Great Lakes Fruit, Vegetable & Farm Market EXPO December 10 - 12, 2013

DeVos Place Convention Center, Grand Rapids, MI

Hard Cider

Thursday morning 9:00 am Where: Gallery Overlook (upper level) Room F

Moderator: Emily Pochubay, MSU Extension

9:00 am Hard Cider--Short Term Fad or Long Term Shift in the US Market?

Ian Merwin, Professor Emeritus, Cornell Univ.

9:20 am Juice Evaluations of Cider Apple Varieties

Carol Miles, Horticulture Dept., Washington State Univ.

10:05 am Modifying Harvest Equipment for Different Crops

Brian Kreiger, BEI International, South Haven, MI

10:35 am Mechanical Harvesting of Cider Apples

Carol Miles, Horticulture Dept., Washington State Univ.

11:20 am Session Ends

HARD CIDER: Short Term Fad or Long Term Trend?

Ian A. Merwin, Professor of Horticulture, Emeritus Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853

Is hard cider just a fad, or is this the beginning of a long-term trend in the US?

Production and sales of hard cider have doubled every two years for the past decade

People all over the northern US are planting cider apples, building cideries, and

developing regional cider markets

Several national breweries are investing in this sector and have long-term plans for

substantial expansion

A national organization of cider producers convenes its third meeting in Chicago early

next year, and should promote and facilitate expansion of hard ciders

Legislation has been proposed at the state and federal levels, aimed at rationalizing and

streamlining regulations for this expanding market sector

Major market trends are driving this expansion

Apples and ciders are gluten free

Hard cider is a relatively low calorie and low alcohol beverage

It is local and “different” which appeals to the younger demographic groups

It usually costs less than wine, and is increasingly competitive with beers as the cost of

grain has increased due to biofuels

On-farm, direct market, and agritourism business models are thriving in the US, and

farm cideries are a good fit for these sectors

What is the ideal size for craft cider makers?

For apple production, the minimum size for economies of scale is probably ~ 50 acres

The beak-even point for small cideries appears to be about 5,000 gallons per year

Thr am Hard Cider

This level of production would require about 2000 bu of fruit.

These numbers obviously depend upon the cider price points in the market…but it

appears that the small craft cider business model can be profitable

What do US consumers want or expect in a hard cider?

Our customers are flexible and have few restrictive expectations for hard ciders

Most tasting rooms indicate that sweet or semi-sweet ciders are their best sellers

The usual trend as people learn more about wines has been from whites to reds, and

sweet to dry

This may happen with ciders as well, but farm winery history suggests that we need to

offer a range of ciders in distinctive styles…something for everyone!

Do we really need bittersweet or bittersharp (high tannin =/- acidity) apples for hard cider?

Customers appreciate many cider styles, but some want tannin structure in their ciders

Tannins improve microbial stability during fermentation and storage of bottled cider

Tannins help in clarification, and add desirable golden color to ciders without caramel

Tannins are antioxidants with proven health benefits, which promotes the positive

image of ciders

The high-tannin apples are in limited supply locally and nationally, which provides a

good opportunity for growers to produce and sell these varieties to cider makers

What about dual-purpose apples for both fresh markets and cider making?

Scab-resistant sharps like GoldRush, Liberty, Bramley’s seedling and Crimson Crisp

provide pH adjustment for cider makers using the high tannin varieties, and can be

produced at lower cost which makes them excellent “base” cider sources

Heirloom apples such as Golden and Roxbury Russet, Ashmead's Kernal, Northern

Spy, Cox Orange Pippin, St. Edmond’s Pippin, etc. are in high demand at local farmer’s

markets, and also make for complex and high quality hard ciders.

Apples like Fuji, Pound Sweet and Tompkins King that often develop watercore

(sorbitol) are useful for providing non-fermentable residual sweetness in a finished cider

Thr am Hard Cider

A. Zimmerman, G. Moulton, C. Miles, J. King, and K. Craig

WSU Mount Vernon NWREC 16650 State Route 536, Mount Vernon, WA 98273

http://maritimefruit.wsu.edu

Cider Juice Protocol at WSU Mount Vernon NWREC At harvest, 15-25 ripe fruit are randomly collected for each variety, and stored up to 1 week in cold storage at 32oF (0oC). From 2002 to 2012, fruit were milled and pressed in a basket cider press (Standard Correll Large, Veneta, OR).From 2013 onward, the fruit samples are chopped in a shredder and pressed in a bladder press. Juice samples are collected in 250 ml plastic bottles and frozen (5oF; -15oC) until harvest of all varieties was completed. Juice samples were thawed to room temperature (68oF; 20oC) and analyzed for tannins (%), oBrix, pH, and malic acid (g.L-1). Tannins are measured by adding 1 ml of each cider juice sample to 150 ml distilled water mixed with 5 ml of indigo carmine solution. The indigo carmine solution is mixed in the laboratory and consists of 1 g indigo carmine, 1 l distilled water, and 50 ml concentrated sulfuric acid (H2SO4). The mixture of juice and indigo carmine solution is titrated with a solution of 0.005 M potassium permanganate (KMnO4) just until it turns yellow. The resulting end color is compared to an indicator blank. The indicator blank is 5 ml indigo carmine solution in 150 ml distilled water, and titrated with potassium permanganate until it turns yellow; the amount of potassium permanganate added, typically around 1.2 ml, is the “Q value”. The percent total tannins for each sample is calculated using the equation “Q Value”/10. Brix is measured by placing 2-3 drops of the juice sample onto a digital refractometer (Palm Abbe Model #PA201). Juice pH was measured for each sample using a digital pH meter (Thermo-Scientific Orion 3 Star). Total acidity is measured by placing 25 ml of juice sample and 100 ml distilled water in a 250 ml beaker, stirring with a magnetic stir bar, and titrating with 0.2 M solution of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) to a reading of 8.1. The volume (ml) of sodium hydroxide added is recorded and malic acid is calculated using the equation:

Malic acid (g.l-1) = ml NaOH x 0.536 Specific gravity (SG), the amount of sugar in a juice sample measured by hydrometer, is calculated to estimate the percent of alcohol by volume of the finished cider, using the formula where the value 7.5 is a constant:

(SG – 1.0 ) x 1000 7.5 = % alcohol by volume

Hydrometers can be calibrated for different uses, and those used in cider fermentation may have a triple scale calibrated to provide readings of specific gravity, oBrix, and percent "potential alcohol" by volume based on a calculation using the specific gravity value (Rabin and Forget, 1998). The conversion ratio of sugar (when fermented) to alcohol is affected by yeast efficiency and the possible presence of a small amount of non-fermentable sugars remaining after fermentation. However, since yeasts are very efficient in cider and non-fermentable sugars are low to absent in apple juice, the conversion of sugars to alcohol (percent by volume) tends to be accurate for cider production purposes.

C. Miles, J. King, G. Moulton, A. Zimmerman, J. Roozen, and K. Craig

WSU Mount Vernon NWREC 16650 State Route 536, Mount Vernon, WA 98273

http://maritimefruit.wsu.edu

Juice Quality of Cider Apples in Northwest Washington The objective of this study was to analyze the juice characteristics of cider apples grown at Washington State University Mount Vernon Northwestern Washington Research and Extension Center (WSU NWREC) from 2002 to 2013. In this study, percent tannin, oBrix, pH and malic acid were analyzed for a total of 74 cider apple varieties, including 13 American, 31 English, 27 French and 2 German varieties. Analyses were done using standard analytical methods practiced in cider making (Lea, 2008; Mitchell 2005). Apples are classified into 4 categories based on the system developed at the Long Ashton Research Station (LARS) in Bristol, England in 1903, published by the Cider Advisory Committee in1956 (Table 1). Based on the LARS classification system, cider apple varieties tested at WSU NWREC have been categorized below in Table 2. We will compare juice analysis at WSU NWREC (Table 3) to juice analysis recorded at LARS. If results are similar, growers may be able to use the LARS juice analysis data base to select varieties for cider production. Methods: At harvest, 15-25 ripe fruit were randomly collected for each variety, and stored up to 1 week in cold storage at 32oF (0oC). From 2002 to 2012, fruit were milled and pressed in a basket cider press (Standard Correll Large, Veneta, OR); in 2013 the fruit samples were chopped in a shredder (Zambelli Enotech, Camisano Vicentino, Italy) and pressed in a bladder press (Enotechnica Pillan, Camisano Vicentino, Italy), a more efficient processing method. Juice samples were collected in 500 ml plastic bottles and frozen (5oF; -15oC) until harvest of all varieties was completed. Juice samples were thawed to 60oF (15.6oC) and analyzed for tannins (%), oBrix, pH, and malic acid (g.L-1). Tannins were measured using the Lowenthal method of permanganate titration, the standard procedure used at LARS (Lea, 2008). Samples were analyzed by adding 1 ml of cider juice sample and 5 ml of indigo carmine solution to 150 ml distilled water in a 500 ml flask. The indigo carmine solution was mixed in the laboratory and consisted of 1 g indigo carmine, 1 l distilled water, and 50 ml concentrated sulfuric acid (H2SO4). The mixture of juice and indigo carmine solution was titrated with a solution of 0.005 M potassium permanganate (KMnO4) just until it turned yellow, and the value recorded as X. A blank titration using 5 ml of indigo carmine solution alone was performed and the result recorded as Y (typically approximately 1.2 ml). Total tannin (%) was calculated by the formula: T = (X-Y)/10 expressed as tannic acid equivalents. Brix was measured by placing 2-3 drops of the undiluted juice sample onto a digital refractometer (Palm Abbe Model #PA201, Cleveland, OH). Juice pH was measured for each sample (undiluted) using a digital pH meter (Thermo-Scientific Orion 3 Star, Pittsburg, PA). Total acidity was measured by placing 25 ml of juice sample and 100 ml distilled water in a 250 ml beaker, stirring with a magnetic stir bar, and titrating with 0.2 M solution of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) to a reading of 8.1. The volume (ml) of sodium hydroxide added was recorded and malic acid was calculated using the equation: Malic acid (g.l-1) = ml NaOH x 0.536

Table 1. Cider variety classifications defined by the Long Ashton Research Station, Bristol, U.K. Type Tannin (%) Acid (%)

Sharp < 0.2 Low tannin

> 0.45 High acid

Bittersharp > 0.2 High tannin

> 0.45 High acid

Bittersweet > 0.2 High tannin

< 0.45 Low acid

Sweet < 0.2 Low tannin

< 0.45 Low acid

Table 2. Cider varieties at WSU Mount Vernon NWREC, their origin1, and type classification based on mean data from juice analysis 2003-2012.

Sharp Bittersharp Bittersweet Sweet Bramley’s Seedling-E Brown’s Apple-E Court Pendu Plat-F Court Pendu Rose-F Finkenwerder H’prinz-G Golden Russet-A Grimes Golden-A Grindstone-A Harrison-A Maude-E Redstreak-E Ribston Pippin-E Roxbury Russet-A Skyrme’s Kernel-E Taliaferro-A Tom Putt-E Whidbey-A Zabergau Reinette-G

Breakwell Seedling-E Cap of Liberty-E Foxwhelp-E Hewes VA Crab-A Kingston Black-E Lambrooke Pippin-E Reine des Hatives-F Stoke Red-E

Amere de Berthcourt-F Bedan de Parts-F Blanc Mollet-F Bramtot-E Brown Snout-E Bulmer’s Norman –F/E Campfield-A Chisel Jersey-E Cimitiere-F Coat Jersey-E Dabinett-F/E Domaines-F Doux Normandie-F Dymock Red-E Frequin Audievre-F Frequin Rouge-F Frequin Tardif-F Harry Masters’ Jersey-E

American Forestier-F Bouteville-F Brown Thorn-F/E Crow Egg-A Granniwinkle-A Peau de Vache-F Smith’s Cider-A Sweet Alford-E Sweet Coppin-E Taylor’s-E Track Zero-A

Jouveaux-F Kermerrien-F Major-E Marie Menard-F Marin Oufroy-F Medaille D’Or-F Mettais-F Michelin-F Muscadet de Dieppe-F Muscat de Bernay-F

Bittersweet (continued) Nehou-F Red Jersey-E Reine des Pommes-F Ross Nonpariel E Royal Jersey-E Stembridge Jersey-E Vilberie-F Yarlington Mill-E

1 A= America; E=England; F=France; G=Germany.

Table 3. Summary of juice analysis for cider apple varieties grown at WSU Mount Vernon NWREC from 2003 – 2012 (data was not collected in 2007).

Tannin % Malic Acid g/l oBrix pH

Cultivar Years

Evaluated Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Amere de Berthcourt 3 0.48 0.20 1.90 0.53 12.9 1.55 4.31 0.14 American Forestier 2 0.20 0.01 1.98 0.00 11.7 0.14 3.86 0.33 Bedan de Parts 1 0.21 . 1.93 . 12.8 . 4.21 . Blanc Mollet 2 0.26 0.06 1.50 0.00 11.5 0.07 4.23 0.06 Bouteville 3 0.14 0.04 1.31 0.34 12.8 0.91 4.54 0.10 Bramley's Seedling 3 0.12 0.04 10.07 0.29 11.1 1.47 3.26 0.43 Bramtot 3 0.76 0.18 2.95 0.16 14.0 0.26 4.05 0.11 Breakwell Seedling 5 0.27 0.22 7.82 3.27 10.9 0.97 3.23 0.13 Brown Snout 7 0.19 0.06 3.37 0.84 13.5 1.77 3.87 0.16 Brown Thorn 1 0.14 . 1.23 . 10.5 . 4.18 . Brown’s Apple 4 0.16 0.09 7.29 0.51 10.8 1.28 3.28 0.19 Bulmer's Norman 5 0.22 0.07 2.16 0.37 11.4 0.62 4.04 0.10 Campfield 4 0.23 0.12 2.54 0.19 13.1 1.47 4.41 0.17 Cap O’Liberty 5 0.23 0.10 11.42 1.53 12.0 0.73 3.17 0.21 Chisel Jersey 3 0.58 0.37 2.50 0.78 14.3 1.30 4.49 0.45 Cimitiere 2 0.32 0.01 1.26 0.18 9.9 1.91 4.59 0.45 Coat Jersey 1 0.48 . 1.93 . 11.8 . 3.72 . Court Pendu Plat 1 0.10 . 7.72 . 13.0 . 2.93 . Court Pendu Rose 3 0.11 0.04 7.74 1.97 12.2 1.62 3.44 0.29 Crow Egg 3 0.10 0.00 4.04 1.38 11.6 2.09 3.82 0.18 Dabinett 8 0.29 0.18 2.55 1.30 14.0 1.18 4.37 0.25 Domaines 3 0.36 0.15 2.23 0.51 14.5 1.80 4.23 0.28 Doux Normandie 3 0.30 0.16 3.14 0.79 11.7 1.15 3.82 0.22 Dymock Red 2 0.20 0.01 1.93 0.15 13.7 0.99 4.18 0.16 Finkenwerder Herbstprinz 5 0.10 0.04 9.04 2.05 13.7 0.71 3.24 0.20 Foxwhelp 4 0.22 0.07 7.96 1.90 13.0 1.05 3.15 0.14 Frequin Audievre 1 0.23 . 1.40 . 12.0 . 4.75 . Frequin Rouge 4 0.38 0.17 2.62 0.28 11.7 0.88 4.19 0.28 Frequin Tardif 1 0.28 . 2.58 . 12.0 . 4.36 . Golden Russet 5 0.13 0.05 6.64 0.91 16.9 1.33 3.67 0.25 Granniwinkle 4 0.09 0.04 2.65 0.92 11.0 0.72 3.31 1.18 Grimes Golden 3 0.08 0.02 6.75 0.57 12.8 0.69 3.42 0.10 Grindstone 3 0.14 0.04 5.47 0.61 13.3 1.75 3.41 0.20 Harrison 3 0.16 0.03 7.77 2.58 15.8 0.21 3.37 0.39 Harry Masters’ Jersey 5 0.24 0.07 2.03 0.51 12.8 1.60 4.24 0.15 Hewes Virginia Crab 3 0.27 0.07 9.07 1.45 14.7 0.46 3.23 0.09 Jouveaux 3 0.21 0.11 2.39 0.71 13.0 2.89 4.11 0.13 Kermerrien 6 0.37 0.09 2.44 0.21 13.2 1.22 3.76 0.25 Kingston Black 7 0.17 0.11 6.45 1.04 13.4 1.39 3.45 0.19

Tannin % Malic Acid g/l oBrix pH

Cultivar Years

Evaluated Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Lambrooke Pippin 3 0.40 0.10 9.80 2.12 12.8 1.46 3.12 0.23 Major 3 0.25 0.04 1.80 0.03 13.7 0.95 4.26 0.15 Marie Menard 1 0.35 . 2.03 . 13.6 . 4.41 . Marin Oufroy 2 0.28 0.06 2.92 0.11 15.4 1.70 4.52 0.07 Maude 3 0.09 0.03 4.56 0.32 12.4 0.46 3.45 0.09 Medaille D’Or 4 1.05 0.49 3.43 0.48 15.8 1.73 4.19 0.18 Mettais 4 0.33 0.13 2.11 0.80 14.2 2.03 4.39 0.09 Michelin 4 0.16 0.08 3.25 1.20 12.0 0.67 3.98 0.15 Mott Pink3 2 0.08 0.04 5.77 1.86 10.5 2.12 3.23 0.10 Muscadet de Dieppe 7 0.19 0.07 2.72 0.80 14.7 1.24 4.12 0.23 Muscat de Berney 2 0.25 0.10 2.84 0.37 12.2 0.28 3.85 0.23 Nehou 3 0.41 0.19 3.21 0.55 15.2 1.17 4.18 0.33 Peau de Vache 3 0.15 0.05 2.48 0.54 11.4 0.91 3.99 0.25 Red Jersey 1 0.26 . 1.72 . 11.0 . 4.38 . Redstreak 3 0.10 0.05 9.15 0.62 11.7 0.46 3.14 0.19 Reine des Hatives 2 0.26 0.23 5.79 4.70 12.8 1.77 3.67 0.95 Reine des Pommes 2 0.75 0.11 3.79 0.58 15.1 0.28 4.07 0.21 Ribston Pippin 3 0.17 0.08 6.18 1.24 15.3 2.05 3.52 0.23 Ross Nonpareil 1 0.50 . 3.48 . 16.1 . 3.82 . Roxbury Russet 4 0.08 0.03 5.23 0.98 15.9 1.11 3.60 0.24 Royal Jersey 2 0.50 0.06 1.69 0.27 12.4 0.21 4.08 0.07 Smith’s Cider 2 0.10 0.03 4.29 0.01 11.4 0.50 3.40 0.35 Stembridge Jersey 2 0.40 0.11 2.04 0.53 11.2 2.48 4.35 0.49 Stoke Red 3 0.32 0.10 6.13 1.42 12.3 1.45 3.67 0.32 Sweet Alford 3 0.10 0.05 1.86 0.89 11.9 2.38 4.43 0.30 Sweet Coppin 1 0.13 . 2.20 . 11.3 . 3.92 . Taliaferro 2 0.14 0.07 6.77 0.06 10.7 0.64 3.06 0.27 Taylor’s 2 0.16 0.05 1.90 0.57 13.3 1.41 4.39 0.04 Tom Putt 4 0.14 0.06 6.11 1.23 11.3 0.55 3.46 0.23 Track Zero1 3 0.13 0.04 1.82 0.33 13.1 1.10 4.08 0.10 Skyrme’s Kernel2 4 0.20 0.06 10.26 0.48 11.3 0.93 3.14 0.24 Vilberie 6 0.54 0.21 3.01 0.78 12.0 1.65 3.87 0.17 Whidbey 3 0.13 0.05 6.59 2.42 12.3 1.93 3.72 0.22 Yarlington Mill 6 0.21 0.11 2.59 1.08 12.3 1.45 4.13 0.43 Zabergau Reinette 4 0.14 0.04 7.20 1.83 14.6 2.22 3.61 0.19

1Local seedling discovered in Seattle train yard by John Ross, cider maker.

2Tentative identification, was received under an incorrect name. 11/2013