Varietal Labeling Question

I see in a recent wine publication that Spottswoode received a great score of "94" for a white wine labeled "Sauvignon Blanc" but which had only 73% SB and 27% Sauvignon Musque. Evidently the Musque varietal is similar enough to the Blanc to be considered part of the Sauvignon "family". Would my interpretation be correct?

[David M. Bueker]

Now I have to go look up Sauvignon Musque in the Jancis Robinson grapes book.

Now I have to go look up Sauvignon Musque in the Jancis Robinson grapes book.

Harumph.....real wine geeks know that kind of stuff right off the top of their head, David.

SauvBlanc and SauvMusque are, in fact, one in the same variety. Just different clones...DNA wise identical. SauvMusque was a SB clone DougMeador/Ventana found lurking on the FPS list. Not happy w/ the strong herbal/veggy character of the standard SB in Monterey, he planted it & found it much more aromatic and better than standard SB. SauvMusque is finding more & more use in Calif. DryCreekVnyds makes a 100% SauvMusque that is wonderful.

There is also a ChardMusque clone floating about, but I've not been able to track one down.

Tom

I seem to remember tasting a musque but not quite sure which one?

I think Merry Edwards's well known S.B. uses a large portion or mainly Sauvignon Musque. However, I am not a big fan of that style.

I think Merry Edwards's well known S.B. uses a large portion or mainly Sauvignon Musque. However, I am not a big fan of that style.

I believe that is correct, Jon. Though she doesn't make a big deal of using SauvMusque.
Tom

Found it, a chard from the Okanagan.

https://blastedchurch.com/wines/unortho ... onnay_2014

I had a Chardonay Musque from Ontarios Vineland Estates

from Merry Edwards website:

This appealing Sauvignon Blanc includes grapes from six diverse sites in Russian River Valley. The foundation is 53% Sauvignon Musqué, a highly floral and rich-bodied clone of the parent varietal. Adding weight and depth to the blend is the old vine portion, which contributes 40% to the blend from vines 25 to 35 years old.

So roughly half of the 2013 vintage is from Sauvignon Musque'.

P.S. The name is Jane, not Jon.

P.S. The name is Jane, not Jon.

Sorry, Jane....I was thinking of a Jon on another Site.
Tom

[David M. Bueker]

Now I have to go look up Sauvignon Musque in the Jancis Robinson grapes book.

Harumph.....real wine geeks know that kind of stuff right off the top of their head, David.

Given that I despise Sauvignon Blanc, I tend to block that sort of knowledge from my brain!

SauvBlanc and SauvMusque are, in fact, one in the same variety. Just different clones...DNA wise identical.

Well, actually they are manifestly NOT "DNA identical" if they are different clones. It is DNA mutations that cause one clone of a vine to be different from another. But I understand what was meant: sauvignon blanc and sauvignon musque share the same principal DNA markers that distinguish the variety from other grape varieties. And sauvignon musque was not produced by planting a fertilized grape seed--it came about by cloning a particular branch of a sauvignon blanc vine that had mutated slightly.

An interesting question is at what point are there enough mutations between clones that they should be considered distinct varieties? My understanding is that both pinot blanc and pinot gris began as clones of pinot noir where the mutation(s) happened to cause loss of grape skin pigmentation. The recent Musigny blanc mutation is a similar phenomenon (if not the same--I don't know if anyone has checked whether the loss of pigmentation in Musigny blanc is due to the same mutation as in pinot blanc or pinot gris). Should Musigny blanc be considered a pinot noir clone, or a separate variety?

-Paul W.

SauvBlanc and SauvMusque are, in fact, one in the same variety. Just different clones...DNA wise identical.

Well, actually they are manifestly NOT "DNA identical" if they are different clones. It is DNA mutations that cause one clone of a vine to be different from another. But I understand what was meant: sauvignon blanc and sauvignon musque share the same principal DNA markers that distinguish the variety from other grape varieties. And sauvignon musque was not produced by planting a fertilized grape seed--it came about by cloning a particular branch of a sauvignon blanc vine that had mutated slightly.

An interesting question is at what point are there enough mutations between clones that they should be considered distinct varieties? My understanding is that both pinot blanc and pinot gris began as clones of pinot noir where the mutation(s) happened to cause loss of grape skin pigmentation. The recent Musigny blanc mutation is a similar phenomenon (if not the same--I don't know if anyone has checked whether the loss of pigmentation in Musigny blanc is due to the same mutation as in pinot blanc or pinot gris). Should Musigny blanc be considered a pinot noir clone, or a separate variety?

-Paul W.

Point well taken, Paul. Since the DNA typing of varieties only looks at a few Sites, they are identical by that standard.
My understanding is the DNA typing they use isn't refined enough to distinguish clones.
Bear in mind I'm waaaay outside my area of expertise. When a dumb engineer tries to talk about subjects like this, the story can get quite garbled.
Tom

My take on all this, is that a variety starts out as a vine that grows from a single seed. All vines that are propagated from this “mother vine” by cuttings or buds will be the same variety. Over many centuries of time and many thousands of vines spontaneous genetic changes will take place in individual vines and be perpetuated in subsequent propagation of those individual vines. Thus giving rise to a “variety family” with many clonal variants, some visible or detectable by a physical or behavioral characteristic or discernible by tasting (thus we might even give them numbers or even a name) and some not. No matter how many changes occur to separate these clones, they would always be clones of the original (“mother vine”) variety. They will never diverge into separate varieties.

Salute

I'm not sure that is the case for all recognized distinct varieties. I thought that pinot gris and pinot blanc started out as particularly distinctive clones of pinot noir. But perhaps they started out from seeds both of whose parents were pinot noir.

-Paul W.

[David M. Bueker]

Pretty sure Pinot Gris and Blanc were mutations of regular Pinot Noir that happened on the vine, not from seed.

David wrote:
Pretty sure Pinot Gris and Blanc were mutations of regular Pinot Noir that happened on the vine, not from seed.

Maybe the white grape bearing Pinot vine (Pinot Blanc) was the fist “human selected mother- vine” and the other color variants were clones.

Salute

I had a Chardonay Musque from Ontarios Vineland Estates

Chateau des Charmes, also in Niagara, does a Chard Musque as well.

[David M. Bueker]

David wrote:
Pretty sure Pinot Gris and Blanc were mutations of regular Pinot Noir that happened on the vine, not from seed.

Maybe the white grape bearing Pinot vine (Pinot Blanc) was the fist “human selected mother- vine” and the other color variants were clones.

Salute

I thought Pinot Noir was the "mother vine."

I thought that pinot gris and pinot blanc started out as particularly distinctive clones of pinot noir. But perhaps they started out from seeds both of whose parents were pinot noir.

Gris, blanc, meunier, precoce are mutations of Pinot Noir. If PN crossed with PN the seeds would produce a new variety.

Maybe the white grape bearing Pinot vine (Pinot Blanc) was the fist “human selected mother- vine” and the other color variants were clones.

Intriguing and possible, but I think that written records reference the black version earliest.

Nature wants black.grapes because veraison occurs when the grapes are ripe and they then become visible among leaves inviting birds and animals to eat them to propagate their seeds.

Gris, blanc, meunier, precoce are mutations of Pinot Noir. If PN crossed with PN the seeds would produce a new variety.

Thanks, Peter. That is what I thought. Today pinot gris, pinot blanc, and pinot meunier (I hadn't heard of pinot precoce before) are considered varieties in their own right, distinct from the pinot noir from which they were originally cloned. So new grape varieties don't perforce arise from seed.

-Paul W.

Paul wrote:
Today pinot gris, pinot blanc, and pinot meunier (I hadn't heard of pinot precoce before) are considered varieties in their own right, distinct from the pinot noir from which they were originally cloned. So new grape varieties don't perforce arise from seed.

Pinot Gris wine; Pinot Blanc wine; and Pinot Noir wine are all considered different varieties of wine. But this does not mean Pinot Gris vines; Pinot Blanc vines; and Pinot Noir vines are different varieties of vines. New varieties of vines arise only through sexual reproduction (seed); clones arise through vegetative reproduction.

The Pinot, Muscat, Traminer family of grapes are some of the oldest recorded. At a very early stage in the cultivation and domestication of the wild vine species by man, a certain member of these families (black, red, gray, white, etc, who knows it’s anyone’s guess) was selected as “best suited” for cultivation, propagation, and the production of wine. I assume these families of grapes are not to far separated from the wild vine species. The term Vitis vinifera applies to the cultivated (cultivars) or domestic species of vines.

Salute

Yep, turns out I was wrong about that. Pinot blanc and pinot gris are not technically separate varieties but clones of pinot noir.

-Paul W.