Terroir and Sensitive Crystallization

Does terroir have a signature? Does "terroir" even exist? A recent conference on terroir at U.C. Davis tackled these questions and more. Randall Grahm of Bonny Doon gave what was undoubtedly the most unique presentation—a discussion of sensitive crystallization accompanied by slides of crystals from various sites in France and California.

Randall’s entire presentation is published at Appellation America, and is followed by my article, The Tarot of Terroir, on our attempts to create crystallization samples with soil scientist Dr. Tom Rice.

In a process created by Ehrenfreid Pfeiffer, a student of biodynamics founder Rudolph Steiner, a solution of copper chloride is added to an organic sample. In this case—wine. The resulting pattern of crystals might be specific to type and site, and offer some indication of the health and balance of the entire organism.

Filled with impish curiosity, Dr. Rice and I prepared eight plates of crystals from six vineyard-specific wines.

We used cabernet and viognier from Hansen Vineyard in the eastern end of Templeton Gap—Hansen has some unusually black, ancient sedimentary soils underlying clay.

We chose zinfandel and syrah from Dove Pond Vineyard in the middle of Templeton Gap, and roussanne and syrah from Starr Ranch in the steep northwest hills of the Adelaida district.

We also prepared two samples of a field Rhone blend from Alto Pomar—a high plateau vineyard east of Atascadero. All of these samples are photographed and available for review at Appellation America.

Each site did indeed have similar patterns that differed from the other sites, but in some samples, the difference was very slight. The two Alto Pomar plates were very different from all the others. Is that due to the site? Or is it due to that wine being a blend of three varietals? What do the concentric rings mean? What do even vs. ragged crystals mean? What do the raised textures in some samples mean?

We were intrigued and fascinated by the results. In our next session, we will prepare several plates of the same wine to check for consistency of crystal formation, and we’ll compare some samples of our estate wine to macerated plant material and soil solutions from our vineyard.

Science or silliness? Who knows. Many things we now understand about the world were once scoffed at.

Comments

[Josh]

Great article Mary. Strikes the right balance between scientific curiosity and outright fun.

The only way we'll ever know if sensitive crystallization is science or silliness is to test it, like you've been doing. I look forward to reading about the results of your second round.

There more things in heaven and earth than can be dreamt of to be sure, but I just wonder if whatever information that may be captured in the crystalline structures can be successfully decoded, much less correlated somehow with positive sensory characteristics that might aid us in grape growing and winemaking.

Still, with someone as thoughtful and articulate as you calling for open minds, I'll be watching with interest.

[Josh]

By the way, is it "sensitive" or "sentitive" crystallization? I've seen it referred to as both.

Thanks!

[Mary Baker]

Thank you, Josh! I am trying to find more books by Pfeiffer on the process of "reading" the crystals . . .

I have used his book "Weeds and What They Tell" in researching our existing cover crop and options in replanting, and I didn't even realize it was the same author until now. As a third generation farmer, I don't find it odd at all to "read weeds." The type and health of weeds in various parts of the farm landscape indicate the type of soil, the direction of the soil's health (getting dryer, wetter, losing pH, etc.) and sometimes the permeability and tilth of the soil. Pfeiffer's book on weeds is quite accurate (the translation is a little quirky in places) and also discusses what the weeds contribute back to the soil.

Nevertheless, I would never have attempted this if it weren't for Dr. Rice's "let's try it" suggestion. And oddly enough, some local enologists are interested in learning more about it. It's refreshing to see that kind of curiosity and sense of fun in a scientific community.

I'm not sure why Grahm prefers the term 'sentitive.' Perhaps it's related to the word 'sentient'--to perceive and sense things. I use 'sensitive' because that is the term that Dr. Pfeiffer uses in his book.