| . |
DVR - Why Norton?
 |  |  |  |
Breeding the Best with the Best - Naturally Why Norton? Norton is a unique grape. It is the only “native” American grape that can make a wine that tastes like a European or California wine. Norton totally lacks the "foxy" flavors and odors associated with native American grapes. Thus it was the logical grape to use in creating a new family of vines that would combine the hardiness of American vines with the wine quality of European vines. What is Norton? Named for Doctor D.N. Norton of Virginia around 1820. The grape was at one time more commonly and correctly known as the “Virginia Seedling”. This name is significant. It is highly likely that Norton is an incidental cross, (originating in Virginia) of a Vitis Vinifera vine and a native American vine, most likely from the species Vitis Cinerea. Throughout the 1600s and 1700s European vines were imported into Virginia in numerous attempts to establish an American wine industry. The climate and soil of Virginia didn’t seem that different from parts of France and there appeared to be no good reasons why vines would not do well there. All these early attempts slowly failed however because of diseases that were present in America and not found in Europe. The imported vines had no resistance to these American diseases, and (in a reversal of what happened to the human populations), the diseases of America wiped out the European newcomers. Fortunately, the European vines, Vitis Vinifera, did not die immediately. Many survived for five or six years before succumbing. The heavily wooded areas that still surround most eastern vineyards are thick with wild grape vines. These produce prodigious amounts of pollen in the spring that easily cross pollinate into any surrounding cultivated vineyards. Then, as now, birds would eat a goodly portion of the crop, especially a light crop in a struggling vineyard. Hours later these grape feasting birds would redeposit these seeds (complete with a little shot of fertilizer) back in to the vineyard where in the following season the observant vine tender would notice a new vine sprouting up. If this vine survived, it would be cared for and propagated. This is the most likely origin of Norton and many other early American grape varieties. The Literature Because Norton is highly responsive to different sites and growing conditions, it looks almost like a different vine when grown in different locations. As a result, over the years, it acquired a host of synonyms: Norton, Virginia Seedling, Cynthiana. Current DNA science indicates that there is no real genetic difference between vines called by these sundry names. Early literature, especially the great ampelograpy “The Grapes of New York” (from the New York State Agricultural Experiment Station in Geneva, NY) treated these as separate vines and ascribed different parentages to each. Lacking DNA testing, the early authors used the physical characteristics of the vines to try to discern their origins. Variously, the vine was said to contain American parentage from, Vitis Labrusca, Vitis Aestivalis and (as one French ampelographer noted) Vitis Cinerea. Why Cinerea? First, why not Labrusca? If Norton had a Labrusca parent, then Norton would be the only vine in the world that had a significant Labrusca parentage that had absolutely no trace of any Labrusca flavor in the grapes or the wine. Why did some suspect Labrusca? The best guess, and it only that, is that some were fooled by the size and shape of the large leaves which many Labrusca also have. Large leaf size, though, is also found in many Vinifera. For instance, the vine known as Malbec in many of the better vineyards in Bordeaux has a leaf every bit as large and rustic as Norton. So, why not Aestivalis? This is the most quoted lineage of Norton. But, like that of the Labrusca it doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. First, the flavor of Aestivalis is described by Pierre Galet and others as being distinctive and unpleasant. Thus, if Norton is an Aestivalis cross, it is the only Aestivalis cross that totally lacks the uniquely unpleasant taste of Aestivalis. Norton has no unpleasant flavors. It in fact, and most notably, has no flavors that are outside the Vinifera profile. Second, Galet states that Aestivalis is of almost no interest in hybridization due to its poor resistance to phylloxera. In sharp contrast, of all the American vines, Norton is considered to be the most phylloxera resistant. How could the most phylloxera resistant grape vine be derived from one parent with poor resistance to phylloxera and another with almost none? It's possible but highly improbable. There is only one American vine that has excellent resistance to phylloxera, excellent resistance to fungus diseases and lacks the strong flavor profiles of other wild grapes. That vine is Vitis Cinerea. Vitis Cinerea is a thin tree climbing vine which produces very small grapes and seeds that are spread almost entirely by small perching birds such as finches and sparrows. The importance of this is that almost all birds, (with the exception of the vulture family) have somewhat poorly developed olfactory systems. These birds have incredibly sharp eyesight and hearing which is most useful in finding the small bugs, berries and seeds upon which they feed. A keen sense of smell would be of little use to them, (and considering the diet, would probably be a disadvantage.) So Vitis Cinerea over the centuries has not expended energy and resources manufacturing flavor components that would make it attractive to the small birds that are its primary vector for spreading its seeds. Taste tests have also proven this out. Wines made from pure Cinerea grapes (necessarily highly “ameliorated” with water) have a very neutral flavor, occasionally resembling elderberries. As they age they improve and never develop the offensive odors typical of the large berried wild varieties. Why a Vinifera Parent for Norton? This is easy. Thomas Munson stated that in his 19th Century travels in America (covering over 50,000 miles) searching out every wood and dale for native vines, he only once came upon a wild white vine. He also reported that almost all wild vines were sexed, that is they were either male or female. So white berries, and a complete flower, are characteristics that are very common in Vinifera yet extremely rare or non- existent in wild vines (albeit like the Sasquatch, we can never absolutely prove their current non-existence). Norton, like almost all cultivated Vinifera, is an hermaphroditic vine whose flower has both male and female parts. Of even greater importance is the fact that Munson stated that about 1/3 of Norton’s seeds will produce offspring vines that have white berries. Our tests have also borne this out. The exact Vinifera parent of Norton could, and will most likely, be determined in the future through DNA testing. The best guess would be one of the varieties that were readily available to 17th and 18th Century English sailing merchants. It could well be a white grape. The most likely source for vines would be the French Atlantic coast, most likely Bordeaux. If so, then Norton is the offspring of a tart from Bordeaux and an American native. (P.S. Our above contentions have been affirmed by subsequent DNA testing by the USDA. Go to website:) http://afrsweb.usda.gov/research/publications/publications.htm?seq_no_115=238484 The French Hybrids Sadly, during the phylloxera epidemic in Europe, the early French hybridizers who sought to combine American vines with European vines chose what is perhaps one of the worse wine grapes in the world, a female vine named “Jaeger 70”, to use as the American parent for their new vines (it wasn't their choice; it was sent to them). In turn they bred this American trollop with 3rd rate sycophants from the south of France creating the ignoble family of “French Hybrids” which today is mercifully disappearing. Even sadder, these French grape breeders almost never introduce new genes in to their pool of breeding stock. They continued to practice viticultural incest by continually breeding and rebreeding the same stock back in to itself. In their defense, they knew nothing of DNA and little of the laws of heredity and were handicapped by the French winegrowers' worship of the Lamarckian notion that vines (like all living things) would adapt, and improve themselves and pass on those improvements to their offspring. Thus vines grown in good vineyards would become better and pass on better traits to future generations, or so they thought. The 75% Solution As a result of this inbreeding (and perhaps their understandable fear of breeding out resistance to phylloxera) these French Hybrid vines almost never had more than a gross percentage of 50% Vinifera. It was only in later years that men like Vidal and Ravat and the far sighted grape breeders at the New York State Aricultural Experimental Station at Geneva, NY, pushed the envelope and bred pure Vinifera back in to the mix creating more successful vines that were 75% Vinifera. Most importantly, these pioneers proved that vines could be created that were 75% Vinifera that would not succumb to phylloxera. Breed the Best with the Best Norton is the best American grape, bar none. Cabernet Sauvignon is arguably the best European grape. Why not breed the two together and create a 75% Vinifera vine that can be grown on its own roots, is more resistant to fungus diseases and winter damage than Cab and has the high wine quality of both vines? Norton contributes phylloxera and disease resistance as well as remarkable resistance to winter injury. Its wine is excellent when well made with hints of Syrah and even Pinot. As a breeding grape its overwhelming contribution to the wine is its lack of any odd non-Vinifera flavors that would interfere with the grape with which it would be mated. Cabernet Sauvignon is arguably the best wine grape in the world. Also the vine itself is one of the more winter resistant of the Vinifera. Although it has almost no resistant to phylloxera (like all Vinifera), it is relatively resistant to most diseases, except Powdery Mildew. (Fortunately, Norton is highly resistant to PM). Contrary to what might seem logical, the ideal cross between these two vines would NOT be a vine that would turn out to have all the vine characteristics of Norton and all the wine characteristics of Cabernet. For one thing, Cabernet has some outstanding vine characteristics that would be of benefit in any cross. Likewise, Norton has some very interesting flavor profiles (cedar, elderberries, cherries) that would be of interest and benefit in any resultant wine. The Norton vine has some negative features as well that would be nice to tame with the better features of Cabernet. Norton is a rampant grower and almost always has to be grown on a double curtain to be managed properly. Its berries and bunches are both small. It almost always has to be hand picked. It has an overabundance of seeds. These two vines seem to compliment each other nicely and it would seem that a cross between the two would be ideal. Why wasn't it done before now? Unfortunately, despite the fact that Norton has been well know to grape breeders for centuries, until now almost no commercially viable hybrids of Norton existed (Albania and Starks Star are the two best known and they can hardly be found outside of germ plasm collections). Indeed, Norton has proven difficult, but not impossible, to breed. Grape breeding itself is an arduous task that can be done only during a few days each year. It requires removing the minute male parts from grape flowers working with a bent pin and a magnifying glass. This is a slow process yielding very few emasculated flowers per day. These are then fertilized with pollen from a father plant. Of these, perhaps 5% will “take” or fertilize and produce berries. The berries will usually have no more than one seed. Of these seeds, 10% might germinate when planted; half of these will die after germination. Of what remains, if eventually planted to a field for testing, many of these will be females or males and of no further use. Many will die because they have incorporated some of the worse characteristics of both plants instead of the better ones. One or two will produce enough grapes to be economically viable. Years later when those grapes are made into wine it can be determined whether or not the whole effort was worthwhile. The great 19th Century grape breeder Thomas Munson stated that in his experience fewer than 1 in 1000 vines that he bred would be equal to or superior to one of the parents. No wonder then that there are very few wine grape breeders in the world today. The Garden of Eden All DVR vines were developed in either Davis, Ca or nearby Winters. There is probably no better location on earth to do grape breeding as the climate is ideal. We used a special selection of Norton as a parent and had easy access to the nearby Napa Valley with all of the best clones of Vinifera. As always with grape breeding, success takes time, persistence, and a lot of good luck. Every successful vine we developed took close to 1000 crosses verifying Munson's estimate. East of Eden While California is a great place to breed grapes, the best place to test them is the midwestern US where the climate, disease pressure, and varying soil conditions provide an ideal testing ground. We have several acres of vineyards of experimental vines in both central Missouri and west central Illinois where they have been subjected to cold winters, spring frosts, wet springs and dry summers. |