Phylloxera

This where I get confused. Before I developed an interest in wine I understood the term "clone" to mean an organism that was in every respect genetically identical to the organism from which it was derived. DNA, genes, chromosomes, the whole bit. With regard to wine grapes, however, the term seems to be used to describe an organism that is slightly different from the parent organism. And if propagation of wine grapes is by cuttings, how does genetic mutation occur? Can someone help me here?

That is my understanding. I'm not sure that PN was the first, but all of the pinots are closely related.

That's because the term originated after Samuel Johnson "simplified" so many of the spellings of English words. ;-)

Vino

I think your definition is correct. But any plant can put out a sport, which is a mutation. This is how many cultivars are developed. So, if the cutting is a sport, then the graft is no longer a clone of the parent plant. In effect you have a new cultivar from the sport, and subsequent cuttings retain that genetic material.

That's how it works for some other plants, anyway! :)

-E

"UC" wrote in news:1158167289.932398.227880 @i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

Ah, but now you've changed the subject again.

This is not worth my time to discuss with you because you lack the intellectual integrity to engage in reasoned discussion.

John

You have claimed that permitting European variities to develop resistance to phylloxera would likely bring about poorer wines BECAUSE poor quality wines come from American grapes that have developed resistance to phylloxera.

I say you have no way of determining that.

It may in fact be true that permitting European variities to develop resistance to phylloxera would bring about poorer wines, but NOT because they will have developed resistance to phylloxera. It could well be incidental.

That is my understanding

I am not sure about that. You can have different clones of the same variety (maybe that is what your were thinking of). But within each clone the DNA should be identical.

Mutation can occur within all living organisms as I understand it. It is not necessarily to do with the process of taking cuttings. See

So you may set out to have a collection of clones - genetically identical vines. But in fact some might have mutations. Or some might mutate at a later stage.

See. Words mutate too. My quoted text has even aquired a complete parenthetical comment!

I know that a grape variety can have a number of different clones, using that term in the sense that it is used in viticulture. Chardonnay has the Dijon clone, among others. Brunello is one of several clones of sangiovese. I would assume that, within each clone, the DNA is identical. But between clones, the DNA is slightly different. Again, it appears that the term "clone" is used in two different senses.

Sorry. I used brackets to try to indicate that the insertion was made by an editor (me) and was for the sole purpose of clarifying the quotation because an antecedent had been omitted. I even did this to one of my own quotes above. ;-)

Vino

"UC" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

I reply only so the record shows that you have completely mis-characterized what I said.

John

John Gunn wrote in news:Xns983DA0EFBACjohnlgunnqwestnetnos@65.115.167.1:

born unable not to do any other, and never will

Then you have trouble comprehending what you write. Seek professional help.

Michael, John never wrote that.

John wrote that "the grape varieties that evolved along with phlloxera do not make good wine.", which is a simple observation of the facts.

You replied "There is no NECESSARY connection bewteen the poor wine-making quality of American grapes and the presence of phylloxera in American soil." Your response makes no sense. John never claimed that phylloxera resistance CAUSES a grape variety to produce bad wine, but simply that american grapes produce bad wine, and happen to have ph. resistance.

He has explictly pointed out that breeding resitance to P. in European wines would result in poor wines, given that American vines that are resistant make poor wines. There is no necessary connection. American and Europe separated about 100 million years ago!

Nonsense. He never wrote that.

I went back and reviewed the thread. You're right. He said they were correlated.

Michele, for god's sake: Stop feeding that troll.

M.

I suppose that unless someone can be bothered to check no one knows whether the DNA is identical or not. I think the point is that vines are sold as clones are INTENDED to have identical DNA.

I don't know about the"Dijon clone", but I understand Brunello to be a subvariety of Sangiove rather than a clone, and I would imagine there are many different Brunello clones in the various vineyards around Montalcino.

Having said that I have just googled and discovered that people DO decribe Brunello as a clone. I would say they are wrong, but a more liberal view would be that usage varies. I will make a note to check what people mean when they use the term in the future.

No problem. Should have added a smiley to my comment too.