A few months ago, I was having a conversation with a gentleman who LOVES nebbiolo. I thought I had a deep understanding when it comes to Piedmonte wines, but this man’s knowledge specifically about the clonal types used in the different communes gave me goosebumps!
We both share a deep love for the wines of Cappellano. They use 100% michet clone of their PR bottling. Apparently the michet clone is so finicky that the lose a little over 50% due to its poor genetics. 50%! I also understand that age of the vines play a part since some of Cappellanos vines are from the 1940s.
Is there any hope of saving the Michet clone with all the technology we have at our disposal, or in the next decade or so will we see the clone being ripped up and replanted with Lampia or Bolla or something new they are cooking up? This makes me cherish what I have of Cappellano and keeps me on the hunt for more!!
I always thought it wasn’t a clone, in the sense of all identical individuals propagated from a single individual, but rather an historic massale selection, or family of individuals sharing a similar phenotype. However it seems people often refer to it as a clone, and maybe true clones have been taken from within Michet plantings. I have also read that, when it was cleaned up for propagation it was found that many of its desirable traits actually derived from fan leaf virus. But again, that could be mistaken or out-of-date, not my specialist subject.
If by PR you mean “Piè Rupestris”, you’ve got it backwards. The full name on that wine (which comes from 2/3rds of their parcel in Gabutti) is labeled “Piè Rupestris - Nebioli”. “Piè Rupestris” here refers to American root stock and “Nebioli” indicates that the clones in this portion of the vineyard are a mix of various Nebbiolo clones.
His other Barolo is labeled “Piè Franco - Michet”. Piè Franco indicates European roots stock and Michet refers to the specific clone in that parcel.
Not my strong suit either, but my understanding is that Michet is technically a subvariety of Nebbiolo and that there are various clones within the Michet subvariety.
To my understanding, there are two primary clones or sub varieties of Nebbiolo, Michet and Lampia. It was later found that the Michet clone was a badly virus infected version of Lampia. The quality of the Michet wines supposedly was because it was weakened by the virus. So that means they should be able to clean it up of the virus. If this cleaned up Michet still produces superior wine, I don’t know.
Both clones are available from FPS/Davis. The Michet would then be virus-free. Nick Martin at MartinBros/PasoRobles was the first in Calif to plant Lampia & made his first Lampia in 1976. He produced the first varietally labeled Nebb in Calif in '72 from an old Central Vlly vnyd.
Up until then, the Nebb Grown in Calif was Nebbiolo Rose, not a particularly highly regarded clone because of the lightness of the wines (that is bad??). They also have Nebbiolo Rose in Piemonte & I think one Wnry makes a wine exclusively from that clone.
Ian d’Agata in his book on Italian varieties has the best discussion of Nebbiolo. I was lazy & didn’t review that book.
Tom
Kerin O’Keefe quotes oenology professors saying that Michet is “a genetic mutation of Lampia caused by a virus.” That suggests you can’t cure it of the virus and end up with Lampia.
As a footnote, there is also Rose, long thought to be a third, lighter, more fragrant form of nebbiolo, but not recognized as a close relative but genetically distinct. It is allowed under the DOCG rules.
And Morrell is plugging Cascina Baricchi this week. It’s a relative new winery that makes some mostly and 100% rose wines that it makes only as riservas and sells with lots of age. Morrell is offering a 2004 and 2006 now.
Here is a link to Kerin O’Keefe’s article about Barolo Elvio Cogno 2016 Ravera Vigna Elena Riserva. It gives interesting background info on their decision to vinify it separately.
In a previous thread about Nebbiolo rose Levi Dalton shared the following very interesting video about Nebbiolo, bio types etc. Excellent and highly educative:
Nebbiolo Rosé is not a clone of Nebbiolo. It’s a distinct variety related to Nebbiolo, but actually research shows it’s closer to Muscat or Pinot than to Nebbiolo.
We also had an interesting discussion a year ago and I found a research that has some very detailed information on the phenotypes of Nebbiolo and where they are grown in the larger Piedmont / Lombardy area, including a very nice map: https://www.wineberserkers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3245481#p3245481
While the Lampia clone might’ve originally born as a virus-infected mutation of Michet, it is more distantly related to Michet than any other of the clones (Picoutener, Spanna / Chiavennasca and the other genotypes that don’t appear to have names). Also only very few samples of the Lampia clone were found - and only in the Langhe region - whereas Michet or its unnamed sibling clones appear to be much more widespread.
Nebbiolo Rosé is not a clone of Nebbiolo. It’s a distinct variety related to Nebbiolo, but actually research shows it’s closer to Muscat or Pinot than to Nebbiolo.
We also had an interesting discussion a year ago and I found a research that has some very detailed information on the phenotypes of Nebbiolo and where they are grown in the larger Piedmont / Lombardy area, including a very nice map: https://www.wineberserkers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3245481#p3245481
While the Lampia clone might’ve originally born as a virus-infected mutation of Michet, it is more distantly related to Michet than any other of the clones (Picoutener, Spanna / Chiavennasca and the other genotypes that don’t appear to have names). Also only very few samples of the Lampia clone were found - and only in the Langhe region - whereas Michet or its unnamed sibling clones appear to be much more widespread.
[/quote]
I’m not sure the comment about rose is correct(?) - as I recall it has a sibling relation with Nebbiolo.
I think the clip Levi shared kind of sorted out what’s what but a very interesting thread.
I think you mixed up Michet/Lampia. Michet is the viruses version of Lampia. Where did you get information it was closer to the others?
Chiavennasca was if I recall from the clip (need to re-watch it) mutated (?) to the point that it like Rose was considered to be different.
Indeed I accidentally mixed up Michet and Lampia. However, to my understanding both are free of viruses - Michet was just born of a mutation caused by the fanleaf virus, but Michet clones by default are not infected. They of course can be, just as Lampia can be as well, but there are lots of Michet Nebbiolos planted which are completely virus free.
But on to other points; did you read the post I linked there? Or the research paper in question? There were answers to many of your points and questions (including the part that from the point of view of alleles Michet is closer to the other clones and Lampia is quite distinct). However, I can try to answer some of them here as well.
First, yes, Nebbiolo Rosé is related to Nebbiolo - exactly as I said - but as the research shows, the allelic configuration of Nebbiolo Rosé is very different to any other clone of Nebbiolo. Certain alleles in all Nebbiolo clones are A-A, whereas the same alleles in Nebbiolo Rosé’ are A-T, meaning that it has retained the A from its Nebbiolo parent and acquired another allele T from another variety, making it from allelic point of view similar to varieties like Muscat or Pinot (which also are A-T).
This is somewhat analogous to, say, red-haired people, who have two red-haired alleles (say, “R”). However, if a person has an allele for brown (“Br”) or black (“Bl”) hair, they are no longer red-haired. A person with R-R alleles is red-headed, whereas a person with alleles R-Br is similarly brown-haired as a person with alleles Br-Br. When it comes to Nebbiolo Rosé, the DNA from its Nebbiolo parent certainly gives a lot of Nebbiolo characteristics, but there are still lots of other elements that are quite dissimilar.
Here’s a chart that hopefully clarifies things a bit more:
And regarding Chiavennasca / Spanna - no, it isn’t considered to be a different variety like Nebbiolo Rosé. If you just read the research I linked, it shows that Chiavennasca / Spanna is just one of Nebbiolo’s many clones. And you seem to have confused some things, as mutations don’t give rises to new varieties, but new clones. Mutations make changes in alleles, but the genetic makeup of the DNA doesn’t change, so all different clones of one variety seem to have identical DNAs. This means that all clones of Nebbiolo have identical DNAs. However, as Nebbiolo Rosé is a cross of Nebbiolo and some other variety, 50% of Nebbiolo Rosé is similar to Nebbiolo and 50% has come from its other parent, making its DNA distinct from Nebbiolo’s. Here’s the same thing put in different words: https://www.winespectator.com/articles/whats-the-difference-between-a-clone-and-a-variety-49442
But regarding the point on mutation, it seems that both Chiavennasca / Spanna and Michet have mutated from Lampia at some point, and that Picoutener clone (only found in Aosta) is a further mutation of Chiavennasca / Spanna. However, Chiavennasca in Lombardy is completely identical to the Spanna clone grown in Alto Piemonte and Aosta, down even to the alleles, ie. in no way different to what is grown on the Piedmont side.
but a very interesting thread.
![[wow.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/7/7d450e9830889c8943b674446a21b7254cad657e.gif "wow"){kind=small}
![[snort.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/b/bdc3944606213c4dca6c1169cf0a166c8bc4f8c9.gif "snort.gif"){kind=small}
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}