This article was downloaded by: [Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche]On: 22 August 2013, At: 00:59Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Wine ResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjwr20

The description and evaluation ofgrapevine land races in OltrepòPavese, Northern ItalyLeonardo Valenti a , Francesco Mastromauro b , LucioBrancadoro a , Maurizio Bogoni a & Fulvio Mattivi ca Istituto di Coltivazioni Arboree, Università degli Studi,Milano, Via Celoria 2, I‐20133, Milano, Italyb C.I.VI.FRU.CE., Torrazza Coste (Pavia), Italyc Istituto Agrario di San Michele, Via E.Mach 1, I‐38010, SanMichele all'Adige (Trento), ItalyPublished online: 21 Mar 2007.

To cite this article: Leonardo Valenti , Francesco Mastromauro , Lucio Brancadoro ,Maurizio Bogoni & Fulvio Mattivi (1997) The description and evaluation of grapevine landraces in Oltrepò Pavese, Northern Italy, Journal of Wine Research, 8:2, 87-102, DOI:10.1080/09571269708718106

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09571269708718106

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoeveras to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of theauthors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracyof the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verifiedwith primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and otherliabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

Journal of Wine Research, 1997, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 87-102

The Description and Evaluation of Grapevine LandRaces in Oltrepò Pavese, Northern Italy

LEONARDO VALENTI, FRANCESCO MASTROMAURO, LUCIOBRANCADORO, MAURIZIO BOGONI and FULVIO MATTIVI

Original manuscript received, 18 June 1996Revised manuscript received, 28 October 1996

ABSTRACT Most grapevine land races which were extensively grown in the last century in Oltrepò

Pavese, Northern Italy, can today only be found in marginal old vineyards close to abandonment or

eradication. Germplasm collected following an initial survey in 1986 was described during 1990-91

according to a basic list of morphological traits. Between 1990 and 1993, yield and must composition

traits were measured for vines in the collection. In 1991, grapes from 15 representative Oltrepò land races

were micro-vinified. Chemical and sensory analyses of wines were performed. Many local biotypes of each

old cultivar were discovered in a second survey in Oltrepò carried out in 1990 and 1991, confirming

that the most important land races described in the literature were not properly cultivars but rather variety

populations, because of their large intra-population variability. To avoid genetic drift, it will therefore be

necessary to reproduce this variability in germplasm collections. Anthocyanin high-pressure liquid

chromatography profiles were successfully adopted to classify the land races into groups and for the

purposes of variety identification. It was concluded that only a few of these land races may be proposed

to growers as an alternative to traditionally grown cultivars, to increase the typicity of wines produced

in the district.

Introduction

The loss of genetic resources of Vitis species and cultivars is a worldwide phenomenon,resulting from the expansion of cultivation causing the loss of land races (local varietiescultivated in the past which are now uncommon) and also to progressing civilisation andnatural disasters. This situation has been described in particular for wild grapes (Vitisvinifera silvestris) in Italy (Anzani et al, 1990) and for grapevine land races all over theworld (Dettweiler-Munch, 1990). The decline of European land races started in thesecond half of the 19th century. Today, old cultivars are neglected almost everywhereand this situation is encouraged by restrictive legislation concerning the varieties that arepermitted to be cultivated. Nevertheless, large genetic resources will always be needed asa reservoir for future cultivation and quality requirements (Lesica and Allendorf, 1992).

Italian viticulture is very old (over 4000 years) and important (more than 900 000 ha).In spite of this, little research has been conducted on germplasm description and

L. Valenti, L. Brancadoro and M. Bogoni, Istituto di Coltivazioni Arboree, Università degli Studi, Milano, ViaCeloria 2, I-20133 Milano, Italy. F. Mastromauro, C.I.VI.FRU.CE., Torrazza Coste (Pavia), Italy. F. Mattivi,Istituto Agrario di San Michele, Via E.Mach 1, I-38010 San Michele all'Adige (Trento), Italy.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

88 L. VALENTI ETAL.

conservation (Scienza et al., 1993). About 2200 different varieties of Vitis vinifera and othergrape species, more or less extensively grown in Italy as wine, table or rootstock cultivars,have been listed (Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, 1988; Costacurta, 1992).

In the past, vineyards were comprised of a population of vines which was mainlyheterogeneous and, sometimes, of several mixed varieties. This heterogeneity could haveboth a genetic origin and a sanitary cause (Boidron, 1995), the latter related to thesustained use of certain soils and locations and the use of infected rootstocks. Modernviticulture is based on the propagation of clones of a few traditional cultivars. Bydefinition, a clone is a population of plants all the members of which are the descendantsby vegetative propagation of a single individual. Clonal selection, the most widely usedprocedure for improvement of wine grapes, exploits the genetic variation existing withincultivars. This variation has been attributed to the polyclonal origin of varieties (Rives,1961), to mutational events, to pathogens (such as viruses and viroids) and, in some cases,to the misnaming of grapevine cultivars which are difficult to differentiate for phenotypiccharacters and are compounded by extensive synonymy (Mullins et al., 1992). Thisvariation may be reduced by the use of a small number of clones in large cultivationareas (Stefanini et al., 1995). The approximately 300 clones so far actively propagated inItaly are not sufficient to preserve the genetic potential of the cultivars once they areselected. Some traditional cultivars are often represented by only one or two registeredclones (Mannini, 1995). Moreover, as a consequence of the difficulty in finding cloneswithin each cultivar which meet all the requirements of the selection protocol (a veryhigh virological standard and high viticultural and oenological aptitudes are required byItalian legislation), a reduced number of clones reach the target for registration.

Nevertheless, within traditional cultivars, the maintenance of genetic variability isconsidered essential for wine grape cultivars in order to promote a better response tonatural selection pressures, as well to exploit their contributions to the complexity of winecharacteristics. In order to minimise the loss of genetic variability, new approaches tograpevine selection have been proposed, using weak selective pressure (Bogoni et al.,1993) and the use of polyclonal families in multi-clonal vineyards (Scienza, 1993), whichinvolve exploiting the synergistic effect of a blending of genotypes to achieve the bestwine quality.

Oltrepo Pavese is the largest viticultural district (about 20 000 ha) in Lombardy,Northern Italy (Figure 1). Modern Oltrepo viticulture (Failla, 1988) is based on a groupof major cultivars (Barbera n., Croatina n., Pinot n., Riesling italico b., Moscato b.,Malvasia b., Cortese b., Chardonnay b.). Among minor grapevine varieties, some arecultivated over areas of from 10 to 100 ha, while other varieties are grown on smallersurfaces.

The present research aimed to develop a suitable methodology for the description,the identification and the general evaluation (yield and fertility traits, disease susceptibil-ity, oenological and sensory properties) of grapevine land races. Only the results obtainedfor red berry land races will be discussed here, with the material on white berry racesbeing the subject of a future paper.

Materials and Methods

Germplasm sampling, evaluation and conservation were conducted according to com-monly used procedures: exploration of germplasm source locations, germplasmclassification, evaluation and use, germplasm preservation in collections. The germplasmprogramme was developed according to the following steps.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

GRAPEVINE LAND RACES 89

Pavia

Figure 1. Geographical position of Oltrepo Pavese area. C.I.VT.FRU.CE.Collection site is marked with an asterisk. Locations surveyed: (1) Pometo,(2) Redavalle, (3) Torrazza Coste, (4) Rovescala, (5) Castello di Santa Giuletta,(6) Sarezzano, (7) Moline Zavattarello, (8) Oliva Gessi, (9) Fumo,(10) Ossinisio, (11) Valle di Cicognola, (12) Canevino, (13) Montalto Pavese,(14) Zavattarello, (15) Casteggio, (16) Corvino San Quirico, (17) Santa

Giuletta, (18) Castello di Montalto, (19) Torricella Verzate.

Evolution of Variety Range

A preliminary literature search of references on the evolution of variety range inOltrepo Pavese and in bordering regions from the end of the 19th century upto now was undertaken. This produced a list of the main red berry grape varietiescultivated in the 19th century (Table 1). Moradella, Croa, Vermiglio and Moretto,extensively grown in the past, have left no traces on modern germplasm in OltrepoPavese. At the end of the last century, after the transformation caused by phylloxera,Giulietti (1884-87) reported the presence of some 118 local red grapevine varieties inOltrepo Pavese: only 20 had a widespread distribution (among them Barbera, Dolcetto,Croatina and Ughetta, nowadays still grown), and 62 were present only in very restrictedsites. In some cases the same cultivar might have different names depending on the areain which it was grown, and different cultivars might have the same name (Mullins et al,1992).

Among all these land races, three main and heterogeneous groups or pop-ulations could be identified: Moradella, Croa and Vermiglio (Failla, 1988). Varietieswithin these groups had similar cluster and berry characteristics as well aswine quality. Croatina, Ughetta and Pignolo could be regarded as minor groups ofvarieties.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

90 L. VALENTI ETAL.

Table 1. List of main red berry varieties grown in Oltrepo Paveseat the end of the 19th century (modified from Failla, 1989)

Code

123456789

10111213141516171819202122

Variety

MoradellaUghettaCroatinaVermiglioCroa rossoBarberaNebbiolo"Moretto'ToppiaBarbisino'Dora o D'OroPignoloDolcettoBonardaUva raraCrovaGrignolinoCrovarinoRossaroneRosseraSchiavaAleatico

A

7252483829616032235331311634242797

11191326

B

61372825232320181911131012756646623

Code

23242526272829303132333435363738394041424344

Variety

Malvasia n.ColombanaGattineraNebbioloneCorberaParmaVermioneSlarinaMostarinoBossoleraBalsaminaCaloraMaccaferroBrianzottoLambruscaFresia o FreisaPinot n.ScioccheraBasganoMoscato rossoPissadellaTintorino

A

151011108766435

11985542

35261414

B

2632343233211111120000

a— Names used for Dolcetto, Lambrusca di Alessandria, Grignolino and Croatina respectively.A, number of districts where the variety was cultivated; B, number of districts where the varietywas intensively cultivated.

First Survey in Vineyards

In 1986, few locations in Oltrepo were surveyed (Figure 1). In general, old varieties weresingle vines or groups grown in isolated rows or in very old vineyards close toeradication. The name traditionally attributed by growers was given to these genotypes(i.e. individuals with a specific genetic constitution). In a few cases the name of the farmwas attributed (e.g. Pollini). The validation of locally attributed names by comparisonwith morphological, agronomic and oenological descriptions found in 19th centuryliterature (Giulietti, 1884—87) was not easy, as most of them proved to be veryambiguous. This was probably due to the presence of a large intra-population variability,to site effects and to the lack of precise ampelographic methods.

Only genotypes with no recognisable symptoms of virus diseases (such as abnormalshoot morphology, yellow mosaic, veinbanding and leafroll) were used as sources ofbudwood, that is as mother plants for clonal propagation.

The Establishment of a Germplasm Collection

Germplasm collected in the first survey was planted in 1987 in C.I.VI.FRU.CE (theagricultural experimental station of Lombardy Regional Council in Torrazza Coste,Pavia). Vines (10 plants for each genotype), grafted on to Kober 5BB (Vitisberlandieri X Vitis riparia), were Guyot trained (2.5 mX 1.20 m). The vineyard (180 m

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

GRAPEVINE LAND RACES 91

Table 2. List of OFV morphological traits used for landraces description

OIVcode

001

003

004

065

067

068

076079

084

085

151

202220223225230231

241

Trait

Form of young shoot tipIntensity of anthocyanin coloration of young shoot tipDensity of prostrate hairs of young shoot tipMature leaf sizeShape of mature leaf bladeNumber of mature leaf lobesShape of mature leaf teethGeneral shape of petiole sinus of mature leafDensity of prostrate hairs between the veins on lower side of mature leafDensity of erect hairs between the veins on lower side of mature leafSex of flowerBunch sizeBerry sizeBerry shapeBerry skin colourBerry flesh colourIntensity of colour of berry fleshPresence of seeds

above sea level), on a silty-clayey soil, was managed according to commercial mechanicaltillage practices. For some land races, two or more biotypes (i.e. individuals with verysimilar phenotypic characteristics, but collected in different sites) labelled with a differentnumber were planted.

The Description of Germplasm in the Collection

Genotypes were described in the 1990-91 period according to a minimal descriptor list(Table 2) (OIV, 1983). Data were processed by discriminant and cluster analyses.

Over 4 years (1990—93), at harvest, on all vines of each genotype, yield (kg), clusternumber, number of fruiting shoots, mean cluster weight and bud fruitfulness weremeasured. Refractometric sugar degree, titratable acidity and pH were determined onmusts obtained by three representative clusters from each vine. The possibility of virusinfections of selected vines might have affected vine performances and must compositionof the genotypes in observation. In 1991 and 1992, about 60 kg of grapes from 15 landrace biotype varieties in the C.I.VI.FRU.CE collection were vinified at the San MicheleInstitute experimental cellar according to a standardised scheme (Valenti et al., 1992).Two biotypes of Tabernello, Freisa, Moretto and Uva della Cascina were vinified. Wineswere bottled 5 months after vintage. Chemical analyses of wines were performedaccording to European Union official methods.

Sensory analyses were performed by a trained panel of 15 tasters in our Institute.Barbera and Croatina wines, whose grapes had been harvested in vineyards contiguousto the collection and micro-vinified with the same technique, were used as test wines. Atbottling and 8 months afterwards, wines were tasted to identify the main sensory notesaccording to a standard reference list (Noble et al., 1987). Fifteen sensory attributes weresummarised in a descriptive list (Figure 2), later used by panellists. Sensory evaluationwas completed by the evaluation of colour and taste notes on astructured scales (Iacono

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

92 L. VALENTI ETAL.

AROMA-Floral-Spicy-Fruity

-Vegetative

-Chemical

-Caramelised-Woody

TASTEmin

Acid IAstringent |Alcohol |Structure |Balance |

COLORIntensity I

berrytree fruittropical fruitdried fruitartificial fruitfreshdriedcanned/cookedpetroleumsulphur

burnedphenolic

max

111

1

1

Figure 2. Card used for sensory descriptive analyses.

et aL, 1994). Sensory tests were replicated twice. Three among the most representativelocal varieties (Moradella, Croa and Uva di Mornico) were replicated twice within eachsensory session. In the last trials, each wine from local varieties was compared to areference wine (Barbera) in a paired test (Sauvageot, 1980) with respect to aromaamount, taste quality and overall appreciation on astructured scales. Results weresubjected to quantitative descriptive analysis (QDA; Gerbi and Zeppa, 1993), analysis ofvariance (ANOVA) and multivariate statistical techniques.

The Second Vineyard Survey (1990-91)

The area surveyed in 1990—91 was larger than in the first phase, and included thebordering viticultural areas of Tortona (Piedmont) and Piacenza (Emilia-Romagna).Sixty-six biotypes of 39 land races were identified. Genotypes were named as describedpreviously. When more than one genotype was found with the same name, the locationname (or a number, within the same location) was added. Sometimes the term 'unknown'was used. All genotypes were described with respect to cluster and berry, bud fruitfulness,vine vigour and yield, ripening period, Botrytis infection rate, must soluble solids (Brix0),titratable acidity (g 1~ as tartaric acid) and pH. Berries were sampled for skin

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

GRAPEVINE LAND RACES 93

anthocyanin determination. All genotypes were multiplied by grafting and planted in thecollection in 1993. Only the berry skin anthocyanin data are discussed in this report.

Skin Anthocyanins

Berry samples, both from the collection and from vines in vineyards detected in thesecond survey, were subjected to spectrophotometric determination of total skin antho-cyanins during 1992-93. Anthocyanins were separated by high-pressure liquid chroma-tography (HPLC) and quantified (Mattivi et al., 1990). Due to the stability of anthocyaninprofile within the same grape variety (Mattivi et al., 1990; Valenti et al., 1993), thistechnique was adopted in germplasm evaluation to group land races according to theiranthocyanin profile, to make suggestions about the similarity among local varieties foundin different locations, differently named but with similar morphological characteristics, orconversely to solve problems of homonym varieties. The use of percentages instead ofabsolute amounts, as proposed by Mattivi et al. (1990), reduced the influence due tophenotype, i.e. to the synthesis of different quantities related to ripening phase and year.Moreover, it allowed an easier verification of similarities between varieties belonging tothe same family, but which were often very different with respect to the absoluteanthocyanin contents with similar profiles.

Evaluation in Commercial Vineyards

Vineyards were established in 1993 on private farms for the evaluation of the bestperforming old varieties, to obtain data necessary for registration in the list of regionalrecommended cultivars and to get a sufficient number of buds for their commercialpropagation. On all these varieties, indexing procedures will be applied to identify thepresence of virus diseases and to decide the opportunity of sanitation by thermotherapy.

Results and Discussion

Vine Yield and Must Composition

Uva della Cascina, Croa rosso and Tabernello 1 had the highest vine yield and clusterweight (about 10 kg/vine and 300 g respectively), probably due to their high budfruitfulness (Table 3). Moradella biotypes had strong differences in cluster and berrysizes: Giulietti himself (1884—87) noted the existence of a little (or 'piccola') Moradellaand a big (or 'grossa') Moradella or 'Moradellone'. Moretto 0 and 1, Nibio 2 and Pignolahad very low vine yield (about 2 kg/vine or even less), related to low cluster weight(127-179 g) and bud fruitfulness (0.77-1.44). Nibio had a low variability with respect toyield and fertility.

The highest sugar refractometric degree was recorded for the test varieties (Croatinaand Barbera) and for Pollini, Vermei, Uva della Cascina 2 and Pignola. It was notpossible to get a sufficient sugar content in Croa rosso 2 and Uva della Cascina 1,probably due to their high productivity. Tabernello 2, Moradella biotypes and Uva diMornico, in spite of a not-excessive crop load, were not able to get a good sugar contentin musts. The highest total acidity contents were measured in Freisa 1, Croa rosso 2,Barbera, Pollini and Pignola. Uva di Mornico, Moradella 0, Nibio 2, Colombaia nera,Uva della Cascina 1 and Moretto 0 had the lowest titratable acidity (less than 6 g 1~ ).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

94 L. VALENTI ETAL.

Table 3. Means and standard deviations (STD) for yield and must compo-sition characters recorded in the 1990-93 period on old varieties and tester

cultivars (Barbera and Croatina) in the C.I.VI.FRU.CE collection

Variety

ColombaiaCroa rosso 1Crop rosso 2Frcisa 0Frcisa 1Frcisa 2Moradella 0Moradella 1Moradella 2Morctto 0Moretto 1Morctto 2Nibio 1Nibio 2PignolaPoUiniTabernello 1Tabcrncllo 2Uva Cascina 1Uva Cascina 2Uva MornicoVermci

BarberaCroatina

Grand mean

Yield'(kg)

8.8913.049.174.557.024.522.945.576.591.222.354.784.452.401.993.32

13.086.67

19.437.716.367.33

5.525.30

6.34

STD

4.076.773.451.803.172.311.074.653.200.391.762.830.751.721.612.516.582.918.063.483.904.21

1.513.74

4.25

Clusterweight

(g)

372

384

347

238314

219

130

183

273

179

135

232

95

127

161

155

356

272

362326

302

295

190

369

251

STD

248

128

99

120

95

84

28

79

53

89

30

68

24

25

107

95

115

75

129117

191

81

98

105

152

Bud

fruit-fulness*

2.1

1.7

.7

.5

.6

.5

.7

1.7

1.6

0.8

1.0

1.1

2.51.4

1.2

1.6

1.8

1.52.21.5

1.4

1.3

1.6

0.9

1.5

STD

1.4

0.8

0.5

0.4

0.8

0.5

0.6

0.90.5

0.4

0.5

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.6

0.7

0.3

0.5

1.1

0.6

0.5

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.7

SSR'(Brix°)

20.921.017.121.021.721.019.819.119.820.720.220.220.820.521.623.920.319.118.922.119.622.9

23.522.6

20.8

STD

2.25.0

2.91.7

1.1

1.7

1.1

2.33.1

2.2

1.0

2.1

4.22.5

3.5

1.0

1.8

3.5

2.4

2.1

2.5

4.9

0.9

1.8

3.1

Titra tableacid

(gi-y

5.427.398.156.149.316.835.597.197.195.326.076.925.554.947.607.736.516.865.806.845.286.48

7.905.85

6.62

STD

1.240.721.081.090.441.131.252.111.471.310.871.201.061.141.450.781.691.621.441.530.921.56

0.801.18

1.56

pH

3.363.103.013.253.313.213.573.303.353.473.403.183.263.303.163.233.363.113.453.263.323.21

3.193.26

3.27

STD

0.130.120.070.200.140.130.060.140.090.340.100.210.150.240.170.120.250.170.100.140.160.18

0.130.11

0.20

''Yield per vine.'Number of clusters per number of fruiting shoots.'Soluble solids refractometric degree.dg 1 ~ ' as tartaric acid.

Ampelographic Description

Four subgroups (1-2-3-4), which could also be summarised in two main groups(A and B), were obtained by cluster analysis (Ward's method) applied on theampelographic traits (Figure 3). Croa, Vermei, Freisa, Pignola, Tabernello andUva della Cascina 2, with few prostrate hairs on young shoots and on lowersides of leaves, with a very low anthocyanic pigmentation on shoot apexes andwith berry skin colour from pink to dark red, were grouped in A. Genotypesin group B (Moradella, Moretto, Uva di Mornico, Nibio, Colombaia, Uva dellaCascina 1, Pollini) had opposite morphological characteristics and dark red or blue berryskins.

Land races which had the largest spread in the last century were separated: Croa andVermiglio in group A, Moradella in group B (with Moretto and Uva di Mornico).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

GRAPEVINE LAND RACES 9 5

Figure 3. Groups obtained by cluster analysis (Ward's method) applied on 18ampelographic characters used to describe grapevine varieties.

Anthocyanins in the Skin

Classification of local varieties in the collection, or detected in the second survey, wasmade according to results of cluster analysis (not reported here), performed on the fivemonoglucoside (M) concentrations, expressed as percentage chromatographic area at520 nm, the summation of acetic esters and the summation of />-cumaric esters. Barberasamples collected in the same locations were used as controls. Five groups were obtained(Figure 4, Table 4).

In group 1, di-substituted (cyanidin 3-M, peonidin 3-M) and tri-substituted (del-phinidin 3-M, petunidin 3-M, malvidin 3-M) anthocyanins are approximately equivalent;cyanidin 3-M and malvidin 3-M are the principal pigments (Figure 5). The otheranthocyanins have similar proportion. Ester amount is generally low, particularly in thetwo Tabernello-named varieties. In group 2, tri-substituted anthocyanin concentrationsare slightly lower than di-substituted ones; peonidin 3-M is the main pigment and esteramount is low. In group 3, the tri-substituted amount is higher than di-substituted; themain pigment is malvidin 3-M. Ester amount is generally intermediate. In group 4,malvidin 3-M is the main pigment and the tri-substituted amount is predominant overdi-substituted. Moreover, ester content is high, in particular for Uva di Mornico. Ingroup 5, tri-substituted concentration is very low and di-substituted forms predominated.Cyanidin is the main pigment and only traces of esters are found. Only Pulitana, whoseberry skin is pink, has these characteristics. Moscato-named varieties were classified ingroup 4; Brachetto and Freisa, with peculiar berry aroma, were put in group 2.

In some cases, genotypes collected with the same local name in different areas withinOltrepo had the same anthocyanin profile. This happened for Rossarone and Croa rosso(group 2) and Uva di Mornico (group 4). In other cases, genotypes having the same local

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

96 L. VALENTI ETAL.

Figure 4. Concentrations of the five monoglucosides, the summationsof esters and the summations of p-coumaric expressed as per-centage of chromatographic area at 520 nm in the five groupsdetected in cluster analysis. Delph.: delphinidin 3-monoglucoside;Cyan.: cyanidin 3-monoglucoside; Petun.: petunidin 3-mono-glucoside; Peon.: peonidin 3-monoglucoside; Malv.: malvidin 3-mono-glucoside; Ac. Est.: Summation of acetic esters; /j-cum.Est-: p-coumaric

esters.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

GRAPEVINE LAND RACES 97

Table 4. List of varieties subjected to the classification according totheir anthocyanin profile; they are divided in groups according to

results of cluster analysis (Figure 5)"

Group 1

Croa Acino Piccolo (10), Croa Rosso (3, 14, 16), Doux D'Henry (9), Incognita 1 (16),Incognita 4 (8), Incognita 4 (16), Moradella (3, 13), Rossarone Acino Grande (10), RossaroneChiuso (11, 14), Rossarone Gentile (10, 14), Rossarone Maschio (14), Sangiovese (16),Tabernello (3), Uva Dura (14), Uva Rara (1), Vermei (3)

Group 2

Bonardina (6), Bonarda (8), Brachetto (9), Freisa (3, 6), Granval (17), Incognita 1 (15),Incognita 1 (16), Incognita 2 (15), Incognita 2 (16), Incognita 3 (16), Incognita 4 (15),Incognita 5 (8), Incognita 6 (19, 13), Moscato Nero (9), Rossarone (15), Tipo Pulitana (6),Uva Nera Particolare 2 (9), Uva Rara (4, 5, 6), Uvetta (16)

Group 3

Barbera (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 19), Barberone (6), Basgano (7, 14), Bermestia (9), Bonarda (15),Colombaia Nera (3), Croa Grappolo Grande (11, 14), Croatina (2, 6, 12), Incognita 1 (6),Incognita 3 (8), Incognita 3 (13), Incognita 2 (16), Lunga Tipo Croatina (17), Moretto (3, 6),Moscato Nero (14, 16), Moscato Rosa (16), Moscato Rosa del Carso (9), Pissadella (8),Pollini Tipo Barbera (3), Rossa 1 (17), Rossa 2 (17), Uva Crova Montalto (13), Uva dellaCascina (3, 9), Uva Rara (3, 19)

Group 4

Basgano (8), Ciliegiolo (6), Croatina (3, 4, 5, 13, 19), Incognita 1 (13), Moradella Grossa (18),Nibio (3), Tipo Tintoria (13), Uva Dora (13), Uva di Mornico (3, 7, 13), Uva di Nigazzo (13),Uva Nera Particolare 1 (9), Uvetta (13), Vespolina (3)

Group 5

Pulitana (3)

"In parentheses: locations where genotypes were found.

name were distributed in different groups according to their anthocyanin profile:Moradella genotypes were put in groups 1 and 4, as well as Croa genotypes which weredistributed in groups 1 and 3. These results confirmed that the same names of Moradellaand Croa were locally used for different varieties. Anthocyanins in the skin were usefulto solve wrong homonym cases (which are very frequent when looking for localgermplasm), even before getting these material in a collection.

Chemical and Sensory Analyses of Wines

Chemical analyses (Table 5) assessed the suitability of tested land races for vinificationand according to sensory analyses. Moradella and Croa had low alcohol content andconfirmed data recorded by Giulietti (1884-87).

Sensory data obtained by the use of the descriptive list of attributes (Figure 2) weregraphically represented with QDA techniques. On radii the per cent of tasters whodetected the corresponding sensory note was reported. Only aroma notes which allowedsignificant discrimination among the wines were used for wine sensory profiles (Gerbiand Zeppa, 1993). In general, old local varieties showed a good complexity in aromaprofiles (Figure 5).

Panellists' scores for taste and colour intensity on unstructured scales were subjectedto ANOVA, which assessed the significant role played by samples (wines), but not bytasters. After standardisation by taster, cluster analysis (Ward's method) was applied andsix groups of wines were detected. Results of the discriminant analysis, applied to these

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

98 L. VALENTI ETAL.

BARBERA

CARAMELIZED

BEKRY

TREB FRUITS

ARTPICIAL ESTER

CROATINA

CARAMELIZED

FRESH VEOST.

CROA1

ram vf IMT. TREE FRUITS

vumncua E(TCR

MORADELLA

CARAMELIZED

T D M FRUITS

'ARTIFICIAL ECTER

UVADIMORNICO UVADELLACASaNA

CARAMELIZED

SULFUR

FLORAL

FRESH VEOSX

CARAMELIZED

FRESH VEOET.

Figure 5. Results of sensory descriptive analysis of two tester cultivars(Barbera and Croatina) and some land races (Croa rosso, Moradella, Uva di

Mornico and Uva della Cascina).

groups, were plotted in the bi-dimensional space of the two first significant canonicalfunctions (55 and 31% of total variability respectively) (Figure 6). The highest standard-ised coefficients, as absolute values, were attributed to wine colour and acidity in the firstfunction, and alcohol, body and astringency in the second. Within each session,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

GRAPEVINE LAND RACES 9 9

Table 5. Chemical analyses of wines obtained by micro-vinification in 1990and 1991 from 15 old cultivars collected in C.I.VI.FRU.CE germplasm

collection

Variety

Moretto 0Moretto 2Uva Cascina 0Uva Cascina 2Tabemello 0Tabernello 2Freisa 1Freisa 2Croa rosso 0Moradella 0Uva MornicoPolliniColombaiaNibio 1Pignola

Alcohol(%)

12.3511.6210.8812.3611.2910.8012.4012.7110.819.92

11.1714.4912.2512.5811.46

Sugar

(gl" ')

1.31.21.21.11.21.11.01.71.31.41.11.71.01.21.5

FreeSO2

(mgl"1)

181415181413181414181816191820

Volatileacidity

(gl" ' )

0.180.260.340.380.280.280.220.180.460.370.430.260.490.260.18

Totalacidity

(gl" ')

6.167.486.627.386.417.467.518.536.786.716.778.695.137.469.34

PH

3.272.973.133.053.112.953.053.043.043.193.033.043.393.032.93

Malicacid

(gl" ' )

0.030.140.030.040.040.141.010.800.050.250.061.211.150.571.72

Tartaricacid

(gl" ' )

3.155.264.394.764.395.013.874.803.994.004.235.572.944.434.71

Totalantho-cyanins

(mgl"')

24386

18220514113422812773

336243325479249211

Dryextract

era

24.5123.6622.2323.4021.9022.2725.6727.8521.6224.3522.7830.1920.3424.4228.31

Alcohol as per cent on volume; sugar as Feehling; total and volatile acidity as g 1 of tartaric and acetic acidrespectively; total anthocyanins as mg 1 ~' of malvidin diglucoside.

replicated wines (Moradella, Croa and Uva di Mornico) were attributed to the samegroups (Figure 6). The reference wines Barbera and Croatina belonged to groups 6 and4 respectively. Moradella and Uva di Mornico were attributed to group 1, very close togroup 6. Croa was classified in group 2, noticeably different from the other groups. This

Figure 6. Diagram of the discriminant analysis relative to sensory character-istics of local varieties and tester wines (Barbera and Croatina). Morad.:Moradella; U. Mornico: Uva di Mornico; U. Cascina: Uva della Cascina;

Tabern.: Tabemello.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

100

2ooCO

oCO

S3

00

L. VALENTI ETAL.

Aroma amount Taste quality Overall appreciation

Moretto

Colombaia

I Moradella

Freisa 2

Nibio1

Pignola

Figure 7. Sensory properties ofsome old varieties and a tester wine (Barbera)obtained by a paired test. Sensory scores were standardised to the testerwine. Vertical bars with the same letter are not statistically different at

p = 0.05 (Duncan's multiple-range test).

test assessed the differences between wines of the two main old varieties (or groups ofvarieties), Croa and Moradella.

In the last sensory tests, each wine was compared to a common reference wine(Barbera) in a paired test. ANOVA assessed the existence of non-significant differencesamong scores attributed by tasters to the reference wine. Wines made from old varietieswere statistically different as concerns taste quality and overall appreciation. Sensoryscores were later standardised by taster and expressed for each variety as differences fromthe standardised mean score of the tester wine. Positive differences assessed a highersensory evaluation than the tester wine. In general, just a few varieties (Moretto 0,Moretto 2, Pollini, Freisa 1, Colombaia and Uva della Cascina) gained higher judge-ments than the reference wine (Figure 7).

Conclusions

These results suggest that the reintroduetion of land races in modern Oltrepo viticultureshould take into consideration the evaluation of their agronomic and oenologicalaptitudes and, at the same time, pass through a clonal and sanitary selection protocol.Within local varieties, it is generally impossible to select clones with the requiredvirological status: their populations are too small and the spread of virus infections is veryhigh (Mannini, 1995). Most of the collected land races will probably be infected by oneor more viruses and the application of artificial sanitation will be necessary. Sanitation,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

GRAPEVINE LAND RACES 101

even if relatively easy to carry out, will prolong the period of selection, but it willprobably reduce variation within biotypes of the same varieties caused by virus diseases.

Most of the local varieties were abandoned for their higher sensitivity to biotic andabiotic stresses, for their low phenotypic stability, for the low quality of grapes and winesthey produced, and for the short storability of wines (Failla, 1988; Giulietti, 1884-87).Only a few of them will consequently be of some interest for the modern wine industry.Nevertheless, it is necessary to test all discovered and collected genotypes since some ofthe negative judgements given in the past could be due to old management practices andcellar technologies.

A number of local biotypes of some land races, which had differences in somephenotypic traits, were observed during vineyard surveys. This situation suggested thatsome Oltrepo old varieties could be considered as 'variety populations'. To avoid geneticdrift, it is necessary to preserve most of the discovered genotypes and to reproduce theexisting variability of these populations in a germplasm collection.

The anthocyanin HPLC profile was useful in the preliminary screening of localvarieties found in old vineyards. Different genotypes having the same name and collectedin different vineyards were separated.

The sensory evaluation process resulted in a preliminary description and evaluationof sensory traits in the wines. The progress which could be obtained with the reintroduc-tion of old varieties was estimated by comparison with wines of cultivars now extensivelygrown. Sensory analyses assessed the aroma complexity of some old varieties. Theirreintroduction in commercial vineyards might enhance the range of sensory attributes inOltrepo Pavese wines. However, only a very few of these old land races can be proposedas an alternative to traditionally grown cultivars, due to their insufficient oenological andorganoleptic aptitudes. These discouraging results may be only partially explained by theadoption of a standardised vinification technique, perhaps sometimes not suitable forsome of the varieties. Nevertheless, land races are the result of selection pressures appliedin the Oltrepo environmental conditions and the best performing old cultivars shouldhave the advantage of adaptation to specific environments of this territory. Moreover,consumer perception and demand may vary over time, thus imposing some modificationsin varieties that are now considered status quo. In general, the best performing oldvarieties should be regarded not only as varieties to use in monovarietal wines, but alsoas minor or major components to improve wines prepared from traditional cultivars inOltrepo Pavese. This strategy should increase the typicality of wines produced in thedistrict.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dr Roberto Daffonchio (C.I.VI.FRU.CE., TorrazzaCoste, Pavia, Italy) for his co-operation in vineyard surveys and chemical analyses.

ReferencesANZANI, R., FAILLA, O., SciENZA, A. and CAMPOSTRINI, F. (1990) Wild grapevine (Vitis vinifera var.

silvestris) in Italy: distribution, characteristics and germplasm preservation--1989 report, in:Proceedings 5th International Symposium on Grape Breeding, 12-16 September 1989, St Martin/Pfalz,Germany, Vitis, Special Issue, 97-113.

BoIDRON, R. (1995) Clonal selection in France. Methods, organization, and use, in: Proceedings of theInternational Symposium on Clonal Selection, 20-21 June 1995, Portland, OR, USA, American Societyfor Enology and Viticulture, 1-7.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013

102 L. VALENTI ETAL.

BOGONI, M., REINA, A., VALENTI, L. and SCIENZA, A. (1993) Valutazione della variabilità intravari-etale attraverso procedure di pressione selettiva debole, Vignevini, 12, 25-30.

CONSIGLIO NAZIONALE DELLE RICERCHE (1988) Elenco delle cultivar di fruttiferi reperite in Italia, Firenze:CNR.

COSTACURTA, A. (1992) Il germoplasma della vite in Italia: reperimento, descrizione e conser-vazione, in: Atti Congresso Germoplasma Frutticolo--Salvaguardia e valorizzazione delle risorse genetiche,Alghero (Italy), 21-25 September 1992, 485-496.

DETTWEILER-MUNCH, E. (1990) Activities concerning conservation of Vitis germplasm, in: Proceedin-gs 5th International Symposium on Grape Breeding, 12-16 September 1989, St Martin/Pfalz, Germany,Vitis, Special Issue, 44-49.

FAILLA, O. (1988) L'evoluzione della viticoltura oltrepadana: vecchi e nuovi vitigni, in: SCIENZA, A.(ed.) Oltrepò Pavese: aspetti viticoli, enologici ed economici, Pavia: Logos International, 177-192.

GERBI, V. and ZEPPA, G. (1993) Individuazione dei descrittori sensoriali di un vino: il caso deiPelaverga, in: Quaderni della Scuola di Specializzazione in Viticoltura ed Enologia, Università di Torino,87-102.

GIULIETTI, C. (1884-1887) Notizie di Ampelografia per la provincia di Pavia, in: Estratti del Bollettinodel Comizio Agrario di Voghera.

IACONO, F., FALCETTI, M. and P O R R O , D. (1994) Improving on tradition: uprating and upgradinggrowth and quality in Trentino, Italy, Journal of Wine Research, 3, 225-236.

LESICA, P. and ALLENDORF, F.W. (1992) Are small populations of plants worth preserving?,Conservation Biology, 1, 135-139.

MANNINI, F. (1995) Grapevine clonal selection in Piedmont (Northwest Italy): focus on Nebbioloand Barbera, in: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Clonal Selection, 20-21 June 1995,Portland, OR, USA, American Society for Enology and Viticulture, 20-32.

MATTIVI, F., SCIENZA, A., FAILLA, O., VILLA, P., ANZANI, R., TEDESCO, G., GIANAZZA, E. and

RiGHETTI, P. (1990) Vitis vinifera--a chemotaxonomic approach: anthocyanins in the skin, in:Proceedings 5th International Symposium on Grape Breeding, 12-16 September 1989, St Martin/Pfalz,Germany, Vitis, Special Issue, 119-133.

MULLINS, M., BOUQUET, A. and WILLIAMS, L.E. (1992) Genetic improvement of grapevines, in:Biology of the Grapevine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 203-229.

NOBLE, A.C., ARNOLD, R.A., BUECHSENSTEIN, J. , LEACH, E.J., SCHMIDT, J . O . and STERN, P.M.

(1987) Modification of a standardized system of wine aroma terminology, American Journal ofEnology and Viticulture, 38, 143-146.

OFFICE INTERNATIONAL DE LA VIGNE ET DU V I N (OIV) (1983) Code de caractères déscriptifs des variétéset espècies de Vitis, Paris: A. Dehon.

RiVES, M. (1961) Bases génétiques de la sélection clonale chez la vigne, Annales de Amélioration desPlantes, 2, 337-348.

SAUVAGEOT, F. (1980) Technique d'analyse sensorielle, in: LINDEN, G. (ed.) Technique d'analyse et decontrole dans les industries agro-alimentaires (II), 2, 327-390.

SCIENZA, A. (1993) Vigneti policlonali e valorizzazione della diversità dei vini, Vignevini, 12, 23-24.ScIENZA, A., FaILLA, O. and VaLENTI, L. (1993) Grapevine germplasm diversity and conservation,

in: BuNCE, R.G.H., RySZKOWSKI, L. and PAOLETTI, M.G. (eds) Landscape Ecology and Agroecosystems,Lewis Publishers, 183-195.

STEFANINI, M., IACONO, F. and P O R R O , D. (1995) New strategies to optimize clonal variability ofPinot noir to trentino environment (NE Italy), in: Proceedings of the International Symposium on ClonalSelection, 20-21 June 1995, Portland, OR, USA, American Society for Enology and Viticulture,143-147.

VALENTI, L., BOGONI, M., BRANCADORO, L., MASTROMAURO, F., NICOLINI, G. and SCIENZA, A.

(1992) Valutazione dell'attitudine enologica dei vitigni autoctoni oltrepadani, in: Atti CongressoGermoplasma Frutticolo--Salvaguardia e valorizzazione delle risorse genetiche, Alghero (Italy), 21-25September 1992, 559-564.

VALENTI, L., MATTIVI, F., MASTROMAURO, F., ANZANI, R. and SCIENZA, A. (1993) Caratterizzazione

della Vitis v. silvestris italiana attraverso i pigmenti antocianici, Vignevini, 9, 42-47.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Con

sigl

io N

azio

nale

del

le R

icer

che]

at 0

0:59

22

Aug

ust 2

013