“Clonal selection in Burgundy: history, advantages and disadvantages”.
1 – HISTORY
A. Pinot noir
This name appears in texts for the first time in 1375. It is highly probable that this grape variety occupied Burgundy long before this date, and that it is the product of a slow evolution which, through natural sowing or mutation, gave rise to a new varietal type. This varietal type has proved to be of such quality that it has been given a special name: PINOT NOIR. An anecdote confirms this quality: in 1395, Philippe le Hardi, Duke of Burgundy, decided that everything that was not Pinot Noir should be uprooted and replanted with Pinot Noir, and that any breach of this order should be punished by hanging. Under the name of Pinot noir coexist numerous varietal types whose productivity can vary from one to four.
Over the last few centuries, the Burgundians developed a number of Pinot noir selections, which can be found under different names in ampelographies: Pinot noir franc (very productive), Pinot noir mauvais grain (insufficiently productive), Pinot noir de Pernand and Pinot noir Liebault. Each of these biotypes is then multiplied to generate a specific form of massal selection. Over time, selection continued and became more precise, with highly satisfactory results, until the dramatic day when phylloxera appeared in the Burgundy vineyards. Massive replanting began. The situation was urgent. These massive replantings also suffered from a lack of sorting of plant raw materials. In the 50s and 60s, all replanting was still carried out using “massal” selection. This selection was based solely on the apparent health of the strains and their productivity. In this period, two parameters were detrimental to wine quality:
- Rootstock selection. There are few on the market; they are not particularly qualitative and generally too productive.
- Agricultural advisors push for the immoderate use of chemical fertilizers, particularly potash, which will unbalance the soil and therefore the wine. In the end, the winegrower makes a poor living because the wine doesn’t sell well. He tries to make up for this lack of income not by superior quality, but by selecting productive plants, hoping for higher yields.
B. Foundations of clonal selection research
By the mid-50s, the health of Burgundy’s vineyards was catastrophic. Productivity of Pinot noir, and even more so of Chardonnay, was extremely low. In the worst cases, 12- to 15-year-old vines produce just 5 hl/ha, and the result is of poor quality. In the same plot, we find highly productive vines that can barely reach 8 or 9°, sterile vines and vines with low loads. Clearly, this situation is the result of numerous viruses that are impossible to eliminate when the selection of vines is purely visual. Burgundy’s vineyards had to be cleaned up. This is why Raymond BERNARD, freshly arrived at ONIVINS, embarked on research into clonal selection (he had in fact devoted his studies to ampelography as well as varietal and sanitary vine selection at the viticulture laboratory of ENSA Montpellier).
II – DEVELOPMENT OF CLONAL SELECTION
A/Method
The method is as follows: Raymond BERNARD asks certain winegrowers, reputed to be rigorous, either to mark the stocks of their vines, as they already do for massal selection, or to allow him to act alone. After three years of observing the marked strains to judge whether their sanitary and productive qualities had been maintained, he rejected many of the vines. He then had sanitary tests carried out in the laboratory. According to INRA, out of the 1,000 to 1,500 marked vines, only 2 or 3 are retained. Once the clone has passed this first series of tests, it is multiplied by 10 plants in a so-called “behavioral vineyard”, where it rubs shoulders with other clones grafted on the same rootstock. Its resistance to botrytis, quality and productivity can then be assessed. If it passes this second series of tests, it is multiplied by 200 plants. The resulting grapes can then be micro-vinified to assess the quality potential of the wine produced from this clone. At the end of this long process (15 years), the clone finally arrives on the market.
B. The rootstock problem
Today, we’ve completely forgotten that very few rootstocks were available when research into clonal selection began. At the time, S04 was considered a panacea because of its good health, but I can say today that the best Burgundy winegrowers would no longer consider using this rootstock, which proved to be both fragile and far too productive, at least in the early years. As in the case of Pinot noir, the health of rootstocks was disastrous in the 50s. Winegrowers were already aware of the great qualities of 161-49C. However, it was also affected by virus and thyllosis. ONIVINS’ work therefore led to the selection of new clones of this rootstock, so that it could be used in Burgundy and elsewhere. The Pinot noir1l61-49C combination has always been better than that of Pinot noir and S04.
III – CLONAL SELECTION AND THE DUJAC ESTATE
A. Justifications
I’m realizing that all the new vines planted on my estate’s old vines are rapidly turning virulent and becoming sterile. For example, on the Echeveaux plot I bought in 1969, almost half the vines are missing. So I planted new vines. Ten years later, over 50% of the young vines have become sterile and the rest are moribund. As for the old vines, they continue to die gradually. I met Raymond BERNARD in 1975. After learning about his research and visiting the vineyard with him, it seemed to me that the use of clones could enable me to seriously improve the situation in my vineyard, by temporarily accepting the risk of living with few clones. Indeed, few clones are available at this time. One thing in particular attracts me to the clone, apart from its initial absence of virosis, is its earlier ripening (8 to 10 days): Burgundy being at the northern limit of Pinot noir production, this can be very beneficial for the quality of the harvest.
B. Implementation
In 1977, Raymond BERNARD suggested that I replant a half-hectare plot of Clos de la Roche with clones still under observation, and thus participate in their certification. On this plot, I’m planting around ten clones on three different rootstocks, alongside “standard” massal selections, which will serve as a point of comparison. Of course, it has been agreed that ONIVINS will be able to carry out any useful research in this plot at any time.
C. Initial conclusions
When the Clos de la Roche plantation was 10 years old, we began to make separate wines from clones and massal selection vines. I suggest that my friends taste the two Clos de la Roche obtained, side by side: the massal selection, based mainly on old vines, and the clonal selection, which was 10 years old at the time. Obviously, this comparison favors the old-vine massal selection: for a good comparison, the clonal selection should be the same age as the massal selection. Despite this, many of my colleagues blindly prefer clonal selection and believe it to be massal selection. This encourages me to continue along this path.
IV- CLONAL SELECTION AND THE DOMAINE DUJAC TODAY
A. Every year, new clones arrive on the market. In the current Burgundy collection, there are 250 to 300 clones under observation or in the process of certification, but only 10 to 15 clones actually available. This is still not enough, especially as we are eliminating those that prove too productive. As I said, it takes a long time to get a quality clone. At the end of the 70s, the clones made available to winegrowers were “generalists”, designed to suit as many situations as possible. Clone 115, for example, is suitable for both regional and village appellations, but is too productive for Grand Crus. Today, clonal selection continues to become more precise and targeted. Relations between winegrowers, ONIVINS and ATYB need to be close in order to define precise objectives. We have some clones (not yet certified) whose results we like, in vines recently replanted in Clos de la Roche. Very low yielding (20-35 hl/ha), with small berries and thick skins, they are suitable for grands crus, and difficult for regional appellations, given their low yield.
Having persevered on this path, my estate is now almost 80% replanted with clonal selection. At Domaine DUJAC, we have around twenty clones in production. Some clones were withdrawn from the market because they presented risks, in particular clone 123, which was susceptible to leafroll. However, we found that this clone also had enormous qualities: it’s not very productive, it has small bunches that are very rich in sugar and tannins, and it’s a clone that produces high-quality wine. I took the risk of putting a little bit of it in each plot. We’ve seen very little evidence of this phenomenon, which is why we continue to propagate it using grafts from our own vineyards. Of course, we use all the quality clones at our disposal. By way of information, in new plantings in Burgundy, the rate of clone planting is around 75% for Pinot noir, and 85% for Chardonnay.
B. Problems encountered with clonal selection
With clonal selection, 10,000 plants/ha are productive. It’s very easy to reach yields that are too high. This has led to serious mistakes in the past. Some ill-informed winegrowers, accustomed to traditional pruning of their virosed vines, did not modify their behavior with clonal selection vines; this overproduction led to dilution and loss of terroir identity. Clonal selection therefore requires yield control. We have put in place several means to achieve this. The first was to modify the pruning system and establish short pruning on the cordons de Royat: optimal use of the trellising plan for the best possible chlorophyll synthesis, rigorous disbudding leaving only 6 to 8 buds per vine. The second method is to adapt the way we work the soil. From September to May, the soil is grassed with bluegrass to limit vigor and improve the vine’s biological activity, while forcing the roots to penetrate deeper. From June to August, we plough thin soils to limit excessive competition.
Finally, we practice green harvesting. On the basis of trials undertaken by several estates, including Domaine DUJAC, we have observed that there is an optimum date to be respected in order to avoid any production compensation by the stock: this is the beginning of veraison. That’s why we drop grapes in the first part of August, so as to keep only 6 or 7 bunches per vine. Some of our colleagues think that rigorous pruning is enough to replace the green harvest. The 1999 vintage proved them wrong. Clonal selection can only produce good results if the vineyard is carefully managed, which is very labor-intensive. This is its weak point. However, if the estate makes this investment, it will achieve superb ripeness, and I believe a significant improvement in quality. In the same way that I find it delicate to condemn clonal selection, it is unthinkable to condemn (good) massal selection. Proponents of clones too often forget that there are Pinot fin massales that produce great wines – but they don’t have the guarantee of good health that previously tested clones provide. There are also Pinot massales known as “beet”, which must disappear from our land.
Finally, I’d like to offer you two series of two wines for tasting: the first series features wines I made myself, namely a 1996 Morey-Saint-Denis and a 1996 Chambolle-Musigny. These two wines come from similar clones, from vines that are, give or take 1 or 2 years, the same age; there are about 400 meters between Morey-Saint-Denis and Chambolle-Musigny; they are located at the same altitude, the soil is worked in the same way on these 2 parcels, and finally, these wines have been vinified in the same way. Yet they taste very different, suggesting that the clone has not supplanted the terroir. The second set of wines are two Channes Chambertin 1996s. One is from my estate, an 18-year-old clonal selection; the other, from a 60-year-old vineyard belonging to the estate of my friend Christophe ROUMIER. In both cases, the vinification was very similar, and again I don’t think the selection has changed the character of the wine: in both cases, the Charmes Chambertin is clearly present.
Terroir dominates grape variety, lending credence to the notion of appellation d’origine. I’m inclined to believe that the use of selected yeasts may have more influence than clonal selection on the loss of terroir identity. With these few comments, I hope I’ve helped you understand why some winemakers, including myself, have embarked on clonal selection with the aim of producing the best possible quality. This is not to say that we haven’t made some mistakes, or that we won’t make others in the future, but I can assure you that it will always be with the aim of achieving even higher quality.