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…

Caractérisation des relations hydriques sol/vigne dans un terroir languedocien

Par le fait d’une politique agricole communautaire axée sur des objectifs de qualité des produits, la recherche et l’identification des critères de cette qualité deviennent impératives. En viticulture, la notion de qualité du produit est rattachée au concept théorique de «terroir». Ce terme englobe un ensemble de paramètres du milieu (géologie, sol, climat) influant sur la récolte.

Functional characterization of grapevine MLO genes to define their roles in Powdery mildew susceptibility by CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing

Successful powdery mildew (PM) infection in plants relies on Mildew Resistance Locus O (MLO) genes, which encode susceptibility factors essential for fungal penetration. In Arabidopsis, loss-of-function mutations in three clade-V MLOs, AtMLO2, 6, and 12 confer complete resistance to PM infection. Since then, efforts are on to discover MLO genes contributing to PM susceptibility in many species to introduce mlo-based PM-resistance. Earlier studies in tomato and grapevine, using the RNAi approach, attributed PM susceptibility to SlMLO1, 5, and 8 and VvMLO3, 13, and 17, respectively indicating likely functional redundancy among MLOs.

On the losses of dissolved CO2 during champagne aging

A misconception lingers in the minds of some wine consumers that Champagne wines don’t age. It’s largely a myth, certainly as far as the best cuvees are concerned. Actually, during the so-called autolysis period of time (in the closed bottle, after the “prise de mousse”), complex chemical reactions take place when the wine remains in contact with the dead yeast cells, which progressively bring complex and very much sought-after aromas to champagne. Nevertheless, despite their remarkable impermeability to liquid and air, caps or natural cork stoppers used to cork the bottles are not 100% hermetic with regard to gas transfers. Gas species therefore very slowly diffuse through the cap or cork stopper, along their respective inverse partial pressure. After the “prise de mousse”, because the partial pressure of CO2 in the bottleneck reaches up to 6 bars (at 12 °C), gaseous CO2 progressively diffuse from the bottle to the ambient air
(where the partial pressure of gaseous CO2 is only of order of 0,0004 bar).

RED WINE AGING THROUGH 1H-NMR METABOLOMICS

Premium red wines are often aged in oak barrel. This widespread winemaking process is used, among others, to provide roundness and complexity to the wine. The study of wine evolution during barrel aging is crucial to better ensure control of wine quality.
¹H-NMR has already been proved to be an efficient tool to monitor winemaking process [1]. Indeed, it is a non-destructive technique, it requires a small amount of sample and a short time of analysis, yet it provides clues about several chemical families.

Podcasts – Terroir Congress 2020

All about “Australian grapevine stories”