sequential fermentations. These wines were analyzed for wine chemistry attributes in addition to microbial populations during primary and malolactic fermentations. Final wines were also analyzed by a consumer-based sensory panel to determine if perceptible differences existed between treatments. Finally, an undergraduate (FD SCI 413) and graduate (FD SCI 597) level enology class used an additional 10 varieties provided from both vineyard plots to teach harvest techniques and winemaking techniques. Additionally, several students used these varieties for independent research projects. A few of these projects were presented at the ASEV National Conference in Austin, TX in June 2014. Table 1. Dormant pruning weight, yield/vine and average cluster weight of wine grape cultivars planted at two locations in Pennsylvania in 2013. Lake Erie Region Grape Research & Extension Center (LERGREC) Pruning wt. Avg. Cluster Cultivar kg/vine Yield / Vine, Kg. wt, g Cabernet Franc* 1.24 e** 7.34 cd 104 bc Chambourcin 0.34 ab 9.05 def 197 d Chancellor 0.72 bcd 10.56 efg 110 c Gruner Veltliner 0.74 bcd 6.45 bcd 181 d La Crescent 0.68 abcd 7.86 de 72 ab Marquette 0.90 cde 8.26 def 74 abc MN 1235 0.74 bcd 8.10 de 79 abc Muscat Ottonel 0.31 a 3.01 a 79 abc Norton 0.89 cde 4.40 abc 48 a NY 81.0315.17 0.50 abc 11.50 fg 100 bc Pinot Grigio 0.51 abc 3.22 a 86 bc Noir 0.55 abc 3.17 a 81 abc Syrah 0.58 abc 4.01 ab 199 d Traminette 1.08 de 3.33 ab 82 abc 0.47 ab 12.25 g 187 d P-Value 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 Fruit Research and Extension Center (FREC) Pruning wt. Avg. Cluster Cultivar kg/vine Yield / Vine, kg. wt, g Albarino 1.70 bcde 2.17 abc 145 abc Barbera 2.18 bcde 5.35 def 309 cdef Cabernet Franc 2.38 de 6.52 ef 283 bcdef
sequential fermentations. These wines were analyzed for wine chemistry attributes in addition to microbial populations during primary and malolactic fermentations. Final wines were also analyzed by a consumer-based sensory panel to determine if perceptible differences existed between treatments. Finally, an undergraduate (FD SCI 413) and graduate (FD SCI 597) level enology class used an additional 10 varieties provided from both vineyard plots to teach harvest techniques and winemaking techniques. Additionally, several students used these varieties for independent research projects. A few of these projects were presented at the ASEV National Conference in Austin, TX in June 2014. Table 1. Dormant pruning weight, yield/vine and average cluster weight of wine grape cultivars planted at two locations in Pennsylvania in 2013. Lake Erie Region Grape Research & Extension Center (LERGREC) Cultivar Pruning wt. kg/vine Yield / Vine, Kg. Avg. Cluster wt, g Cabernet Franc* 1.24 e** 7.34 cd 104 bc Chambourcin 0.34 ab 9.05 def 197 d Chancellor 0.72 bcd 10.56 efg 110 c Gruner Veltliner 0.74 bcd 6.45 bcd 181 d La Crescent 0.68 abcd 7.86 de 72 ab Marquette 0.90 cde 8.26 def 74 abc MN 1235 0.74 bcd 8.10 de 79 abc Muscat Ottonel 0.31 a 3.01 a 79 abc Norton 0.89 cde 4.40 abc 48 a NY 81.0315.17 0.50 abc 11.50 fg 100 bc Pinot Grigio 0.51 abc 3.22 a 86 bc Noir 0.55 abc 3.17 a 81 abc Syrah 0.58 abc 4.01 ab 199 d Traminette 1.08 de 3.33 ab 82 abc 0.47 ab 12.25 g 187 d P-Value 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 Fruit Research and Extension Center (FREC) Cultivar Pruning wt. kg/vine Yield / Vine, kg. Avg. Cluster wt, g Albarino 1.70 bcde 2.17 abc 145 abc Barbera 2.18 bcde 5.35 def 309 cdef Cabernet Franc 2.38 de 6.52 ef 283 bcdef
SCRI%20REPORT_FINAL_-2-14-2016.docx