AJEV
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 56:3:284-286 (2005)
Copyright © 2005 by the American Society for Enology and Viticulture.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fidelibus, M. W.
Right arrow Articles by Verdenal, P.-T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Fidelibus, M. W.
Right arrow Articles by Verdenal, P.-T.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Fidelibus, M. W.
Right arrow Articles by Verdenal, P.-T.

Research Note

Performance of Zinfandel and Primitivo Grapevine Selections in the Central San Joaquin Valley, California

Matthew W. Fidelibus1,*, L. Peter Christensen1, Donald G. Katayama1 and Pierre-Thibaut Verdenal2

1 Department of Viticulture and Enology, University of California, Davis, and Kearney Agricultural Center, Parlier, CA 93648; 2 École Supérieure D’Agriculture, Department of Viticulture and Enology, Angers, France.

* Corresponding author [Email: mwf{at}uckac.edu]

Zinfandel and Primitivo grapevines selections (Vitis vinifera) from Foundation Plant Services at UC Davis were evaluated near Fresno, California. Zinfandel selections FPS 1A, 2, and 3 and Primitivo selections FPS 3, 5, and 6 were planted in April 1997 as own-rooted cuttings, and fruit yield and quality were assessed annually from 2000 to 2003. There were few differences among the Zinfandel selections. Primitivo selections were generally superior to those of Zinfandel, having earlier fruit maturity, similar or higher yield, and similar or lower bunch rot susceptibility. Selections Primitivo 3 and 6 were particularly desirable, having the highest yield and lowest sour rot susceptibility, respectively.

Key words: clones, germplasm, clonal evaluation




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Enol. Vitic.Home page
M. W. Fidelibus, L. P. Christensen, D. G. Katayama, P.-T. Verdenal, and K. Cathline
Fruit Characteristics of Six Merlot Grapevine Selections in the Central San Joaquin Valley, California
Am. J. Enol. Vitic., June 1, 2007; 58(2): 259 - 261.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Enol. Vitic.Home page
M. W. Fidelibus, L. P. Christensen, D. G. Katayama, and P.-T. Verdenal
Yield Components and Fruit Composition of Six Chardonnay Grapevine Clones in the Central San Joaquin Valley, California
Am. J. Enol. Vitic., December 1, 2006; 57(4): 503 - 506.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the American Society for Enology and Viticulture.