietal character, oxidized, thin, empty, naked ... ". 4. Metabolism Film yeasts are able to metabolize sugars both aerobically (respiration) and anaerobically (fermentation), but they gain the main energy for growth through the oxidation of ethanol (aerobically). Common is also an accompanying degradation of organic acids. The composition of a wine affected by Pichia farinosa was changed in the following way [3,4]: initial after 3 months ethanol 70.8 g/1 20.5 g/1 malic acid 6.8 g/1 3.4 g/1 glycerol 6.9 g/1 1.3 g/1 (6 months) metabolism of ethanol: esters higher alcohols ox ox ethanol + 02 --> acetaldehyde --> act acetic acid respiration (TCA cycle) BRETTANOMYCES/DEKKERA 1. Anecdotal "One prominent wine writer, in particular, reportedly has such a strong preference for Brett flavors that he consistently ranks infected wines higher than uninfected ones. As a result, some wineries are deliberately producing wines that are at least slightly infected, possibly to improve their ratings" journalist ". we decided that a little Brett adds warmth and complexity. As the wine develops, the barnyard aromas disappear, leaving earthy and cedary notes. ( ... ). 122 We want to control Brett, but not get rid of it entirely" winemaker "Brett is the chief microbial concern in most wineries, it is the spoilage yeast par excellence" microbiologist 2. Classification Brettanomyces/Dekkera belong to the group of the apiculate veasts. They are the same organism representing the sexual (Dekkera) and asexual (Brettanomyces) reproduction mode common to most yeasts: -Brettanomyces: imperfect form (7 species) -Dekkera: perfect form (2 species, fig. 17) 3. Characterization The shape ranges from ogival to ovoidal, exhibiting a strong polymorphism (fig. 17). Brettanomyces is usually small, sometimes as small as bacteria ([1.5~ - 3.5~] x variable length). It is a weak and slow fermenter with a high alcohol tolerance (up to 14-15 %) and a strong resistance towards S02 sorbate and actidione (up to 100 ppm!). ' 4. Occurrence The concept that Brettanomyces enters the winery on grapes cannot be supported by research. Brett lives in the winery, feeding on any nutritional source available such as dirty crush equipment, drains, pools of grape juice left after cleaning, cooperage etc. It is very versatile and its growth is not restricted to sweet wines. It has been isolated from dry red and white wines with less than 0.1% RS and up to 15% alcohol, sherries and sparkling wines. Sometimes the incomplete separation of the daughter cells from the mother cell leads to the formation of a film. 5. Metabolism The formation of the by-products res pons i bl e for the "Brett character" depends largely on the composition of the must/wine and on the fermentation conditions, particularly on the degree of oxygen present (stimulation of growth by oxygen: "Custer effect"). The Brett fermentation is generally semi-aerobic or aerobic. The various descriptors of "Brett wines" can be explained by the following processes: - fruity, apple- or cider-like, aldehydic: The high activity of esterification enzymes leads to an increased formation of ethyl acetate, isoamyl acetate, 2-phenethyl acetate, ethyl esters of medium chain fatty acids (C8 - C14 ). 123 - sharp, sour, pungent: Due to an increased formation of: - acetic acid: up to 2-3 g/1; - short chain fatty acids: rancid, sweaty, cheesy, penetrating, putrid; - burnt beans, ammonia, barnyard animals, mousiness: The degrirlltioo of the naturally occurring amino acid lysine in the presence of ethanol leads to the formation of the two isomers 2-acetyl- 1,4,5,6-tetrahydropyridine and 2-acetyl-3,4,5,6-tetra hydropyridine (aroma threshold in water: 1.6 ppb !!!). strongly spicy and clove-like: Due to the metabolism of ferulic acid, a naturally occurring phenolic acid in grape juice and wine, to 4-ethylguaiacol. - woody, smoky, phenolic: Due to the metabolism of p-coumaric acid, a naturally occurring phenolic acid in grape juice and wine, to 4-ethylphenol. In addition the increased formation of medium chain fatty acids (C8 - C14 ) can reach levels inhibitory to Saccharomyces. 6. Control Once Brettanomyces is in the winery it is very difficult, if not impossible, to get rid of it. The best control can be achieved by preventive measures: - good sanitation, incl. the elimination of any nutritional sources (need of external vitamins for growth); - maintenance of adequate so~ levels (deterrent reducing the growth without complete eliminat1on of the organism!); - segregation of infested wine lots and containers (barrels!!); - maintenance of cool cellar temperatures; Experience in wineries all over the world has shown that the Brettanomyces population can be controlled - that is kept at low levels - but not eliminated completely with the above practices. LITERATURE CITED 1. Biology of Microorganisms, Thomas D. Brock, 3rd edition, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632. 2. Mikrobiologie des Weines, Prof. Dr. Helmut Hans Dittrich, 2. neubearbeitete Auflage 1987, Verlag Eugen Ulmer, D-7000 Stuttgart 70 (Hohenheim). 3. Practical Microscopic Evaluation of Wines and Fruit Juices, Prof. Dr. Hans R. Luthi and Ulrich Vetsch, 2nd edition 1981, Heller Chemie- und Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH, D-7170 Schwabisch Hall. 4. Chemie des Weines, Gottfried Wurdig und Richard Woller, 1989, Verlag Eugen Ulmer, D-7000 Stuttgart 70 (Hohenheim). 124 5. Heresztyn T., Formation of Substituted Tetrahydropyridines by Species of Brettanomyces and Lactobacillus Isolated from Mousy Wines, Am. J. Enol. Vitic., 37(2):127-31 (1986). 6. Heresztyn T., Metabolism of volatile phenolic compounds from hydroxycinnamic acids by Brettanomyces yeast, Arch Microbial, 146:96-8 (1986). 7. HockS., Coping with Brettanomyces, Practical Winery and Vineyard, 26 - 31, Jan/Feb 1990. FIGURES Fig. 13: [3], p. 38 Fig. 14: [3], p. 40 Fig. 15,16: [2], p. 209 Fig. 17: [2], p. 225 125 THE MYTH OF BRETT 1989 Shows Its Greatness Again BETWEEN DREAM, FACT AND UNCHANGEABLE REALITY ! " ... we decided that a little Brett adds warmth and complexity. As the wine develops, the barnyard aromas disappear, leaving earthy and ce dary notes. ( ... ).We want to con trol Brett, but not get rid of it entirely." winemaker 126 figure 13: Film yeast. Old, heavy pellicle on surface of grape juice (magnification 6-fold, bright-field illumination, Luthi et al. 1981) figure 14: Film yeast. Old, heavy pellicle on surface of grape juice (magnification 6-fold, bright-field illumination, Luthi et al. 1981) 127 figure 16: Pichia membraneaefaciens. After 10 days on potato agar (Lodder 1970) figure 15: Pichia membranaefaciens. After 3 days in malt extract. (Lodder 1970) figure 17: Dekkera bruxe77ensis. Pure culture after 5 days in male extract. (lodder 1970) 128 AN UPDATE ON SPARKLING WINE PRODUCTION PRACTICAL APPLICATION AND EVALUATION OF NON-VINIFERA VARIETIES Carl E. Shively Alfred University Alfred, NY Based on the present data, there is in excess of 2,000,000 cases of sparkling wine available from U.S. producers. Between 10 and 15% of this is produced from French-American hybrids and native varieties. Because of the competitive and highly technical nature of the sparkling wine industry, only those with an understanding of production economics, technology, and marketing can expect to succeed. Centuries of experience have enabled the sparkling wine producer to refine the art of bottle-fermented sparkling winemaking known as the "methode champenoise". There is considerable variation in production philosophy and technique regarding methode champenoise, and stylistic decisions are vast and include the following: viticultural practices, cultivars used, harvesting parameters, whole cluster pressing vs. stemming and crushing, types of presses and pressures, separation of press fractions, phenol levels, use of sulfur dioxide, yeast varieties for primary and secondary fermentation and aging, fermentation temperatures, ML fermentation, age of cuvee, nature of dosage, bottle pressure, etc. VITICULTURAL CONSIDERATIONS The array of viticultural parameters affecting methode champenoise palatability are numerous, and understanding the relationships between vineyard management and ultimate wine quality may be even more difficult than for table wines. Cuvees are generally bottled when they have the better part of their life ahead to age and develop. This requires considerable insight and perhaps helps to obscure the relationships between vineyard management activities and ultimate sparkling wine palatability. It is generally accepted that a cool climate which allows the fruit to stay on the vine longer, while retaining desirable acidities, is important in the production of base wines. Field temperatures and heat summation units are very important, but such parameters as solar radiation, wind velocity, and to a lesser extent, sky temperature can be quite important. According to Kliewer and Lider (1968), these factors can give ranges of berry temperatures of more than 15°C above to 3°C below the air temperature. Such changes are affected by row orientation, training system, trellis height, vine vigor, etc. To many methode champenoise producers, a high malic acid level in the grape is considered a desirable characteristic. Malic acid appears to add life and freshness to sparkling wine bases. The malic acid level in the grape is principally influenced by maturity, crop level, and temperature. VARIETIES Although most of the sparkling wine produced throughout the world utilizes 129 the classic vinifera varieties, this presentation will deal mainly with French American and native varieties produced in the Finger Lakes Region of New York State. Table 1 lists some of these varieties. Table 1. The major hybrid and native grape varieties used for sparkling wines in the NYS Finger Lakes Region Hybrids Natives Cayuga Catawba Seyval blanc Dutchess Vidal blanc Niagara Vignoles HARVEST PARAMETERS AND FRUIT MATURITY The harvest parameters of severa 1 cult i vars is given in Table 2. Grape harvest should be based upon a determination of desired style. Producers generally harvest based on flavor, aroma of the juice as well as analysis of Brix, acid, pH, etc. Generally, they are striving for base wines that are clean, delicate, and often not varietally assertive-yet not dull or lifeless. A desired cuvee is one with body, substance and structure. Immature fruit produces wines that are green or grassy in aromas as the result of being underripe. Overripe fruit can produce a base wine that is excessively varietal or assertive, thus a major reason for harvesting Niagara at around 14°Brix. Often the producer is looking for bouquet in the finished product, not excessive varietal aroma. This is a stylistic consideration. However, the winemaker should never lose sight of the effect carbon dioxide has on one's perception of wine character. The sparkle adds a significant magnifying effect on the odorous components of the wine. Table 2. Harvest parameters for four grape varieties used in sparkling wine production in NYS Finger Lakes. Cayuga Seyval Vignoles Niagara 0 Brix 18-19 16-18 19-20 14-15 T.A.(gms/100ml) .9-1.1 .8-.9 1.2-1.4 .75-.85 pH 2.95-3.10 3.2-3.35 2.9-3.1 3.0-3.2 CUVEE PRODUCTION There are approximately 12 sparkling wine producers in the NYS Finger Lakes Region. Six of these wineries produce sparkling wines from hybrids and/or native varieties. 130 Unlike classic vinifera varieties, which are usually hand-harvested and whole-cluster pressed, producers of hybrid and native variety sparkling wines for the most part, rely on mechanical harvesting, stemming, and crushing prior to pressing. Press pressures are kept to a minimum, with only a very few producers separating press fractions. Stemming, crushing, and pressing may be satisfactory provided skin contact with the juice is brief. Minimal skin contact produces a more elegant, less varietally assertive base wine, while extended skin contact releases more aroma. However, the latter also releases courser, undesirable components as well. Increased press pressures usually result in an increase of flavonoids such as catechins. Catechins account for most of the flavor in white wines with limited skin contact. Vin de cuvees (first press cuts) produced by low press pressures and thin-layer presses can be low in total phenols and particularly in flavonoid phenols, resulting in a low extract according to Schopfer (1981). Moderate pressures or combining portions of later press fractions are methods of stylistic input that can affect the tactile base and the aromatic character of the cuvee. Further experimentation involving press pressures and press fractions could prove quite useful for those producing sparkling wines from hybrids and native varieties. JUICE TREATMENT Sulfur dioxide is often added to the juice expelled from the press rather than directly into the press to avoid extraction of phenols. Although it is considered desirable to use sulfur dioxide to help control oxidation, there is no industry consensus regarding optimum amounts. In fact, some producers add no sulfur dioxide prior to the primary fermentation if the grapes come to the press in good condition. Phenols are oxidized in the absence of sulfur dioxide, and therefore some pass from the colorless to the colored or brown form, resulting in some juice browning. Less soluble or insoluble phenols precipitate and may be removed during fermentation due to the adsorbent qualities of the yeast. Muller-Spath (1981) suggest the desirability of low sulfur dioxide additions (20-25 mg/1) to the juice under the right microbiological and temperature conditions to encourage some oxidation. Press juice fractions are usually cold-settled or centrifuged to reach a nonsoluble solids level of 1/2 to 2 1/2% prior to fermentation. Grape solids are removed to minimize extraction of phenols during fermentation. Some producers use prefermentation juice fining to aid settling and to modify the palate structure of the base wine (Zoecklein, 1985,1988). PRIMARY FERMENTATION The 1ower the non- so 1ub 1e so 1 ids content and the coo 1er the fermentation, the greater is the production and retention of fatty acid esters (Williams et al., 1978). These compounds are responsible for the fruity, floral, aromatic nose of wines produced under such conditions. Some producers choose to ferment cuvees warm (65-70°F) to reduce the floral intensity making a more austere end product. 131 Vinification at 50-60°F is most common in this country. Protein fining agents can be used to clarify and lower the phenolic content of the juice. Isinglass and gelatin are the most common fining agents used. PVPP is also recommended to remove polyphenolic compounds from the juice. It should be noted that juices are much more forgiving of the harsh action of fining agents than are wines. For a detailed discussion of fining see Zoecklein, 1988. An addition of 10-25 g/hl of bentonite is frequently made prior to yeast inoculation. Also, a standard addition of 5-10 g/hl of diammonium phosphate is quite common. Where methode champenoise is to be used for sparkling wine production, both potassium bitartrate (KHT) and protein stability should be determined. Both of these stability parameters can have an effect on riddling ease, bubble size,and bubble retention. The yeast employed in the primary fermentation is often the same as that used in the sparkling wine fermentation. A problem with this procedure is that the end product may be too floral and too high in volatile components. Sparkling wine yeasts are se 1ected for their ability, among other things, to produce esters. Commonly used strains for primary fermentation of hybrid, native and vinifera varieties are Prise de Mousse, Epernay 2, Pasteur Champagne UCD 595, and California Champagne UCD 505. ASSEMBLING THE CUVEE It is seldom that a single wine of a single vintage from a single vineyard will be perfectly balanced in composition and flavor for a premium sparkling wine. Blending is, therefore, often performed and is considered by most to be the key to the art of sparkling wine production. It is an important tool producing a result that is greater than the sum of its parts and requires considerable insight. The winemaker must blend wines for sparkling wine production when the wines have the better part of their life ahead. The first decision is to determine whether the new wines are of sufficient palatability to produce sparkling wine. The magnifying effect carbon dioxide has on sparkling wines significantly highlights any enological flaws in the product. Wines for cuvee selection should be tasted at room temperature and on several occasions, so that no enological character is overlooked. Some winemakers prepare cuvee blends prior to stabilization. When wines of different ages, grapes, origins, etc., first meet bitartrate, and particularly protein, precipitation can occur. Cellar treatments such as fining and filtration can remove colloidal protectors, thus affecting potassium bitartrate stability. It is essential, whether blending is to be done or not, that protein and bitartrate stability be evaluated just prior to cuvee bottling. Producers should rely on chemical composition of the cuvee as well as taste for blending determinations. High alcohol, low pH cuvees may have difficulty completing the secondary fermentation, while low alcohol cuvees produce sparkling wines with poor bubble retention (Amerine and Josyln, -1970). 132 The primary requisites for a cuvee are: a high titratable acidity (7.0 g/1 or higher); a low pH (less than 3.3); a low volatile acidity (less than 0.060 g/100 ml); and a moderate alcohol level (between 10.0 and 11.5% V/V). The cuvee color should be light, with a balanced, fresh aroma. Many producers are looking for base wines with no single varietal character dominating, but with body, structure, substance, and length. Additionally, wines should have a relatively low phenolic content. The concentration of aldehydes is a gauge by which general sparkling wine quality can be measured. Aldehyde concentration is primarily a function of the extent of oxidation, as well as the quantity of sulfur dioxide added. Concentrations of acetaldehyde greater than about 75 mg/1 may add an overripe, bruised apple aroma. Immediately prior to the secondary fermentation, many producers filter their cuvees. The purpose of such an operation is twofold: to help prevent malolactic fermentation and to begin the secondary fermentation with clean wine. Malolactic fermentations can easily transpire under pressure, such as during the secondary fermentation. The result of such a bacterial fermentation is to reduce malic acid, increase lactic acid, raise the pH, and increase the titer of bacteria, the latter resulting in riddling difficulty and possible loss of product palatability. The general makeup of the cuvee will often prevent a spontaneous malolactic fermentation. THE SECONDARY FERMENTATION Although sparkling wines may be produced by several processes; e.g., Charmat, transfer, and continuous fermentation, we will deal here mainly with methode champenoise. Assuming that we have a cuvee which is brilliant and ready for the bottle fermentation, it is necessary to consider, among other things, the yeast strain to be used. Many strains are available commercially, although some producers use strains which they have isolated. In any case, the yeast strain to be used is going to be introduced into a rather hostile environment; i.e., alcohol, low pH, some level of sulfur dioxide, etc., and therefore, should, ideally, possess the following properties: alcohol tolerance SO to 1erance co~d tolerance produce little S02 adaptable to low oxygen concentration good flocculating qualities should not stain the bottle wall should produce no off flavors or odors Unfortunate 1y, there is no perfect yeast. There are, however, sever a 1 strains which meet most of the above criteria and have, therefore, been selected for sparkling wine production. They include: 133 Champagne Epernay UCD 590 Prise de Mousse EC-1118, Lalvin Pasteur Champagne UCD 595 California Champagne UCD 505 Agglomerating strain 016, Lalvin Epernay II I have worked with a few of these; Prise de Mousse, EC-1118, California Champagne, and the Lalvin agglomerating strain. EC-1118, a strain of Saccharomyces bayanus, is fairly assertive and some producers, therefore, prefer not to use it for both the cuvee fermentation and bottle fermentation. I have not found this to be a problem using grapes from the Finger Lakes. It ferments well at low temperatures (45 to 50°F), produces little sulfur dioxide or a1 dehydes, has good fl occul at i ng properties when used with bentonite as a riddling aid, and enhances fruitiness. The agglomerating strain 016, a strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, possesses many of the desirable properties of EC 1118, although it does not seem to be as assertive. This strain has excellent agglutinating qualities. My experience has been that 5 to 7 days of hand riddling, twice per day, produces a brilliant product, ready for disgorging without the use of any ri ddl i ng aids. I have experimented with UCD 505 and UCD 595. Both are considered good flocculators, although my experience with UCD 595 has not been entirely satisfactory in that on two occasions, I have found difficulty in getting the bottle fermentation started. UCD 505 and 595 are popular sparkling wine strains, but 505 is considered to be more delicate. PREPARATION OF YEAST STARTER CULTURE FOR BOTTLE FERMENTATION Proper preparation of a starter culture for the bottle fermentation is of utmost importance. A minimum of 106 cells/ml should be added to each bottle. An actively growing culture is generally around 1 x 108 cells/ml. It is desirable to grow several generations of active dried yeast prior to adding to cuvee. This can be done using some of the cuvee initially diluted approximately 50:50 with water to which 5% w/v sugar is added. I ferment this starter at 70 to 80°F to insure active cell replication. When the sugar drops to approximately 2.5% w/v, I add this starter to 10 liters of cuvee (undiluted) to which the sugar concentration is increased to 5% w/v. The fermentation temperature is decreased to approximately 60°F for this second round of starter preparation. Aeration or even oxygenation at each stage of the starter wi 11 produce cell membranes rich in ergosterol which will increase alcohol tolerance of the yeast cells. Each build up of the starter culture is done in the same fashion, using the previously grown starter as the inoculum for the next. In this case the 10 liter culture would be added to 100 liters of cuvee containing 5% w/v sugar. PREPARATION OF THE TIRAGE SYRUP Assuming the cuvee is dry, it is sugared at the rate of 4.2 gm/1 (1.0 lb/27.3 gal) for each atmosphere of pressure desired. Since 6 atmospheres is usually the upper limit for sparkling wines, the amount of sugar added would be 25.2 134 gms/liter. If the cuvee is not dry at the time of tirage syrup addition, this must be taken into consideration. Addition of diammonium phosphate favors production of esters and diminishes production of fusel oils during bottle fermentation. I generally add between 100 and 200 mg of DAP/liter of cuvee. To enhance riddling capability and disgorgement, a riddling aid or combination of riddling aids is generally added at the time of cuvee bottling. The most common riddling aids used are: Na or CA bentonite Clarifying agent C Adjuvant H Adjuvant 84 Isinglass Gelatin Diatomacious earth Tannin Bentonite is most popular among U.S. commercial producers. It is commonly added at a rate of 1/4 lb/1000 gallons. Generally, clays are preferred for young cuvees, while gelatins are used for cuvees which have been aged prior to the bottle fermentation. With the yeast Prise de Mousse, I find that using bentonite at this rate or less (1/8 lb/1000 gal) works satisfactorily. There is some controversy over whether it is necessary to aerate the cuvee prior to bottling. If the yeast starter is properly prepared, the amount of air introduced at the time of mixing and bottling will be sufficient. It is thought that purposeful aeration of the cuvee is unnecessary and may affect product palatability and also contribute to gushing. TIRAGE Once the tirage syrup and yeast starter have been added to the cuvee, the wine is bottled and placed in tirage where it will undergo the prise de mousse and develop the organoleptic qualities associated with sparkling wine. The rate of the bottle fermentation is a function of the yeast strain used, yeast volume, temperature, and cuvee chemistry. The fermentation rate is increased by increasing temperature, high levels of nutrients, low phenol content, high pH (above 3.2), low ethanol content, and low sulfur dioxide (less that 12 ppm). The fermentation temperature is generally between 48 and 55°F. This temperature range has been shown to result in a product with small bubble size and better bubble retention. At 50°F, I find that the bottle fermentation requires from 2 to 4 months. The main feature in the methode champenoise is the contact of the yeast with the wine during tirage. During the active bottle fermentation, yeast cells assimilate amino acids from the wine. Once the sugar is exhausted and the fermentation is complete, the still living yeast cells release amino acids back into the wine, a process termed exsorption. This is a purely passive transfer 135 of the amino acids into what is, by this time, sparkling wine. At some point in time (8 to 12 months from the beginning of tirage), the yeast cells begin to break down or undergo autolysis. It is this autolysis which has a great influence on the sensory qualities associated with premium sparkling wines and champagnes. Several investigators have implicated amino acid release from the yeast cells as being the major factor related to development of these desirable organoleptic qualities. If this is so, it should be possible to decrease tirage time {one to four years is normal) by addition of yeast autolysates, along with the starter culture, at the beginning of tirage. Also, since the amino acid content of yeast cells has been determined, it may be possible to shorten tirage time by adding a mixture of amino acids which simulates the amino acid content of a yeast autolysate. It is known that yeast autolysis is dependent upon such parameters as pH, ethanol concentration, and temperature. Elevated pH in particular, increases the rate of yeast autolysis--one possible reason for doing malolactic fermentations on cuvee wines. Aging sparkling wines at elevated temperatures accelerates bubble size and bubble retention in the finished product. In still wines, protein traditionally have been associated with instability. It is interesting to note that in the case of sparkling wines there appears to be an inverse relationship between protein concentration and bubble size; i.e., a protein concentration of 55 mg/1 results in an obvious reduction in bubble size. For this reason, it is suggested that bentonite be used at low levels for both cuvee fining and as a riddling aid during bottle fermentation since it precipitates proteins. There is also evidence which implicates proteins and peptides in carbon dioxide retention, as well as affecting the rate of bubble formation. Sparkling wines in which yeast autolysis has occurred definitely have better gas retention. Yeasts, like most living organisms, when going into starvation, prior to autolysis, will degrade internal organic components in order to attempt to survive. During this process some of the internal proteins of the cells are partially degraded to peptides. It appears that these peptides along with small proteins contribute to gas retention in some way. One possible explanation of this interaction could have to do with electrostatic attractions. A considerable portion of the carbon dioxide present in a sparkling wine is in the form of carbonic acid. Carbonic acid is an asymmetric molecule and has dipolar activity {a weak+ and- charge). This dipole activity could cause it to be adsorbed to charged proteins and peptides. Large amounts of potential carbon dioxide could be held in this manner due to the relatively small size of the molecules and the large surface area involved. Whatever the correct explanation, a considerable amount of research needs to be done to more fully understand what is going on during tirage. 136 RIDDLING, DISGORGEMENT, AND DOSAGE ADDITION Relative to riddling and disgorgement, I wish to point out that air currents should be avoided in the riddling area since they may produce a differential in temperature on the surface of bottles, thus causing the sediment to lift from the side of the bottle and redistribute. Also, if large numbers of bottles are to be riddled, a mechanical system will likely produce more uniform results since the remeur is human and, therefore, will get tired, a machine will not ... Every sparkling wine producer has his own formula for the dosage, and this formula will vary depending on the flavor profile being sought. The dosage may consist of such things as sugar, sulfur dioxide, ascorbic acid, citric acid, tartaric acid, and brandy. Most important is sugar which is added to balance the wine; i.e., to balance the acidity, to mask astringency or bitterness, and to slightly modify the flavor. Addition of sugar, in many cases, will alter the character of the wine, and even give the impression of accelerating the aging process. In order to dose the sparkling wine one needs a dosage prepared with a known sugar concentration. Regardless of its makeup, it should be prepared approximately two weeks ahead of time to insure that it is stable. Any particles present may contribute to gushing at the time the bottle is opened by the consumer. In fact, it may be a good idea to filter the dosage prior to use. One method for dosage preparation is as follows: suppose that you want a dosage solution of 700 gm/1. First, weigh 75 kg of sugar and place it in 56 liters of wine to be used. Other dosage components may be added at this time, except the source of sulfur dioxide since mixing will reduce the free sulfur concentration. Once it is certain that the dosage is stable and clear, the source of sulfur dioxide may be added just prior to use. If we assume the sparkling wine is totally dry and we desire a sweetness of 0.65% (a brut), the volume of dosage in milliliters required per bottle equals: Bottle Volume (mls) X Desired Sugar Level (qms/1} Sugar Concentration of Stock Solution {gms/1) OR: (750 ml l x (6.5 gms/1) {700 gms/1) OR: 6.96 mls of dosage is added per 750 ml bottle Care should be taken in adding metabisulfite to the dosage since carbon dioxide release will tend to amplify one's perception of sulfur dioxide. I usually prefer to have the sulfur dioxide level at around 25 ppm. A final word or two, relative to gushing. Gushing remains an occasional but significant problem of sparkling wines. Particulate matter in the form of cork dust, fibers, particulate matter in the dosage, tartrate crystals, or incomplete 137 riddling all contribute to gushing. Any particulate matter may serve as nucleation site for bubble formation. Also, bottles with imperfections on the inner surface may cause gushing. If gushing is sporadic, dirty-bottle particulates from packaging or corks are often the cause. Entire batches which gush may be the result of nitrogen or air in the wine. When bottles containing air or nitrogen are opened, these gases immediately come out of solution as fine bubbles that then gather carbon dioxide and gush. These gases make the system unstable because their escape rates may be higher than that of the carbon dioxide. It is, therefore, important that cuvee wines not be nitrogen sparged or undergo excessive aeration. LITERATURE CITED 1. Amerine, M. and M. Joslyn. 1970. Table Wines: The Technology of their Production. Univ. of California Press. 2. Bidlingmeyer, B.A., S.A. Cohen and T.L. Tarvin. 1984. Rapid analysis of amino acids in yeasts using precolumn derivatization. J. of Chromatography 336:93-104. 3. Charpentier, C. and M. Feuillat. 1985. Shortening of aging (duration) of sparkling wines elaborated by the champagne method by addition of yeast autolysates. Proc. of the Fifth Australian Wine Conference. 4. Codrington, I.D. 1985. Effect of alcohol, protein and fermentation rate on bubble size. Proc. of the Fifth Australian Wine Conference. 5. Feuillat, M. and Charpentier. 1982. Autolysis of yeasts in champagne. Amer. J. of Enol. and Vitic. pp. 5-13. 6. Henick-Kling, T., E. Baroody, and R. Woodbury (eds.) 1989. Proc. of New York Sparkling Wine Symposium. NYSAES, Cornell Univ., Geneva, NY. 7. Hough, J.S. and I.S. Maddox. 1970. Yeast autolysis. Process Biochem., May, pp. 50-52. 8. Kliewer, W.M. and L.A. Lider. 1968. Influence of cluster exposure to the sun on the composition of Thompson seedless fruit. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 19:175-184. 9. Shopfer, J.F. 1981. Oenologie technologie de preparation des vins de base de qualite. Simposis internazionali vin spumanti. Institute de Enologia, Piacenza. 10. Williams, J.T., C.S. Ough, and H.W. Berg. 1978. White wine composition and quality as influenced by methods of must clarification. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 29:92-96. 11. Zoecklein, B.W. 1985. Methode Champenoise-Juice Treatments. Practical Winery and Vineyard. Nov/Dec. 138 12. Zoecklein, B.W. 1988. Protein fining agents for juice and wine. Virginia Cooperative Extension. Pub. No. 463-012. 13. Zoecklein, B. 1989. A Review of Methode Champenoise Production. Virginia Polytechnic Inst. Blacksburg, VA. 14. Zoecklein, B., K. Fugelsang, B. Gump, and F. Nury. 1990. Production Wine Analysis. VanNostrand-Reinhold, NY. SPARKLING WINE TASTING Lucas Vineyards, Interlaken, NY Cayuga Lake Champagne, 1989. Methode champenoise; Harvest parameters: sugar, 19°Brix; T.A., 11 gms/L; pH 3.0 Grapes mechanically harvested, stemmed, crushed, and pressed. No sulfur at crusher; must settled 48 hrs. Primary fermentation: Prise de Mousse in stainless steel, 55 to 60°F. Secondary fermentation: Prise de Mousse, DAP and Adjuvant 84 added. Fermentation temperature: 60°F. Dosage; ***Ale. 12.4%. Knapp Vineyards, Romulus, NY Blanc de blanc, 1988. Methode champenoise; 100% Vignoles Harvest parameters: sugar, 20°Brix; T.A., 14.4 g/1; pH. 2.9 Grapes mechanically harvested, stemmed and pressed. Only first press fraction used. Must settled, 24 hrs. Primary fermentation: Prise de Mousse in stainless steel, 70°F. Secondary fermentation: Pasteur champagne, DAP, and bentonite. Dosage; 0.5% sugar, free sulfur dioxide, 30 ppm. Widmer Wine Cellars, Naples, NY Champagne, extra dry, N.V.; Grapes: 50% Cayuga and 50% Seyval blanc Harvest parameters: sugar, 16-18°Brix; T.A., 8-9 gms/1; pH, 3.2-3.5 Grapes mechanically harvested, stemmed, crushed, pressed. Settled to 1.0% solids. Primary fermentation: Prise de Mousee in stainless steel, 48 to 54°F. Six months in large cask. Secondary fermentation: Charmat process, Prise de Mousse, 55°F, fermentation stopped at 4°Brix. 139 WINERY TRAILS: A NEW YORK SUCCESS STORY Liz Stamp, Partner Lakewood Vineyards Watkins Glen, NY The wine trail idea in the Finger Lakes of New York began in the early 1980's. Some forward- seeing winery owners rea 1 i zed the importance of cooperation in developing a wine region. As small winery owners, we recognize that we benefit most from direct contact with consumers to introduce and se 11 our products. So, we need to get the consumers to visit us in our respective "retail rooms". The wine trails (with the support of the New York Wine and Grape Foundation) successfully launched a signage and brochure program. These efforts have been a tremendous help in leading consumers to our establishments. Now, we have to impress the patrons once they have reached us. Using cooperative special events the wine trails have provided opportunities for visitors to experience a safe fun weekend with wine and food tasting. Then we are tapping into our most beneficial marketing tools. The good experiences and recommendations of previous visitors. We find these "good experiences" contribute greatly to return visits. Often the return customers bring new "customers" and request our wines in retail stores and restaurants. We cannot give exact figures to illustrate the increased winery sales attributable to the wine trails. However, we see more people planning week-long vacations to visit our wineries (and buy wine). Wine retail shops are calling wineries to request their wines. Restaurants are changing their wine lists to carry more Finger Lakes wines, and 40+ wineries are "surviving" in an area where 15 years ago only 5 wineries existed. 140 BREAKING INTO THE RESTAURANT AND RETAIL MARKET: 1993 PROGRAM Doniella Winchell, Executive Director Ohio Wine Producers Association Austinburg, OH In preparation for bidding on the fiscal 1992-93 marketing and public relations contract for the Ohio Grape Industries Program, our office prepared the following outline of activities and projects. OBJECTIVES 1. Build on the previous efforts of the Board to increase the awareness of the Ohio Grape and Wine Industry. 2. Multi-faceted approach with projects that support needs of large wineries and small wineries alike. 3. Take advantage of leadership offered by Governor Voinovich. 4. Coordinate with other commodity groups through the Departent of Agriculture. 5. Begin to build awareness of national media to get respect at home. 6. Utilize state and local tourism group support. 7. Stress emphasis on wine and food. B. Coordinate with all public and private entities interested in and in support of the Grape and Wine industry. MEDIA RELEASES: Target Regions: 1. 7 major Ohio markets. 2. Regional markets in backyards of wineries-circle tour. 3. Detroit 4. Northern Kentucky 5. Pittsburgh 6. Indianapolis 7. Ontario Releases to: 1. Wi n e med i a 2. Agriculture media 3. Business media 4. Restaurant/grocer/wholesaler/trade publications 5. Travel media 6. Political decision makers 7. Chambers of Commerce B. Convention and visitors bureaus 9. Tour bus operators 10. Ohio wine and friends 11. Media library 12. Samples of art work 141 Samples of media releases and responses they generated 1. Harvest/growing conditions 2. Awards received 3. Local releases about regional/national coverage 4. Wine releases/quality, etc. 5. Winery activities during special 'promos' 6. Trails/tours/group promotions 7. Wine and health information 8. New wineries/growers, etc. 9. Release of point of sale, ad campaign 10. Releases for festivals, tastings, weekends, etc. MAJOR THEMES WHICH CARRY THROUGH ALL EFFORTS 1. "Ohio" Wines 2. Support for regional efforts 3. Wine and food 4. Pairings with Ohio commodities 5. Wine as a beverage of moderation and history 6. Education Target Audiences 1. Ohioans loyal to their state 2. Those who already consume wine 3. Tourists--2 types: pass through and family returnees 4. Restaurants--focus on opinion leaders 5. Grocers--initial focus on small chains, support for wholesalers who work with larger chains 6. Decision makers in above 7. Opinion leaders in the media to influence above--wine writers, local, state and national 8. Using Ohio consumers to build others--develop word of mouth, grass roots interests INDUSTRY SEMINARS Survey Regions for Interest--Potential Topics 1. Utilizing direct mail/newsletters/brochures 2. Staff training: hospitality, management, responsible alcohol service 3. Packaging/marketing with regional attractions 4. How to work with the media 5. How to work with retailers/wholesalers 6. Successful planning of special events 7. Attracting tour buses 8. Working with local political issues and leaders 9. Local signage issues 10. Tour guide training 142 Coordinating with regional workshops planned by Dr. Roland Riesen, research staff and consumer groups: Examples: 12-3: Technical Session 3-5: Marketing Seminar 5-6: Light Dinner 6-8: Local consumer, media, etc .. reception/tasting Interviews (4 areas to emphasize) 1. Harvest 2. Wine month 3. Holiday 4. Wine and food Primarily Radio - Some Television I. Winemakers 2. Retailers/wholesalers 3. Author; e.g., Roger Gentile, Jane Moulton 4. Chefs/cooking schools Wine and Cheese Tastings (Brochure/Direct mail/Word of mouth) I. Fraternal/civic/church groups 2. State conferences/conventions 3. Governmental events/receptions 4. Tourism/CVB activities Procedures I. Collection of wines 2. Acquisition of permits 3. Scheduling of wine representatives 4. Outlines of programs 5. Support materials/brochures 6. Legal distribution of wines WINE COLUMNS Possible Topics: I. Holiday choice series 2. Wine month special events 3. Varietal series 4. Geography of wine series 5. Appellation series 6. Wine with each commodity series/recipes 7. Harvest interest stories 8. Ordering and enjoying wine in restaurants 9. Shipping in grocery stores/specialty shops 143 10. Spring/summer/winter in the vineyards 11. From vine to wine enology series 12. Reading wine labels 13. Role of cork 14. Specialty wines (fruit, dessert, etc.) series 15. Weekends, festivals, etc. 16. Travel opportunities 17. Historical angles 18. Personality profiles 19. Research updates Sources of Writers: -Some from winemakers -Others from Jane Moulton, Robert Kirtland, etc. -Some from Ohio State University -Some from free-lance contacts RESTAURANT AWARENESS - STAFF TRAINING 1. Consumer/grass roots demands 2. Management contacts 3. Management tastings 4. Staff trainings 5. Point of sale support 6. Wholesaler/direct supply information 7. Attend/support/present at various industry trade shows 8. Information clearinghouse 9. Response mechanism CONSUMER PUBLICATION -50,000 copies of grapevine--twice a year -Some original materials -Some reprints of materials from other wine media -Focus: education, winery visitation Distribution: 1. Through wineries 2. Convention and visitors bureaus 3. Chambers of Commerce 4. ODOT travel information centers 5. 1-800 BUCKEYE 6. Division of travel and tourism 7. Retail outlets 144 WINE AND FRIENDS Brochure Membership Card Information Pack Wine related information such as Ohio wine industry, glossary of terms, appellations of origin, wine etiquette, etc. "Ohio's Grapevine" newspaper Winery brochures Discount coupons to restaurants throughout Ohio "Ohio Wines" poster Passport program Information sent to members throughout the year regarding wine weekends, seminars, wine competition, results, etc. 145 THE LEADERS FrQm top tQ bQttom Luther Waters - Chairman Dept. of Horticulture Donnie Winchell - Executive Director OWPA Lou Jindra - Executive Director OGIP 1993 OHIO GRAPE-WINE SHORT COURSE SPEAKERS Jessie Baker Ohio Department of Liquor Control Columbus, OH Pat Brown Destination International Coshocton, OH Jeff Burkholder, Co-owner New Connecticut Farm Geneva, OH Toni Carlucci, Winemaker Chalet Debonne Vineyards Madison, OH Mike Ellis, Professor & Extension Plant Pathologist Plant Pathology Dept. OARDC & OSU Extension Wooster, OH W. Alan Erb, Assistant Prof. Dept. of Horticulture OSU & OARDC Wooster, OH Karyl Hammond New York Grape Wine Foundation Penn Yan, NY Stan Howell, Professor & Viticulturist Department of Horticulture' Michigan State Univ. E. Lansing, MI Carol Landefield Arocom Direct Cleveland, OH Diane Miller, Associate Professor & Ext. Horticulturist OARDC and OSU Extension Wooster, OH Don Neel, Publisher Practical Winery and Vineyard San Rafael, CA Tom Quilter, Partner Shamrock Vineyard Waldo, OH 1993 OHIO GRAPE-WINE SHORT COURSE SPEAKERS (cont.) Andrew Reynolds, Research Scientist Viticulture/Enology Agriculture Canada Research Station Summerland, BC Roland Riesen, Research & Ext. Enologist Dept. of Horticulture OARDC Wooster, OH Claudio Salvadore, Winemaker Firelands Wine Cooperative Sandusky, OH Joseph Scheerens, Associate Professor Dept. of Horticulture OSU & OARDC Wooster, OH Tom Schmidlin, Associate Professor Dept. of Geography Kent State University Kent, OH Carl Shively, Sparkling Wine Producer & Professor Department of Biology Alfred University Alfred, NY Liz Stamp, Partner Lakewood Vineyards Watkins Glen, NY Ed Thompkins, Wine Buyer Heinen's Pepper Pike, OH Roger Williams, Professor & Ext. Entomologist Dept. of Entomology OARDC & OSU Extension Wooster, OH Donniella Winchell, Executive Director Ohio Wine Producers Association Austinburg, OH George Zimmerman, State Travel Director Division of Travel & Tourism Columbus, OH THE SPEAKERS ************** From top to bottom Alan Erb Diane Miller Carl Shively, Toni Carlucci From top to bottom Stan Howell Don Neel, Andy Reynolds Tom Schmidlin Luther Waters, Roland Riesen 1993 OHIO GRAPE-WINE SHORT COURSE MASTER OF CEREMONY Welzel, Karin Food/Wine Writer Columbus Dispatch Columbus, OH REGISTRANTS FOR 1993 OHIO GRAPE-WINE SHORT COURSE Altmaier, John Box 104 Ringoes, NJ 08551 Amberg, Herman Amberg Wine Cellars RD #2 Clifton Springs, NY 14432 Bartholomew, Hank Ohio State Univ. Extension Hocking/Athens Counties Bennett, Douglas 6298 Worthington Rd. Alexandria, OH 43001 Berg, Kenneth R. Box 101 Huron, OH 44839 Bixler, Duke Breitenbach Wine Cellars RD #1 Dover, OH 44622 Bixler, Jennifer Breitenbach Wine Cellars RD #1 Dover, OH 44622 Boas, Ed Firelands Winery 917 Bardshar Rd. Sandusky, OH 44870 Boas, Rob Lonz Winery Middle Bass Island, OH 43446 Bower, Don & Nancy DLB Vineyards 30311 Clemens Dr. Westlake, OH 44145 REGISTRANTS FOR 1993 OHIO GRAPE-WINE SHORT COURSE (cont.) Brett, Lawrence 206 W. Nast St. Wilson, NC 27893 Bubenik, Bob 1553 Salem Hills St. Louis, MO 63119 Bucci, Fred Buccia Vineyards 518 Gore Rd. Conneaut, OH 44030 Butler, Bill 4640 Wyandotte Dr. Columbus, OH 43230 Butler, Jane Wm. Graystone Winery The Brewery District 544 South Front St. Columbus, OH 43215 Ceci 1, C. J. 532 Ivyhurst Dr. Columbus, OH 43232 Christensen, Karen Markko Vineyards RD #2, S. Ridge Rd. Conneaut, OH 44030 Daniel, C. Richard Box 888 Beckley, WV 25801 Debevc, Tony Chalet Debonne Vineyards 7743 Doty Rd. Madison, OH 44057 Dujanovic, Peter 12 Pleasant Creek Ct. Clifton Springs, NY 14432 Ewing, Harry & Karen 6298 Worthington Rd. Alexandria, OH 43001 REGISTRANTS FOR 1993 OHIO GRAPE-WINE SHORT COURSE (cont.) Eckhard, Kaesekamp Euro Nursery 3197 Culp Rd. Jordon, Ontario, Canada LOR ISO Ezzel, Annett & John Grim III 2515 Boston St. Baltimore, MD 21224 Ferrante, Carmel Ferrante Winery 5558 Rt. 307 Geneva, OH 44041 Ferrante, Mary Jo Ferrante Winery 5558 Rt. 307 Geneva, OH 44041 Ferrante, Nick Ferrante Winery 5558 Rt. 307 Geneva, OH 44041 Franklin, Denzel 111 N. Pine Benton, IL 52812 Frisbee, Linda Marrko Vineyards RD #2, S. Ridge Rd. Conneaut, OH 44030 Fritz, J.P. Vi nos 6072 Busch Blvd. Columbus, OH 43229 Gamza, Frank 19 Bailey Dr. Washington Crossing, PA 18977 Genger, David & Nancy 3319 Stockholm Cleveland, OH 44120 Gerlowski, Wes Harpersfield Vineyard 6383 SR 306 Geneva, OH 44041 Gilmore, Tom 1513 Berry Rd. Birmingham, AL 35226 REGISTRANTS FOR 1993 OHIO GRAPE-WINE SHORT COURSE (cont.) Gossett, Roger & Ann PO Box 404 Steubenville, OH 43952 Gottesman, Robert & Muriel Paramount Distillers 1111 Berea Rd. Cleveland, OH 44111 Harris, Chuck & Nina Ravenhurst Wine Cellars PO Box 6 Bellefontaine, OH 43311 Hempstead, John 1190 CR 9 Bellefontaine, OH 45113 Huber, Ted Huber Orchard & Winery 20018 Huber Rd. Borden, IN Ivy, Hyrl e 5422 Brighton Rd. Fort Wayne, IN 46825 Jindra, Lou Executive Director Ohio Grape Industries Program 6877 N. High St., Suite 104 Columbus, OH 43210 Johns, Gregory Farm Manager Grape Research Branch-OARDC Kingsville, OH 44048 Johnson, Tom Paramount Distillers 1111 Berea Rd. Cleveland, OH 44411 Klingshirn, Allan Klingshirn Winery 33050 Weber Rd. Avon Lake, OH 44012 Klingshirn, Lee Klingshirn Winery 33050 Weber Rd. Avon Lake, OH 44012 REGISTRANTS FOR 1993 OHIO GRAPE-WINE SHORT COURSE (cont.) LeFevre, Jerry 6585 S. Ridge Rd. Geneva, OH 44041 Ley, Dean 14659 St. Rt. 404 Van Wert, OH 45892 Martin, Jeff John Christ Winery 32421 Walker Rd. Avon Lake, OH 45036 Mawby, Larry 4519 S. Elm Valley Suttons Bay, MI 49682 McFarland, John RR #1, Box 312A Springpond, IL 62812 Mikulic, Kreso Vinoklet 11069 Colerain Ave. Cincinnati, OH 45247 Miller, Bill 2304 Ballard School Rd. LaGrange, KY 40031 Moulton, Ted Meier's Wine Cellars 6955 Plainfield Pike Cincinnati, OH 45236 Mullins, Steve Oliver Winery 8024 N. Hwy 37 Bloomington, IN 47404 Otto, Dave Old Firehouse Winery 5499 Lake Rd., Box 310 Geneva, OH 44041 Pientrzyk, Art 6060 Madison Thompson, OH Pollman, Greg Valley Vineyards 2276 E. 22-3 Morrow, OH 45152 REGISTRANTS FOR 1993 OHIO GRAPE-WINE SHORT COURSE (cont.) Prichard, Keith 1900 Winchester-Stow Rd. Canal-Winchester, OH 43110 Provens, Joe 2451 Anderson Xenia, OH 45385 Pugliese, Robert PO Box 55 Plain City, OH 45064 Quilter, Tom & Mary Shamrock Vineyard Ch 25, Box 111 Waldo, OH 43356 Rechsteiner, Dave Willow Hill Vineyards 5460 Loudon St. Johnstown, OH 43031 Riley, John 973 County Rd. 170 Marengo, OH 43334 Roberts, Paul 474 E. Lawndale Pl. Zanesville, OH 43701 Rowe, Dick 2307 Fairfax Rd. S. Charleston, WV 25303 Scholl, David 46 Co. Rd. 26 Marengo, OH 43334 Shumrick, Terry Chateau Pomije Vineyards 25060 Jacobs Rd. Guilford, IN 47022 Schuchter, Ken & Beth Valley Vineyards 2276 E. 22-3 Morrow, OH 45152 Schuchter, Ken, Jr. & Doddie Valley Vineyards 2276 E. 22-3 Morrow, OH 45152 REGISTRANTS FOR 1993 OHIO GRAPE-WINE SHORT COURSE (cont.) Spence, Pamela PO Box 204 Ostrander, OH 43061 Smith, Anita Breitenbach Wine Cellars RD #1 Dover, OH 44622 Stephens, John 4444 Beal Rd. Bellefontaine, OH 43311 Stevenson, Chris 1044 Rd 25 S Bellefontaine, OH 43311 Trimble, Glen 3123 Canyon Rd. Granville, OH 43311 Vest, Gary 6305 Barberton Ave. Cleveland, OH 44102 Wagner, Norbert 2415 Harford Rd. Fallston, MD 21047 Ward, Wilson Fisher Ridge Vineyards 418 Medical Arts Charleston, WVA Waters, Luther, Chairman Dept. of Horticulture The Ohio State Univ. 2001 Fyffe Ct. Columbus, OH 43210 Widiger, Al 12961 W. Linsen Ln. Parma, OH 44130 Wineberg, Andy & Hart The Winery at Wolf Creek 2637 S. Cleve-Mass Rd. Norton, OH 44203 Woodworth, Richard 6401 M. Ridge Rd. Madison, OH 44057 REGISTRANTS FOR 1993 OHIO GRAPE-WINE SHORT COURSE (cont.) Wyse, Lee Rainbow Hills Winery 26349 TR 251 Newcomerstown, OH 43832 TRADE SHOW PARTICIPANTS The following participated in the 1993 Ohio Grape-Wine Short Course Aftek, Inc. 740 Driving Park Rochester, NY 14613 (716)458-7550 APM, Inc. 7355 Trans Canada Highway #220 Montreal, Quebec, Canada H4T 1T3 (513)956-7856; FAX (514)956-7858 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) Plaza South One Suite 110 Middleburg Heights, OH (216)522-3374 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) 78 Chestnut St., Suite 143 Columbus, OH 43215 (614)469-2225 Criveller Company U.S. Address: 6935 Oakwood Dr. PO Box 162 Niagara Falls, Ontario, CANADA L2E 6S5 Lewiston, NY 14092 (416)357-2930 Eezy Gro Premium Fertilizer Solutions PO Box 520 Upper Sandusky, OH 43351 (419)927-6110 Euro Nursery & Vineyard, Inc. 3197 Culp Road Jordan, Ontario, Canada LOR ISO (416)562-3312; FAX (416)562-5610 Hess &Associates 140 Fleshman Mill Road New Oxford, PA 17350 (717)624-8018 Northcoast Woodworks 373 Commerce Street Conneaut, OH 44030 (216)593-6249 TRADE SHOW PARTICIPANTS (cont.) Orchard Valley Supply Route 1, Box 41-B Fawn Grove, PA 17321 ( 717) 382-4612 Practical Winery & Vineyards 15 Grande Paseo San Rafael, CA 94903 {415)479-5819 Prospera Equipment 134 Marble Ave. Plesantville, NY 10570 1-800-332-2219 or (319)263-1394 State of Ohio Department of Liquor Control 2323 West Fifth Ave. Columbus, OH 43266-0701 (614)644-2360 • This page intentionally blank. This page intentionally blank.