Noble rot
beneficial form of a grey fungus, Botrytis cinerea, affecting wine grapes
Noble rot (French: pourriture noble; German: Edelfäule; Italian: Muffa nobile; Hungarian: Aszúsodás) is the beneficial form of a grey fungus, Botrytis cinerea, affecting wine grapes. Infestation by Botrytis requires warm and humid conditions, typically around 20 °C (68 °F) and above 80% humidity. If the weather stays wet, the undesirable form, "bunch rot" or "grey rot", adversely affects winemaking by disrupting fermentation and changing the taste, aroma, and appearance of the final wine. Grapes typically become infected with cinerea when they are ripe. If they are then exposed to drier conditions and become partially raisined, this form of infection is known as noble rot. Grapes picked at a certain point during infestation can produce particularly fine and concentrated sweet wine. Wines produced by this method are known as botrytized wines, and are considered a distinct category of dessert wines.
The primary distinction between botrytized wines and other naturally sweet, non-fortified sweet wines, such as late-harvest wines, ice wines, or straw/raisin wines, lies in the range and richness of aroma compounds generated by Botrytis cinerea. Significant differences are also evident in other components, like sugar alcohol and acid composition, due to microbial activity. Descriptors frequently used for these wines highlight flavours of peach, apricot, pear, quince, raisin, and honey, along with unique "botrytis" or roti characteristics.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Noble rot” is beneficial form of a grey fungus, Botrytis cinerea, affecting wine grapes. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Noble, beneficial and form, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “beneficial form of a grey fungus, Botrytis cinerea, affecting wine grapes” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 8, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q749342. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Noble rot”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Noble rot primary sources, Noble rot archive and Noble research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Noble rot”?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Noble rot” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.