Some Thoughts On Pinot Noir Clones
I have spent hours this past week planning to increase the planting of Pinot Noir on our Annadel Estate vineyard. At this time I'm thinking that we eventually will have about 9.2 acres of Pinot Noir under vine. Aside from choices on row-orientation, trellis, irrigation, frost control, rootstock, and training/pruning, the choice of clone(s) is an important factor in these deliberations.CLONES! Some sources suggest that there may be a thousand recognizable clones of Pinot Noir. Of these about 70 certified clones of Pinot Noir are available from FPMS at UC Davis in 2006. Not all of these are available from stock at the various commercial grapevine nurseries: it looks to me as though there are about 20 clones in general propagation.
That's still a lot of choices. Some of these clones are vigorous, heavy producers, which makes them good for sparkling wine production but unsuited to making ultra-premium still red Pinot. Excluding heavy producers narrows the field down to about 15 choices. Some growers would plant every one of these clones, but I'm not one of them.
It is a question of style - what style of wine do I want to produce? There are the "old-school" clones: Swan, Martini, Mt. Eden, Chalone, Wadenswill and Pommard. And then there are the "newcomers": the ENTAV-INRA clones 113, 114, 115, 459, 667, 777, 828 and 943. Each of these clones makes a different sort of wine, and each responds differently to the terroir where it may be planted. Which would make the "best" wines from the Annadel Estate? There is no way I can know ahead of time.
Recently, Dan Berger wrote and article on the loss of a "regional signature" for Los Carneros appellation Pinot Noir. Among the reasons for this change he cited the recent wide planting of the ENTAV-INRA ("Dijon") clones. He suggested that since these clones have come into wider dispersion, the wines from Los Carneros have become "less Burgundian" in character. I find this somewhat counterintuitive, as the ENTAV-INRA clones were selected in Burgundy precisely for their abilities to produce wines with a traditional Burgundian "regional signature".
However, Berger is absolutely right in one regard -- in California the ENTAV-INRA clones do not produce the same wines they produce in Burgundy, nor do they produce wines here with the same characteristics that the "old school" California selections did. The "Dijon" clones were selected for many traits; among these was the ability to ripen relatively early in the environment of the Cote d'Or. In the warmer California environment this trait translates into a tendency toward very rapid sugar accumulation.
Don't get me wrong -- I love some of the wines produced from old school Pinot clones. Our own Haynes Vineyard Pinot is sourced from a vineyard planted to an old Martini selection. Some of the Swan and Mt. Eden Pinots are wonderful. But in my experience these older selections often do strangely away from their home turf. Swan and Mt. Eden particularly, when poorly sited or farmed, make wines that are heavy, overly earthy, meaty and unlovely -- very unlike the delicate complexity I look for in a great Pinot.
On the other hand, in my experience the Dijon clones are capable of producing more consistently interesting wines from conducive terroirs. I have selected the following clones for our cool vineyard site. I like the 115 for its ability to produce a complete, balanced and well-structured wine with a fine varietally-consistent aromatic profile.
By comparison, the 114 is less consistent from site to site and vintage to vintage, but when it is fine it is soft, forward and lovely. The 667 is even more variable -- the French prize this clone for the structure and high-tone purity of the wines it makes, but here in California it can come off with anything from a green apple simplicity to a deep Christmas spice mix.
The 777 is a low-yield, fast-ripening selection that can make an ugly monster of a wine if it is not carefully farmed -- but when paid proper attention, it makes a deeply colored and structured wine with intense dark fruit aromas. Last, I have selected the clone 943 based solely on a personal recommendation from Dr. Raymond Bernard, the University of Dijon viticultural researcher who developed these clones at his own Mt. Battois vineyard.
posted 3/05/2006 08:48:00 PM
4 Comments:
I've a small vineyard in CO, half of which is planted to PN, and plan to plant more. I'm curious to know why Dr. Bernard recommended ENTAV 943 for your vineyard. I have planted one row of it this season, experimentally.
Almost 12 years ago I spent a day with Dr. Bernard in the experimental vineyard he established in the Haut Cotes above Beaune (Mt. Battois). He was excited about the 943 and mentioned that the Technical High School had pulled some of their older clones (I recall that 113 was mentioned) and replanted with 943. At the time we had no 943 in California - this was enough to make me want to try it.
In 1996 our Estate vineyard was no more than a dream. When we started to plant it in 2001 we tried to find some 943 but it was not available. Some ideas - like vineyards - take a long time to reach fruition.
I should get a little fruit off our 2006 block of 943 to work with in 2008, though I don't expect this first crop to be at all representative of what the clone will ultimately do on our site.
After a decade I am less enamored with the "Dijon" clones in general than I was at first. In California conditions they tend to gain sugar too fast and too early - the rest of the grape doesn't have enough time to reach maturity before the sugars are over 25 Brix and the pH is shooting toward 4.0. I'm tweaking our farming to better balance the leaf number to the crop load, but that only gets me so far.
You may have beter results in CO, especially if you are at elevation.
Bottom line, I hope the 943 gives me something interesting - another aromatic profile to increase the interest of our Dijon clone bottling. That said, I am hedging our bets by increasing our Pinot plantings with what I call "heritage" clones - stuff that has done well in California for 30-50 years. If you have followed some of my more recent posts you know that we already have an acre and a half of our Estate planted to budwood from the old block at the Haynes Vineyard. We will build on this in 2008. If I put in any more Dijon budwood it will be minimal - perhaps another acre and probably clone 114.
On a Swiss website, PN 943 is described as having low yields, very tannic wine and loose clusters that have near zero spoilage. Have you found this to be true and what has been your experience with 943? It's almost impossible to find anything on this clone.
INRA & ENTAV are doing a pretty good job of keeping a lid on information about the 943 clone. It is one of the few "Dijon" clones where the French have negotiated a royalty payment for every bud sold here in the US. The royalty agreement is why only a few nurseries here can sell this wood.
Anyway, I have so far very little experience with this clone - 2008 was not even our first commercial crop year. This vintage I left 1-2 clusters/vine where there were clusters at all. The clusters were TINY and tight, with tiny, seeded berries.
I would not say the 943 fruit was tannic in relation to the mature 115 and 667, and it was certainly LESS tannic than the young 777.
We didn't have spoilage in any of the Pinot, so I can't speak to the relative susceptibility of the 943 to rot.
Post a Comment
<< Home