CLONE BREEDING AND CLONE USING OF OLD “HUNGARICA” WHITE WINE VARIETIES
Hajdu, E.1; Májer, J.2; Kozma, P.3; Marcinkó, F.4; Kocsis, L.5 1
Research Institute for Viticulture and Enology, H-6000 Kecskemét, Pf.25. hajdu.e@szbkik.hu
2
Research Institute for Viticulture and Enology, H-8261 Badacsony, Római út 2. 3
Research Institute for Viticulture and Enology, H-7634 Pécs, Pázmány P. u. 4. 4
Tokaj Kereskedőház Company, H-3934 Tolcsva, Petőfi S. u. 36-40. 5
Pannon University of Agriculture, H-8360 Keszthely, Deák F. u. 16.
Summary
The high variability of the vine varieties cultivated in the Carpathian Basin enlightens the selection of valuable clones. An organized clone selection in state institutions began in Hungary after the II. World War using mass, clone-type and individual selection methods. The 3 most important varieties characteristic of Hungarian wines (Furmint, Hárslevelű, Olasz rizling) show considerable genetical progress in genetical and sanitary selections. Of the selected varieties 15 registered clones have been propagated in virus-free stock vineyards established for this purpose. Clone selection will continue in the future.
Key words: selection, clone, biodiversity, virus-free stock vineyard
Introduction
Every living creature lives in populations, in propagation communities. These communities are extremely diversified owing to mutations, their recombinations are cross fertilization. External factors keep on altering the genetical structure of a plant species, such as the vine (Vitis vinifera L.). This process takes a long time and results in evolution. Variability is caused by mutations (Leclair, 1992). Mutations take place in large parts of the population but they are the most frequent in the bud. Bögre and Dohy (1992) indicated that mutation frequency was caused by transposons, that is, by “jumping genes”. Mutation is more frequent in mitochondrial DNA than in nuclear DNA. The function of transposons is due to stable genes and show high mutation rates. Transposons are activated by environmental stress effects and induce sudden changes in morphology, phenology, resistance, production and quality values. The older a vegetatively propagated plant is, the more mutation can accumulate. Changes are fixed in the genom and can be maintained by vegetative propagation (Sartorius, 1928; Hajdu, 2006). A long cultivation period on large areas increases the variability (Calo et al., 1985). The more heterogeneous a variety is, the more clones can be selected from among the stocks (Leclair, 1992; Schartl – Engelhart, 2006).
Selection limits and maintains the polymorphism in the vine. By selection the gene pool of the vine, as well as its environment, can be changed. Selection means genetical impoverishment, thus, more clones must be produced.
Selection is, in the same time, vary effective as economically valueless individuals can be excluded from propagation and only progenies of valuable clones are used to establish plantages. The genetical capacity of varieties, however, limits the development of new clones (Bleser et al., 2005). Ever since vine has been propagated vegetatively, clones have been made. Clones are propagated through cuttings and grafts. A rapid propagation method is the
in vitro micropropagation (Barlass and Skene, 1980). Preservation and maintenance of clones means genetical reserve.
According to Sartorius (1952) there are only stocks of average performance in uniform plantages of a variety. However, if individuals in such plantages are below or above the average they must be selected. Calo et al. (1985) emphasized that in a variety the most valuable clones adapted to the local soil and climate conditions should be selected at the place.
Clones are constant and variable in the same time (Sartorius, 1926). The more ideal conditions are, the more stable clones are. If the variety is altered the stability of the clone will cease. In principle, the stand of stocks of a clone is uniform as it comes form a single stock. Sartorius speaks of induced modification which means that developmental forms are sure to be transmitted to the offsprings. (e.g. the fertility of a new plant depends on the position of the propagation bud on the cane: basal or apical). During long cultivation clone stocks begin to vary in fertility, continuous selection must not be neglected (Hubaček – Hibackova, 1986). Selection needs careful organization and execution as the smallest failure can affect the plantage negatively for years. Selection takes a long time. By the time the clone reaches the stage of full bearing market conditions (variety demands) may have changed. Consequently, breeders have to decide cautiously when to choose a variety for selection. What would be the use of a valuable clone if the variety is no longer wanted in production? Viewpoints and methods of selection must be chosen according to selection targets (Schöffling – Schenda, 1990).
Beside genetical selection sanitary selection must also be taken into consideration (Bernabe, 1977; Bovey et al., 1973). Basler (1977) reported 15-20% yield reduction due to viruses which means considerable agricultural damage. If virus symptoms are well visible a severe visual selection is sufficient. To screen latent viruses indices are needed.
Selection is carried out in several steps. Clone performance is tested in each step. Clone performance is affected by the rootstock (Simon, 1980). Peyer (1970) proposes the use of a performance factor (=cluster weight / stock x must degree Oe° : 100) and the maturity factor (= /10 x must degree Oe°/ : titr. acid g/l) for clone testing.
Clones are maintained in basic vineyards where they are propagated. Production can profit by clones, as mentioned by Becker and Sievers (1978) from Germany in 1978 when 52% of the plantages were planted by White Riesling clones of Geisenheim in the vine region of Rheingau. Profitability increased.
Vine plantages are selected everywhere in the world where vine is cultivated. Selection means genetical advance and clones are profitable.
Clone selection in Hungary
The vine varieties grown in the Carpathian Basin abound in diversity owing to favourable soil and climatic conditions and long tradition in viticulture. This rich variability gives a good opportunity to selection breeding.
The vine varieties: Ezerjó, Furmint, Hárslevelű, Kadarka, Kékfrankos, Kövidinka, Leányka, Olasz rizling cultivated on large areas for a long time are in bad need of selection as their genotypes and sanitary conditions have deteriorated in this time. These varieties are also cultivated and selected beyond the frontiers of Hungary, in the region of the Carpathian Basin: in Austria, Slovakia, Rumania, Serbia, Croatia and Slovenia.
In Hungary the organized selection began after the II. World War. First vineyards were surveyed to get a general view of the situation. The plantages most suitable for selection were chosen based on variability, morphological, cultivation and enological values. Valuable mother stocks (clones) were selected and their progenies tested. Mass selection, Kozma’s clone-type selection and Németh’s clone selection were used (Table 1) in research institutes:
the Research Institute for Viticulture and Enology (Badacsony, Eger, Kecskemét, Pécs, Tarcal), the Pannon University of Agriculture (Keszthely) and in the Selection Supervision Office in Budapest.
Article presents 3 white wine varieties characteristic for Hungarian wines and grown on large areas: Furmint, Hárslevelű and Olasz rizling (Welschriesling = Riesling italico) and their registered clones (Tables 2 and 3).
Selection progress could be achieved in bud fertility, cluster and berry size, yield quantity and berry aroma. The selected clones could be freed from viruses and rot incidence and poor fertility could be reduced by selecting for loose cluster types. The new clones were almost 15-25 % superior in yield.
In Hungary a net of virus-free clone stock vineyards has been established where super-elite and elite propagation material is propagated.
Clone selection continues to find the bud mutants developing constantly and to use them in production. Clone and sub-clone candidates of the selected varieties expect registration. Furmint
In all probability it arrived from the Mediterranean region at Hungary where it is cultivated on 4341 ha (HNT, 2007) in several vine regions (Tokajhegyalja, Siklós, Badacsony, Somló, Kunság).
Taxonomy: Vitis vinifera L. convar. pontica, subconvar. balcanica, provar. mesocarpa, subprov. hungarica.
Varieties of the Furmint variety group: Fehér furmint (white), Piros furmint (red), Változó furmint (variable).
Subvarieties of Fehér furmint (white): Nemes, Hólyagos, Vigályos, Arany, Madárkás, Ligetes, Csillagvirágú, Rongyos, Kereszteslevelű (Németh, 1967).
Buds are fertile from the basal part of the cane on, between the 2-16th bud storeys (Skapinyecz, 1970). Late ripening. Must sugar degree reaches 19-22 Mm° between 16 September and 02 October (Kiss – Németh, 1969). Frost sensitive. Good tolerance to drought. Berries shrivel easily with noble rot.
Wine: bouquet characteristic of the variety, definite acids, somewhat harsh, fine flavour, quality white wine.
Furmint plantages are deteriorated and need selection. Kozma (1960) observed large berries in 45 %, small berries in 25 % and millerandage in 30 % in Furmint plantages in Tokajhegyalja. In Hungary the registered clones include: Furmint Kt.4, P.51, T.85, T.92. selected by Brezovcsik, Király, Kozma, Lengyel and Németh.
Registered clones in Slovakia: ŠE-22/23, ŠE-26/88, ŠE-34/5 (Pospisilova et al., 2005). Hárslevelű
Ancient Hungarian Variety, native of the Carpathian Basin. In Hungary it is cultivated on 1588 ha (HNT, 2007) in every vine region.
Taxonomy: Vitis vinifera L. convar. pontica, subconvar. balcanica, provar. microcarpa, subprov. zemplenica.
Sub-varieties of Hárslevelű: Nemes hárslevelű, Fecskefarkú hárslevelű, Rugós hárslevelű (Németh, 1967).
Buds are fertile from the basal part of the cane on, between the 2-16th bud levels (Skapinyecz, 1970). Late ripening. Must sugar degree reaches 19-22 Mm° between 22 September and 02 October (Kiss – Németh, 1969). Sensitive to frosts, drought and powdery mildew. Berries are apt to rot, in dry years they can shrivel with noble rot but but not so easily as the berries of Furmint.
Plantages of Hárslevelű are less deteriorated than those of Furmint, yet, they need selection. In Hungary selection has been carried on in Tarcal and Pécs sence 1947, in Kecskemét since 1956 (Németh, 1967; Füri, 1975; Marcinkó, 1990).
In Hungary the registered clones include: Hárslevelű 1007, K.9, P.41, T.311 selected by Brezovcsik, Füri, Hajdu, Lengyel, Marciknó and Németh.
Registered clones in Slovakia: ŠE-10/5, ŠE-5/12, ŠE-22-36 (Pospisilova, 2005). Olasz rizling
In all probability Olasz rizling was introduced to the Carpathian Basin in the middle of the XIX century. Now it is generally found in the vine regions of Hungary, Slovakia, Austria, Croatia and Slovenia. In Hungary it covered 20260 ha in 1960. In 2007 the area has reduced to 5649 ha (HNT, 2007). It can be found in every vine region of the country. In the surroundings of Balaton it is the most important variety of the quality white wines.
Taxonomy: Vitis vinifera L. convar. occidentalis, subconvar. gallica.
Subs-varieties of Olasz rizling: Nemes, Cifra, Apró, Öreg, Rugós, Repítő, Sallangos (tetraploid).
Buds are fertile. Late ripening. Must sugar degree reaches 19-22 Mm° between 14 September and 27 September (Kiss, 1990). A very valuable variety with balanced yield.
Wine: reseda bouquet, warming, slightly mellow, the taste reminds of bitter almond, characteristic of Hungarian wines, quality white wine.
As it is a very important variety of our viticulture it needs selection. In Hungary selection has been going on since 1949 (Bakonyi – Bakonyi, 1990; Németh, 1967). Registered clones in Hungary include: Olasz rizling B.5, B.14, B.20, P.2, GK.1, GK.18, GK.37 selected by Bakonyi, Kiss, Németh.
In Slovakia selection has been performed since 1945. Registered clones are: 5/34, PE-5/44, PE-6/65, PE-7-71, PE-7/76 (Valentovič, 1972; Zasuba et al., 1977; Horák – Havlik, 1977, Pospisilova, 1990, 2005).
Table 1
Method of Selection clone selection with 4 steps 1. Study of varieties
2. Basic level for selection of variety 3. Selection
1st step mother plot: mother stock 2nd step clone plot: first successor 3rd step clone field: second successor
4th step basic vineyard: elite propagation material Table 2
Surface of the old Hungarian white wine varieties Total surface in Hungary 86028 ha (100%)
white wine varieties
surface: 54617 ha (64%)
number of varieties: 145
Furmint: 4341 ha (8%)
Hárslevelű: 1588 ha (3%)
Table 3
Qualified clones of old ‘hungarica’ white wine varieties
Name of variety
Sign of clone
Year of
qualification Institute of selection Furmint Kt.4 1969 Corvinus University – Budapest
P.51 1969 SZBKI – Pécs (P.) T.85 1990 SZBKI – Tarcal (T.) T.92 1973 SZBKI – Tarcal (T.) Hárslevelű 1007 1973 SZBKI – Tarcal (T.)
K.9 2005 SZBKI – Kecskemét (K.) P.41 1971 SZBKI – Pécs (P.) T.311 1990 SZBKI – Tarcal (T.) Olasz rizling B.5 1990 SZBKI – Badacsony (B.)
B.14 1990 SZBKI – Badacsony (B.) B.20 1980 SZBKI – Badacsony (B.) P.2 2003 SZBKI – Pécs (P.)
GK.1 1969 Pannon University – Keszthely (GK.) GK.18 2003 Pannon University – Keszthely (GK.) GK.37 2005 Pannon University – Keszthely (GK.) Remark: SZBKI = Research Institute for Viticulture and Enology
(Hajdu, 2006) Literature
Barlass, M. – Skene, K.G.M. (1980): Clonal propagation through tissue culture Grapgrower and Winemaker. CSIRO. Merbein. 3-5.
Bakonyi, K. – Bakonyi, L. (1990): A klónszelektálás eredményei a Pannon Agrártudományi Egyetem Keszthelyi Mezőgazdaságtudományi Karán.
Szőlőtermesztés és Borászat. 12 (1-2) 20.
Basler, P. (1977): Bericht von internationalen Symposium über Klonselektion Obst- und Weibónabu. Wädenswil. 113 (2) 30-33.
Becker, H. – Sievers, E. (1978): Leistungssteigerung durch Klonenselektion Der Deutsche Weinbau. Heft 25. 1-4.
Bernabe, H. (1977): A szőlő szaporítóanyagok előállításának új technikája, genetikai és növényegészségügyi szelekciója
OMKDK. Budapest. 1977.12.01. (oral presentation)
Bleser, E. – Konrad, H. – Rühl, E.H: (2005): Perspektiven der Klonenzüchtung
Deutsches Weinbau Jahrbuch. Verlag Eugen Ulmer. Stuttgart. (260) 116-121. Bovey, R. – Rochaix, M. – Simon, J.L. (1973): La seléction phytosanitaire
Bulletin de l’O.I.V. Paris. 46 (514) 1077-1093.
Bögre, J. – Dohy, J. (1992): “Fékeveszett” mutációk – “új lamarckizmus?” Magyar Tudomány (8) 952-957.
Calo, A. – Costacurta, A. – Montanari, E. (1985): Stand der Klonenselektion bei Keltertraubensorten in Italien
17. Geisenheimer Rebenveredlertagung. 66-68.
Füri, J. (1975): A klónszelektálás eddigi eredményei a Lakiteleki Kutató Állomás „Mathiász János“ kísérleti telepén
Hajdu, E. (2006): A szőlő szelekciós nemesítése és a magyarországi eredmények Kertgazdaság. MEzőgazda Kiadó. Budapest. 38 (4) 39-45.
Horák, J. – Havlik, J. (1977): Z vysledku klonové selekce révy vinné Vinohrad. Bratislava. 15 (10) 230-231.
Hubaček, V. – Hibacková, M. (1986): Evaluation of the collection of grapevine clones Sbornik útvi – Ochrana rostlin – Genetika a Slechteni. Karlstejn.
Kiss, E. (1990): A szelekció eredményei Badacsonyban Szőlőtermesztés és Borászat. 12 (1-2) 15-17.
Kiss, E. – Németh, M. (1969): Minőségi fehérborszőlő-fajták viselkedése Badacsonyban magaskordonon
Szőlő- és gyümölcstermesztés. VOL. V. (306) 239-262. Kozma, P. (1960): A szőlő ivari változékonysága és leromlása
Doktori értekezés I-IV. kötet. MTA. Budapest. 73-390. Leclair, P.H. (1992): Patsimoine génétique: un capital á optimiser
INRA. Bordeaux. 45-47.
Marcinkó, F. (1990): A klónszelekció eredményei és feladatai Tokajhegyalján Szőlőtermesztés és Borászat. 12 (1-2) 23-25
Németh, M. (1967): A klónszelekciós szőlőnemesítés módszere Pécsett és az elért eredmények
Szőlő- és gyümölcstermesztés. Kecskemét. VOL. III. (315) 41-92.
Peyer, E. (1970): Die besten für die Praxis ausgewählten Klonen von Blauburger, verglichen mit der Selektion Mariafeld
Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Obst- und Weinbau. Wädenswil. 106 (16) 392-399.
Pospisilova, D. (1990): Udržovacie šlachtemie viniča Zahradnictvi. 17 (20) 2., 154-155.
Pospisilova, D. – Sekera, D. – Ruman, T. (2005): Ampelográfia Slovenska Bratislava. 117-157.
Sartorius, O. (1926): Zur Rebenselektion unter Besonderer Berücksichtigung den Methodik und der Ziele auf Grund von 6-14 jährigen Beobachtungen an einem Klon Zeitschrift für Pflanzenzüchtung. Berlin. 4 (12) 32-74.
Sartorius, O. (1928): Über die wissenschaftlichen Grundlagen der Rebenselektion in reinen Beständen
Zeitschrift Pflanzenzüchtung. Berlin. 13. Band 80-86. Sartorius, O. (1952): Das Güte – Menge – Gesetz
Der Weinbau / Wissentschaftliche Beihefte. 1952. Juni. 83-84.
Schartl, A. – Engelhart, J. (2006): Frankens, Alte Weinberge – Fundorte für neue Klone? Deutsches Weinbau Jahrbuch. Verlag Eugen Ulmer. Stuttgart. (275) 122-127. Schöffling, H. – Schenden, G. (1990): Neue Klonzüchter der Ertragsrebsorte Müller-Thurgau
an Mosel-Saar-Ruwer
Deutsches Weinbau Jahrbuch. Waldkircher Verlagsgesellschaft. Waldkirch. (336) 61-73.
Simon, J.L. (1980): La seléction du Chasselas en Suisse
Viticulture arboriculture horticulture. Lousanne. 12 (4) 52.
Skapinyecz, Gy. (1970): A Furmint és a Hárslevelű fajták rügydifferenciálódásának üteme Tokajhegyalján 1968-1969-ben
Szőlő- és gyümölcstermesztés. Kecskemét. VOL. VI. (287) 183-191. Valentovič, S. (1972): Klonová selekcia viniča a jej perspektivy v našom vinohradnictve
Vinohrad. Bratislava. 10 (2) 32-33.
Zaruba, P. – Sodoma, V. – Zlatošavá, B. (1985): Rizling vlassky Vinohrad. Bratislava. 23 (11) 1.
