Terroir 2016 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Talking about terroir

Talking about terroir

Abstract

When talking about terroir, scientists and lay wine tasters, very much including wine journalists and wine growers, too often talk past one another.

“Terroir” may be among the most irritatingly vague and slippery words in the wine growers’ and wine critic’s vocabulary, but scientists, too, seem conspicuously unwilling to render this notion more precise; and if a shared and mutually useful concept cannot be achieved, how can we reach genuine agreement or disagreement in our claims about terroir, let alone address or mitigate one another’s perplexity?

Moreover, it often appears as if parties to alleged explications of terroir fail even to agree on the phenomenon that demands explanation. Wine tasters are frustrated with scientists who make no attempt to account for but instead treat as implausible or debunk claims for organoleptic experience of wine as varying with regularity and predictability depending on site and soil type. Entire books have been written about vineyard geology under the rubric of terroir without accounting for how rocks might actually influence taste. Specialists often advise on where best to plant wine grapes seemingly oblivious that “best” can make sense only if location somehow ultimately influences taste. Yet scientists can be forgiven their frustration with and dismissals of utterly implausible pictures that wine tasters have painted for themselves about how soil and site might influence taste.

Examples will be offered of some common conceptual pitfalls into which both scientists and laity stumble when discussing “terroir.” Treating this term as by its nature evaluative undermines attempts to define site potential; treating it as encompassing anything that might impinge on the eventual character of wine including viticultural and cellar practices renders it so all-encompassing that it fails to mark any significant distinction. Positing something called “minerality in wine” trades on equivocation and conceptual muddle.

It will be proposed that “terroir” be defined as those constraints placed on (or opportunities afforded) a vintner and the eventual flavors of his or her wine by the location in which that wine was grown. Several senses of terroir influence consistent with that definition will be explicated, each differing in scope and in the role assigned to grape variety and vine genetics. It will be argued that the notion of wine as exhibiting terroir character and tasters’ ability to discern characteristics causally associated with site are neither more nor less problematic than the analogous notion of vintage character or its identification as predicated on the influence of weather on vine metabolism, fruit maturation and ultimately flavor. It will be suggested that much more scientific research should be devoted to measuring how much or how little such ability tasters can develop, as opposed to imagine themselves possessing, because this will circumscribe investigations into how site influences flavor and determine how relevant place is to pedigree.

DOI:

Publication date: June 23, 2020

Issue: Terroir 2016

Type: Article

Authors

David Schildknecht

Wine Writer, The Wine Advocate and other wine publications, USA

Contact the author

Keywords

Touriga Nacional; Touriga Franca; Climate Change; Summer Stress; Douro Region; Morpho Anatomy; Biochemistry

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2016

Citation

Related articles…

The “resources profile®”: a relevant decision and support system for adapting viticultural practices to soils agronomic properties and limiting their environmental impacts

Soil is a three-dimensional complex system, which constitutes a major component of Terroir. Soil characteristics strongly influence vine development, grape oenological potentialities and thus wine quality and style.

Grape development revisited through the single-berry metabolomic clock paradigm

Although the ripening process of grapevine berries is well-documented at the vineyard level, pinpointing distinct developmental stages remains challenging. The asynchronous development of berries results in dynamic biases and metabolic chimerism. It is thus crucial to consider individual berries separately and resynchronize their internal clock for deciphering physiological changes throughout development. Given the importance of grape composition in wine quality, we aimed at measuring developmental changes in the metabolome of Syrah single berries from anthesis to over-ripening, without a priori preconceived.

Late season canopy management practices to reduce sugar loading and improve color profile of Cabernet-Sauvignon grapes and wines in the high irradiance and hot conditions of California Central Valley

Global warming is accelerating grape ripening, leading to unbalanced wines from fruit with high sugar content but poor aroma and colour development. Reducing the size of the photosynthetic apparatus after veraison has been shown to delay technological ripeness in cool climates, but methods have not been tested in areas with high irradiance and temperature where fruit exposure could have disastrous effects on berry composition. In this Cabernet-Sauvignon trial, we compared the application of an antitranspirant (pinolene), to severe canopy topping and above bunch zone leaf removal, all performed at mid-ripening, with an untouched control. We monitored the vines weekly by measuring stem water potential, gas exchange, fruit zone light exposure. We sampled berries to measure berry weight, total soluble solids, pH, titratable acidity, and the anthocyanin profile. At harvest, we assessed yield components, measured carbon isotope discrimination, rated sunburn on clusters, and produced experimental wines. We submitted harvest samples to metabolomic profiling through PFP-Q Exactive MS/MS and wines to sensory analysis. Application of the antitranspirant significantly reduced stomatal conductance and assimilation rate but did not affect the stem water potential. Inversely, leaf removal and topping increased water potential but did not affect leaf gas exchange. The late topping was the only treatment able to decrease sugar content (up to 2Bx), increase titratable acidity and pH, and improve anthocyanin content because of lower degradation of di-hydroxylated forms. Late leaf removal above the bunch zone increased lightning conditions in the canopy and produced the most significant damage on fruits. Yield components were not affected. This work suggests that late-season canopy management can effectively control ripening speeds and improve grapes and wines. Still, the effect on grape exposure in a critical time must be well balanced to avoid problems with the appropriate technique.

Optimizing disease management in the Rioja wine region: a study on Erisiphe necator and the Gubler-Thomas model

Erisiphe necator is endemic in the Rioja Appellation of Origin. Vine growers exert significant effort to protect their crops, given the economic losses this disease causes. Different studies have shown that using Gubler-Thomas Model (GTM) can reduce treatments by up to 20% compared to a full-time protection strategy. This reduction is achieved by optimizing applications based on temperature variations in late spring and summer when the disease’s conidial stage is active.

CHANGES IN METABOLIC FLUXES UNDER LOW PH GROWTH CONDITIONS: CAN THE SLOWDOWN OF CITRATE CONSUMPTION IMPROVE OENOCOCCUS OENI ACID-TOLERANCE?

Oenococcus oeni is the main Lactic Acid Bacteria responsible for malolactic fermentation, converting malic acid into lactic acid and carbon dioxide in wines. Following the alcoholic fermentation, this second fermentation ensures a deacidification and remains essential for the release of aromatic notes and the improvement of microbial stability in many wines. Nevertheless, wine is a harsh environment for microbial growth, especially because of its low pH (between 2.9 and 3.6 depending on the type of wine) and nutrient deficiency. In order to maintain homeostasis and ensure viability, O. oeni possesses different cellular mechanisms including organic acid metabolisms which represent also the major pathway to synthetize energy in wine.