OldVine Zin----> OldVine Syrah????

Supposin' you got one of them-there 100+ yr old vine Zinfandel vnyds. But you done see'd the light and figured out the real money is in Syrah, not Zinfandel. So you graft those old vines, either direct rooted or planted on StGeorge rootstock, over to Syrah. Voila...you now have an old-vine Syrah vnyd...the only one in all Calif.
Is this really old-vine Syrah?? What would be the impact of these very old roots on the character of the Syrah wine made from them? Would you, say, 10 yrs down the road be able to tell the difference in this old-vine Syrah from an adjacent plot of 10 yr old Syrah, assuming all other things equal (crop load, harvest sugar, indentical vinification, etc)?? Supposedly, the character of the wines from old-vine vnyds are attributed to those roots that go down a gadzillon feet into the soil, sucking up all sorts of minerals and directing them into the wine, giving it that treasured old-vine character.
This is, of course, strictly a hypothetical question. Curious minds want to know. Be objective, now...no knee-jerk reactions on the ethics of using the old-vine label. We just want the facts, M'aam.
Tom

Which leads to a follow-up question. One of the defining characteristics of old-vine Zin vnyd is the age of the vine leads to a much reduced/self-limiting yield. If you have a 100+ yr old Zin vnyd right adjacent to a 10 yr old Zin vnyd and you drop the crop on the newer vnyd to match the self-limited crop-level on the old-vine vnyd. Would you taste it the difference in the wines made from the two vnyds...all other paramaters (as defined above) being equal. No guessing now...just the facts.

[David M. Bueker]

No guessing now...just the facts.

Surest way to kill this thread.

Facts, sorry I don't have! But I think I would call such a makeover an "old root" syrah. You get the nod to the old vine root system, which certainly would contribute some complexity from the larger water/mineral/nutrients spans. But I think half the equation for excellence in a well-cared-for old vine vineyard comes from what's above the ground--the build up of lignified, woody structure that the water and nutrients must fight through to get to the current vintage canes and berries. Depending on how and where you graft, are you losing part of that structure? And then there's the question of whether or not you should have thick trunks of the same variety (above the graft) to truly give the grape its own 'old vine' character?

Facts, sorry I don't have! But I think I would call such a makeover an "old root" syrah. You get the nod to the old vine root system, which certainly would contribute some complexity from the larger water/mineral/nutrients spans. But I think half the equation for excellence in a well-cared-for old vine vineyard comes from what's above the ground--the build up of lignified, woody structure that the water and nutrients must fight through to get to the current vintage canes and berries. Depending on how and where you graft, are you losing part of that structure? And then there's the question of whether or not you should have thick trunks of the same variety (above the graft) to truly give the grape its own 'old vine' character?

Thanks, Mary...that was exactly the kind of thoughtful response I'd hoped my question would evoke.

Your idea of "old root" vnyd makes emminent sense to me, rather than the slightly deceptive "old vine" vnyd.

So these are own-rooted vines. Does that thick/gnarly Zin trunk on the vine make a difference on the scraggly new Syrah on top??
Suppose you grafted the bud down towards the base of the trunk and then whacked off most of that gnarly/old trunk?? I'm clueless.
Tom

So these are own-rooted vines. Does that thick/gnarly Zin trunk on the vine make a difference on the scraggly new Syrah on top??
Suppose you grafted the bud down towards the base of the trunk and then whacked off most of that gnarly/old trunk?? I'm clueless.
Tom

In grafting, whether it is grapevines, apples, pears, walnuts . . . the root system is chosen for its rootly qualities only. The choice of rootstock affects the health, size, and ripening speed of the upper plant. Rootstocks are chosen for being drought tolerant, or tolerant of wet soils, cold hardy, disease resistant, dwarfing, early season, late season, etc. The upper plant, above the graft, determines all the flavor and appearance characteristics of the fruit. So the only thing I can imagine a thick trunk would have to offer is slightly more resistance to water and nutrients passing upwards, and I have no idea how that would impact the flavor, if at all really.

Have you ever seen a 5-in-1 tree? You can grow Baldwin, Pippin, Russet, Granny Smith, Gravenstein and McIntosh apples on the same apple tree--golden apples hanging from one branch, red and streaked on the others. You can do the same for any fruit tree, pears, plums, whatever. I think you'd have to dig long and hard in the literature of agriculture to find anyone who claims that a rootstock, whatever its size and age, materially affects the flavor of the scion. But I do believe that an own-rooted old vine plant has special qualities, in the same way that a very gnarly, old, but well-tended apple tree is going to produce fruit that is noticeably different from young plants of the same cultivar planted right next to it.

In grafting, whether it is grapevines, apples, pears, walnuts . . . the root system is chosen for its rootly qualities only. The choice of rootstock affects the health, size, and ripening speed of the upper plant. Rootstocks are chosen for being drought tolerant, or tolerant of wet soils, cold hardy, disease resistant, dwarfing, early season, late season, etc. The upper plant, above the graft, determines all the flavor and appearance characteristics of the fruit. So the only thing I can imagine a thick trunk would have to offer is slightly more resistance to water and nutrients passing upwards, and I have no idea how that would impact the flavor, if at all really.

I agree with you about the effect, Mary, but not about the cause. As a defrocked plant physiologist, I recall that the rates of translocation within the phloem and xylem of woody plants are actually quite speedy. (Water and minerals are carried within the xylem and organic nutrients produced by photosynthesis are transported within the phloem.) But the fruit will depend exclusively on the plant tissue above the graft because it will be genetically identical* to the tissue above the graft. That's also the explanation for your 5-in-1 graft.

Mark Lipton

*added in edit: yes, I know that plants reproduce sexually, so the fruit is actually not genetically identical to the parent plant except in the case of self-pollination. I hope that my point is clear anyway.

The upper plant, above the graft, determines all the flavor and appearance characteristics of the fruit. So the only thing I can imagine a thick trunk would have to offer is slightly more resistance to water and nutrients passing upwards, and I have no idea how that would impact the flavor, if at all really.

I think you'd have to dig long and hard in the literature of agriculture to find anyone who claims that a rootstock, whatever its size and age, materially affects the flavor of the scion.

I think I am missing something between these two thoughts. I am reading this to say that when working with a grafted vine, there is no reason to believe old is better than young since you can not seem to related either the roots or the top to impacts in fruit quality.

Likewise, if as is the recommended practice on the East Coast to double trunk and bring up new trunks every so often so that no trunk is older than 5 years old, can this ever be considered an old vine.

Hi Brian. By "materially affects" I meant that the age and type of the roots will not affect the basic character of the fruit--cabernet roots on a pinot graft will not give the pinot a cabernet-like character.

But a deep and wide root system does give fruit a perceptible difference in the quality of the cultivar. Old vine pinot will taste different than young vine pinot (same clone, same soil, etc.).

Mark, that's interesting about the rate of nutrient delivery being speedy in woody plants. By speedy, does that mean 'faster' than in plants with less lignin? Might be part of the magic of old vines?

*added in edit: yes, I know that plants reproduce sexually, so the fruit is actually not genetically identical to the parent plant except in the case of self-pollination. I hope that my point is clear anyway.

Actually, the fruit of a grape will be genetically identical to the parent plant. It's only the seeds that are the result of sexual reproduction.

-Paul W.

*added in edit: yes, I know that plants reproduce sexually, so the fruit is actually not genetically identical to the parent plant except in the case of self-pollination. I hope that my point is clear anyway.

Actually, the fruit of a grape will be genetically identical to the parent plant. It's only the seeds that are the result of sexual reproduction.

Very good point, Paul.

Mark Lipton