Skip to content
CiderHQ
Search

Cider apple

Muscadet de Dieppe

An aromatic Norman sweet apple from the Dieppe country, grown for the musky perfume it lends a blend rather than for acid, tannin or sugar.

Also written Muscadet, Muscadet Dieppois.

Classification
Sweet — French cider apple families
Harvest
Early (September)
Single varietal
Sometimes bottled on its own
Blend role
Aroma, Early season
Origin
Pays de Caux, near Dieppe, Seine-Maritime
Species
Malus domestica
Flowering
Pollination group 2
Vigour
Moderate
Biennial bearing
Slightly biennial
Keeping
Poor — mill soon after picking

How it is classified

French cider apple families

Sweet · Douce

Low acid, low tannin. Sugar and body.

Basis: Tannin below 2 g/L and acidity below 3 g/L as H₂SO₄.

Classified as sweet on acid and polyphenol content, which captures almost nothing of what the fruit is actually planted for.

Every classification on CiderHQ names its system. Why there is more than one.

What it contributes to a blend

A direction, not a measurement. These bands are the level of resolution the evidence supports, and they say which way adding this fruit pushes a blend rather than what the finished cider will be.

Contribution to a blend, scored 1–5 as a band. The filled segment is the typical value; the paler segments are the range.
AxisTypicalRange
AcidLow
TanninLight
SugarHigh
BitternessNone
AstringencyNone
AromaDominant
BodyMedium
Based on: its recorded classification

French sweet family placement, with the aroma band raised well above the family default because aromatic character is the cultivar’s entire reason for existing.

Markedly musky and floral, closer to a muscat grape than to most apples. Low in everything the classification measures and high in the thing it does not.

Aroma

Descriptors associated with this fruit. Each names a character with a known cause, and association is not a promise — what reaches the glass depends on the ferment as much as on the apple.

Put Muscadet de Dieppe into a blend

Measured analysis

Each figure is shown with where and when it was taken. They are not averaged: the same cultivar grown in another climate genuinely gives different numbers, and collapsing them into one would be the most misleading thing this page could do.

Measured on the fruit

Measured on the fruit itself, before anything was done to it. These figures hold whatever was later made from the juice.

Reported analyses of Muscadet de Dieppe, by property and source — measured on the fruit
PropertyReadingWhereWhenSource
Fruit diameter2 readings, spanning 60–67 mm67 mmWSU Mount Vernon NWREC, Skagit Valley, Washington, USA2002–2017Modern analysisWashington State University Northwestern Washington Research and Extension Center
60 mm (51–68)USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Geneva, New York, USA2017Modern analysisCornell University / USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit
Fruit firmness46.2 N (35.7–56.8)USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Geneva, New York, USA2017Modern analysisCornell University / USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit
Fruit weight84 g (51–116)USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Geneva, New York, USA2017Modern analysisCornell University / USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit
Juice yield467 L/tWSU Mount Vernon NWREC, Skagit Valley, Washington, USA2002–2017Modern analysisWashington State University Northwestern Washington Research and Extension Center
Starch pattern index7.1 SPI (6.3–7.9)USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Geneva, New York, USA2017Modern analysisCornell University / USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit

Measured on the juice

Measured on juice as pressed, before fermentation. This is where most cider analysis lives and what the classification schemes are defined on.

Reported analyses of Muscadet de Dieppe, by property and source — measured on the juice
PropertyReadingWhereWhenSource
Brix2 readings, spanning 13.6–14.2 °Bx14.2 °BxWSU Mount Vernon NWREC, Skagit Valley, Washington, USA2002–2017Modern analysisWashington State University Northwestern Washington Research and Extension Center
13.6 °Bx (12.6–14.6)USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Geneva, New York, USA2017Modern analysisCornell University / USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit
pH2 readings, spanning 4.12–4.81 pH4.12 pHWSU Mount Vernon NWREC, Skagit Valley, Washington, USA2002–2017Modern analysisWashington State University Northwestern Washington Research and Extension Center
4.81 pH (4.75–4.87)USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Geneva, New York, USA2017Modern analysisCornell University / USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit
Fructose67.9 g/L (45.8–90.0)USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Geneva, New York, USA2017Modern analysisCornell University / USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit
Glucose19.8 g/L (13.7–25.9)USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Geneva, New York, USA2017Modern analysisCornell University / USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit
Sorbitol10.0 g/L (5.3–14.7)USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Geneva, New York, USA2017Modern analysisCornell University / USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit
Specific gravity1.057 SGWSU Mount Vernon NWREC, Skagit Valley, Washington, USA2002–2017Modern analysisWashington State University Northwestern Washington Research and Extension Center
Sucrose43.4 g/L (32.2–54.6)USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Geneva, New York, USA2017Modern analysisCornell University / USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit
Titratable acidity1.6 g/LUSDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Geneva, New York, USA2017Modern analysisCornell University / USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit
Total acid0.260 % w/vWSU Mount Vernon NWREC, Skagit Valley, Washington, USA2002–2017Modern analysisWashington State University Northwestern Washington Research and Extension Center
Total phenolics1900.0 mg/L (1650.0–2150.0)USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Geneva, New York, USA2017Modern analysisCornell University / USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit
Total tannin0.210 % w/vWSU Mount Vernon NWREC, Skagit Valley, Washington, USA2002–2017Modern analysisWashington State University Northwestern Washington Research and Extension Center

3 properties here have been measured more than once. The readings are shown as they were taken and are deliberately not averaged — climate, season, ripeness at picking, the age of the tree and the analytical method all move these numbers, and a single figure would hide every one of them. Where a spread is given below a property, it is the distance between separate studies, not the variation within any one of them.

How these were measured
  • Permanganate titration against indigo carmine, reported as tannic acid equivalent
  • Titration, reported as malic acid equivalent
  • Published as 2.63 inches; converted at 25.4 mm to the inch
  • Juice pressed from 25 fruit, 2015–2017 only. Published as 212 mL/lb; converted at 2.204623 lb to the kilogram
  • Mean of the fruit sampled per accession; where a bracket is shown it is one standard deviation either side of the mean, not the observed range. Published to two decimal places and shown at the precision CiderHQ displays for the unit.
  • Mean of the fruit sampled per accession; where a bracket is shown it is one standard deviation either side of the mean, not the observed range.
  • Cornell generic starch–iodine chart, 1–8, where 1 is no hydrolysis and 8 is complete. Mean of replicate fruit; a bracket, where shown, is one standard deviation either side of it.
  • Penetrometer, mean of replicate fruit; a bracket, where shown, is one standard deviation either side of the mean.
  • Refractometer on pressed juice. Mean of replicates; a bracket, where shown, is one standard deviation either side of the mean.
  • Titration to pH 8.2 with sodium hydroxide, reported as malic acid equivalents. Mean of replicates; a bracket, where shown, is one standard deviation either side of the mean.
  • Meter on pressed juice before fermentation. Mean of replicates; a bracket, where shown, is one standard deviation either side of the mean.
  • Löwenthal permanganate titration, reported by the source as grams per litre of tannic acid equivalent and stored here as milligrams per litre by exact conversion so that it sits in one column with the Folin–Ciocalteu figures the site also holds. The two methods do not measure the same thing and are not interchangeable.
  • Enzymatic assay (Megazyme). Mean of replicates; a bracket, where shown, is one standard deviation either side of the mean.
  • D-sorbitol/xylitol assay kit (Megazyme), sorbitol dehydrogenase method. Mean of replicates; a bracket, where shown, is one standard deviation either side of the mean.
  • A chart position, not a quantity. Almost every accession here scored at or near 8, which says the fruit was picked at or past full starch conversion rather than that the cultivars are alike.
  • One harvest at one site. Soluble solids move several degrees between seasons and with crop load.
  • The published standard deviation on this reading equals or exceeds the mean, so the interval it describes runs below zero. It is not reproduced; the mean is.
  • A permanganate figure and a Folin–Ciocalteu figure for the same juice can differ by a factor of two. Compare this reading with other permanganate readings, not with a Folin one.

Compare within a study to see where these figures sat among the other cultivars the same work analysed — which is a more robust statement than the figures themselves, because absolute values move between laboratories and the ordering inside one study mostly survives.

Watched in the orchard

What named research programmes recorded about this fruit at their own sites. Bloom, harvest and cropping belong to a place and a run of seasons rather than to a cultivar, so they are reported site by site rather than merged.

WSU Mount Vernon cider cultivar trial

Northwestern Washington Research and Extension Center, Mount Vernon, Skagit Valley, Washington · 2002–2017 · Washington State University Northwestern Washington Research and Extension Center

Maritime, with cool summers and mild wet winters — the closest North American analogue to the English West Country, and the reason the programme planted European cider fruit here rather than east of the Cascades.

Mean full bloom
9 May
Harvest
13 September
Bloom density
3.1 of 5
Productivity
2.6 of 5
Growth habit
Spreading
Bearing
Tip Bearing
Alternate bearing
Semi alternate
Blind wood
2.5 of 5
Rootstocks
M9, M27

Filed here as bittersweet.

Tasted at this site

Color dark amber, mildly bitter. Good body and balance. Single-varietal cider, even when fermented to dryness still gives a slightly sweet taste, mix of fruit and grass flavors.

Recorded by the programme from professional cidermakers in the region. One panel, one place, one set of seasons — a description of these ciders rather than of the cultivar everywhere.

Juice characteristics measured on 250 mL of pressed juice; juice yield from 25 fruit, 2015–2017 only. Bloom density, productivity and blind wood are the site’s own subjective 1–5 ratings. Figures are means across the seasons each cultivar was in the trial.

USDA-PGRU Malus germplasm characterisation

USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Geneva, New York, in the Finger Lakes region of western New York State · 2017 · Cornell University / USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit

Humid continental, with cold winters and warm summers moderated by the Finger Lakes — a sharper seasonal swing than any of the European cider regions whose fruit the collection holds, and warm enough in late summer to bring acid down faster than a maritime autumn does.

Held as
PI 589493, held as “Muscadet de Dieppe”
Published here, not republished by CiderHQ
  • Published standard deviation on titratable acidity, published as mean 1.6 g/L, standard deviation 4.1 g/L. The deviation equals or exceeds the mean, so the interval it describes runs below zero. Something in the replicates for this accession went wrong, and CiderHQ publishes the mean without pretending to know the spread.

One harvest season. Fruit assessed for weight, diameter, starch pattern index on the Cornell 1–8 chart and flesh firmness by penetrometer; juice pressed and measured for soluble solids by refractometer, titratable acidity by titration to pH 8.2 as malic acid, pH by meter, total phenolics by Löwenthal permanganate titration as tannic acid equivalent, and glucose, fructose, sucrose and sorbitol by enzymatic assay.

In the orchard

Harvest window
Early
Flowering
Pollination group 2
Vigour
Moderate
Cropping
Slightly biennial
Keeping
Poor — mill soon after picking

Early to mid, and the aroma is at its strongest for a short window; over-ripe fruit smells of little.

Disease and pest susceptibility

Recorded susceptibility. Pressure differs enormously by region and by season, so these are tendencies rather than predictions.
IssueSusceptibilityNote
Scabmoderate

Juice and pressing

How it is used

On its own

Sometimes bottled on its own

A single-varietal Muscadet de Dieppe is aromatically striking and structurally empty. Where it is made, it is normally a low-alcohol, lightly sparkling, sweet cider where the aroma is the point and nothing is asked of the structure.

About Muscadet de Dieppe

Muscadet de Dieppe is filed in the French scheme as a douce — low acid, low tannin — and that classification is accurate and almost useless. Nobody plants this fruit for sugar. It is planted because it smells of muscat, and because that perfume comes through fermentation into the finished cider in a way that most apple aroma does not.

This is a specific limitation of acid-and-tannin classification generally, and it applies as much to the Long Ashton scheme as to the French one. Both systems were built to predict how a blend would behave structurally, and both are silent on aroma, nitrogen, fermentation behaviour and the volatile chemistry that a drinker actually notices first. A cultivar like this one shows the gap plainly.

The name is a problem. Muscadet is applied across northern France to any apple with a musky note, and there are several; it is also, confusingly, a Loire wine and a grape. A tree offered as “Muscadet” without the Dieppe qualifier could be almost anything aromatic, and CiderHQ records the bare form as a regional name rather than a synonym for that reason.

It is early, it keeps badly, and its aroma has a narrow window. Practically, that ties it to fresh pressing and to producers who can put it straight into a blend, which is a constraint that has kept it a minor cultivar despite the genuine interest of its juice.

Names, origin and identity

Cultivar naming is the hardest problem in cider fruit data. The same tree carries different names across ten miles, and two different trees have shared a name for two centuries.

Other names this fruit is known by. Each is a name for the same cultivar, not a separate one — which is why none of them has a page of its own.
NameKindNote
MuscadetRegional nameSeine-Maritime. The bare form is used locally and is a poor identifier: several unrelated aromatic apples across northern France are called *muscadet*, and the name is also a wine.

Why it matters

Related cultivars

Recorded relationships, including the ones this fruit is routinely confused with.

Fruit that plays a similar part

Cultivars sharing a classification under the same system and a comparable role in a blend. Not a similarity score — a stated relationship.

Where it grows

What people ask next

Questions readers ask about the things this page mentions. Each one goes to the section that answers it rather than to a page written to receive the question.

Where to go next

Sources

What this page rests on. Where a source is marked as registered rather than read, CiderHQ is recording that the body is authoritative on the subject without claiming to have worked through the document itself. See our evidence policy for what each state means.

Research Evidence standard for this record. What that means.