Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Cider Digest #2029
Subject: Cider Digest #2029, 17 June 2016
From: cider-request@talisman.com
Cider Digest #2029 17 June 2016
Cider and Perry Discussion Forum
Contents:
CD#2028 Rootstock Fruit ()
Re: fruit quality of rootstock varieties? (Claude Jolicoeur)
Re: Cider Digest #2028, 9 June 2016 (Stephen Wood)
Re: Cider Digest #2028, 9 June 2016 (Akiva Silver)
Re: oenococcus bacteria and health risks (Marc Shapiro)
Re: Cider Digest #2028, 9 June 2016 (Jim Cummins)
Rootstock Fruit Quality (Drew Zimmerman)
RE: Yeast for bottle conditioned cider ("Charles McGonegal")
NOTE: Digest appears whenever there is enough material to send one.
Send ONLY articles for the digest to cider@talisman.com.
Use cider-request@talisman.com for subscribe/unsubscribe/admin requests.
Archives of the Digest are available at www.talisman.com/cider#Archives
Digest Janitor: Dick Dunn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: CD#2028 Rootstock Fruit
From: <lotic@juno.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 20:00:01 -0400
Hi Dick,
Forget about M7. I pulled an M7 and the remaining root sprouted (M7s are
notorious for root suckers). I too was curious and let it grow. It's
mealy and flavorless. Low sugar, low acid, and no tannins. If you want to
roll some dice with a better chance of winning, try planting seeds.
That's what Johnny Appleseed did, and got us some real fine
varieties...after a few thousand tries.
- -Peter Mitchell
PS- But! I now have a good sized M7 (in a good location) upon which I
will graft something useful.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: fruit quality of rootstock varieties?
From: Claude Jolicoeur <cjoliprsf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 20:06:46 -0400
In CD 2028, Dick wrote:
> Subject: fruit quality of rootstock varieties?
> From: Dick Dunn <rcd@talisman.com>
>
> Does anybody have experience and/or source(s) of data for the character of
> fruit from common rootstocks? What I mean is, suppose instead of grafting
> on to a piece of rootstock, you let it grow up into a tree on its own.
Dick, in CD 1136, there was a report that Bud-118 makes a nice
bittersweet apple. I have read the same written elsewhere also.
But... I haven't experienced it myself.
Claude Jolicoeur
Author, /*The New Cider Maker's Handbook
<http://www.chelseagreen.com/the-new-cider-makers-handbook/>*/
http://www.cjoliprsf.ca/
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Cider Digest #2028, 9 June 2016
From: Stephen Wood <swood@farnumhillciders.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:30:50 -0400
Don't bother with M106 or Bud9. Brilliant rootstocks, but completely
indifferent fruit.
SW.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Cider Digest #2028, 9 June 2016
From: Akiva Silver <ttfarm279@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 22:53:38 -0400
Dick,
I have some bud 118s and ohxf 97 pears in the ground. I have been planning
on letting them fruit out of curiosity. I will let you know what they taste
like when I can.
Thanks,
Akiva
------------------------------
Subject: Re: oenococcus bacteria and health risks
From: Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 23:07:56 -0700
> Subject: oenococcus bacteria and health risks
> From: SMB WEBER <weberscrossing9@gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 08:20:43 -0400
>
> I'd like to learn about any health risks associated with oenococcus
> bacteria used in MLF. Similarly, if anyone knows whether any wine-making
> country monitors it for health risks or have placed any restrictions on it
> due to such risks, please let me know.
>
> Thanks very much for any replies.
>
> Susan Weber
Doing a quick Google search on "oenococcus bacteria and health risks "
yields quite a bit. The following links on the first page would suggest
health benefits, not health risks:
Bacteria in Wine May Bring Health Benefits
Bacteria in Wine May Bring Health Benefits (referring to a study in Spain)
http://www.livescience.com/47997-wine-bacteria-probiotics.html
Probiotic properties of non-conventional lactic acid bacteria:
Immunomodulation by /Oenococcus oeni (from the /International Journal
of Food Microbiology
<http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01681605>)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168160510001923
Lactic Acid Bacteria in Health and Disease (from the Rwanda Journal of
Health Sciences)
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&ved=0ahUKEwiX88r
K3JzNAhVO42MKHZsdDKEQFghSMAY&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ajol.info%2Findex.php%2Frjhs%2
Farticle%2Fdownload%2F82342%2F72498&usg=AFQjCNF6RnbaxM1xeThfmpvp2QKWhMItYQ&cad=r
ja
HTH.
Marc Shapiro
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Cider Digest #2028, 9 June 2016
From: Jim Cummins <rootstocks@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 15:49:05 -0400
Dick, we've been thinking along these lines too. Imagine a different
production system for cider fruit: (1) 5-ft bushes, rather than
tree; (2) resistant to Phytophthora and most especially to fire
blight; (3) easily propagated on own roots; (4) fruit ripening over
period of just 2 or 3 days; (5) annual bearing; (6) productive.
On a small scale commercial planting, using over-the-row berry
harvester.
We've used fruit of Malling-Merton 106 in blends for many years.
Really just a filler -- mildly bitter; reasonably productive; but big
tree. Malling 7 and MM.111 are not very productive.
We have made first little test planting of Geneva 202 and will be
making test of G.11. All the Geneva stocks offer good resistance to
fire blight and to Phytophthora; readily available as roote liners;
appear to make bushes or "trees" 5 or 6 ft tall. Fruit on G.202 and
G.11 quite bitter (to my tongue). Reasonably productive but probably
biennial.
Come back in a few years and we may have some news, rathe than speculation!!
Jim Cummins
------------------------------
Subject: Rootstock Fruit Quality
From: Drew Zimmerman <drewzim49@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2016 15:54:29 -0700
A few years back just before WSU cut the tree fruit horticulture program
at the Mount Vernon, WA research station, we had some rootstocks grafted
with cider apples for machine harvesting trials. There were a dozen or
more of the M9 and M27 grafts that did not take and since the program
was ending, there was little or no management of the orchard and the
trees were ignored for a few years. Eventually, as the trees matured, I
was still making varietal ciders as a volunteer cooperator and decided
to make some M9 and M27 ciders since there was enough fruit for 5 gallon
batches.
Both M9 and M27 are bittersweets. The M9 apple is larger than the M27,
both are precocious and good annual croppers. They ripen quite early in
Puget Sound, late August/early September and don't store
particularly well. The ciders, surprisingly are very good. The M9 color
is gold, aroma is woodsy, grassy and phenolic with some bittersweet
apple, tropical fruit and floral notes. The M9 flavor profile is medium
bodied with moderate bitterness and astringency. The aftertaste is short
to medium with a tannic finish. The M27 color is deep gold, aroma is
cidery, spicy and phenolic with bittersweet apple and summer fruit
notes. Favor profile is light bodied with good bitterness and
astringency, full flavored with a medium after taste and tannic finish.
Both in my opinion are excellent blenders, especially with some russets
for acid and structure. Nice bittersweet character.
The only other root stocks I've looked at are B9 and M106. M106
cider is sharp with little to no astringency or bitterness, no
appreciable aroma and an unremarkable cider flavor. B9 is red fleshed
and extremely acidic, probably 15 grams per liter or more. It ripens
early and mushes quickly. I didn't try making cider with it.
There are plenty of heirloom sharp varieties to choose from for an acid
component.
Drew Zimmerman, erstwhile cider producer
------------------------------
Subject: RE: Yeast for bottle conditioned cider
From: "Charles McGonegal" <cpm@appletrue.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 18:23:15 -0500
Richard,
I used to use EC1118 for tirage. Along with the sugar for dosage, I also
added a riddling aid. I've used both Adjuvants (as they are called) but
can't recall at the moment which one I thought was better. There's one for
machine riddling and one for hand riddling. EC1118 is reliable, but I,
personally, think it's a little heavy handed on apple aromas - I think it
flattens them out.
For many years, I've used ProElif encapsulated QA23. Dose your sugar
source, membrane filter to .45um, bottle, hand dose the yeast in (1/4tsp per
bottle) (I can just see Herdie Baisden smiling at my use of a non-metric
unit.), bidule, cap, set to tirage. The fun part is that it riddles in about
12 seconds. We do it in-line during a disgorging day. Not too heavy on
aroma, nor on autolysis aromas. The downside is that since you've filtered
to 'sterility', you've taken out bubble nucleation sites, so the bubbles are
a little bigger.
BUT, I've managed to break it a number of ways over the years.
Don't skimp on the filtration and bottling line sanitation. If you get loose
lees, the work was pointless.
Don't freeze the yeast. It may survive - the encapsulation doesn't seem to.
It's sulfite sensitive. Like 10-15ppm free SO2 max - no matter what the pH
chart says for SO2 addition.
It's nutrient needy. It doesn't make H2S - it just fails. My mistake was
failing to realize that the suggested dose of Phosphate Titers (thiamin, I
think) was only 10% of the YAN requirement. DAP is your friend in this case.
Charles
Ciderwright, Aeppeltreow
------------------------------
End of Cider Digest #2029
*************************
