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…

International Terroir Congress: 14 years of scientific proceedings!

We are a partner of the International Terroir Congress. For 4 months, our team has been putting the congress archives online. We are very proud to announce that the 14 years of archives are finally available. All archives of the International Terroir Congress are...

Étude de la flore levurienne de différents terroirs alsaciens

L’utilisation de levures sélectionnées est généralement considérée comme le moyen d’éviter les problèmes fermentaires. Néanmoins de nombreux viticulteurs pensent que ces levures sont à l’origine d’une standardisation des vins et militent pour le respect d’une flore indigène (Bourguignon, 1992).

Barrel-to-Barrel Variation of Color and Phenolic Composition in Barrel-Aged Red Wine

Tangible variation of sensory characteristics is often perceived in wine aged in similar barrels. This variation is mostly explained by differences in the wood chemical composition, and in the production of the barrels. Despite these facts, the literature concerning barrel-to-barrel variation and its effect on wine sensory and chemical characteristics is very scarce [1]. In this study, the barrel-to-barrel variation in barrel-aged wines was examined in respect of the most important phenolic compounds of oenological interest and chromatic characteristics, considering both the effects of the (individual) barrel and cooperage. A red wine was aged in 49 new medium-toasted oak (Quercus petraea) barrels, from four cooperages, for 12 months

Investigating water stress-related seasonal and spatial patterns and the possible links with juice and wine compositional parameters

The mapping of spatial variability in vineyards offers the potential to implement zonal management strategies with the aim to optimize economic benefits and increase sustainability by managing natural resources, such as water used for irrigation, more optimally. This study characterized the (natural) variability in plant water status in a commercial Cabernet Sauvignon block, using remote sensing techniques, and identified the impact of this variability on the yield, and juice and wine composition. From the field data collected over two growing seasons, we demonstrated that remote sensing techniques are a practical and powerful tool for mapping spatial variability within vineyard blocks.

A sensometabolomic approach to understand wine mouthfeel percepts

Targeted analytical methods can overlook compounds that are a priori unknown to play a role in the mouthfeel sensations. This limitation can be overcome with the information provided by untargeted metabolomic analysis using UPLC‐QTOF-MS. To this end, an untargeted metabolomic approach applied to 42 red wines has allowed development of a model with predictive capacity by cross-validation for the “dry”, “oily” and “unctuous” sensations perceived by a sensory panel. The optimal PLS model for “dry” retained compounds with positive regression coefficients (≥ 0.17) including a trimer procyanidin, a peptide, and four anthocyanins.