1

Last summer I got three near-death Seibel 13053 grapevines for free. I managed to keep them alive and they are now pretty healthy looking. I only know they are supposed to be virus-free and stand-alone in the state I got them.

They look like they might have been grafted because they have tiny buds around the joints but it's hard to tell because their trunks were pencil-wide when I got them and they look nothing like the Cabernet Sauvignon vines I bought which are clearly grafted to obviously different rootstock.

May have been practice plants? My bad for not asking.

Problem is I was fairly successful rooting the cuttings I took last winter and now I have three additional 13053 grapevines growing on their own roots and I wonder if they are doomed given that it's pretty likely they get exposed to phylloxera at some point, this being a grape growing region.

I know that mr Seibel was trying to get phylloxera-resistant hybrids and that one of its ancestors is a rootstock variety but my Google-fu has been unable to confirm its resistance or lack thereof to the evil bugs.

2

Due to both seibel's goals, the fact that this variety was named, and also due to the fact that IA state doesn't list phylloxera resistance as a strength nor as a weakness.

Ref. http://viticulture.hort.iastate.edu/cultivars/Cascade.pdf

I would have to say it is right in the middle. I used to grow grapes in Iowa and I am very familiar with the way IA State does their profiles, if a pest or disease is not mentioned, it is considered neither resistant nor weak to that pest.

It should be noted that this variety of grape is considered poor quality for wine making, and better suited for juice. I am guessing it is due to foxiness, but that's only a guess.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy