If you enjoy New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc — or simply care about what ends up in your glass
… this is one of those rare moments where the news is genuinely positive.
No More Glyphosate NZ recently commissioned independent laboratory testing of four widely sold conventional Marlborough Sauvignon Blancs to check for residues of glyphosate, its primary breakdown product AMPA, and the related herbicide glufosinate.
This round of wine testing was prompted by a question we couldn’t ignore after publishing our recent article on Napa Valley vineyards walking away from Roundup. In Napa, winemakers moved first — not because regulators forced them to, but because soil health concerns were growing and customers kept asking direct questions about glyphosate use.
That raised a natural question here in New Zealand: if vineyards elsewhere are reassessing their reliance on glyphosate, what does that mean for our wine — and is anything measurable ending up in the bottle?
Rather than speculate, we tested.
Why We Tested These Marlborough Sauvignon Blancs
We selected four widely sold, conventional Marlborough Sauvignon Blancs:
- Cloudy Bay
- Kim Crawford
- Villa Maria Private Bin
- Oyster Bay
These are not niche organic wines or boutique producers. They represent the mainstream end of New Zealand wine — bottles commonly found on supermarket shelves, restaurant lists, and export markets.
They were chosen for a simple reason: if glyphosate residues were present in finished wine, this is where consumers might reasonably expect to find them.
What We Tested For: Glyphosate, AMPA, and Glufosinate
All four wines were independently analysed by an accredited laboratory using LC-MS/MS for:
- Glyphosate
- AMPA (glyphosate’s primary breakdown product)
- Glufosinate
LC-MS/MS is a standard analytical method used for pesticide residue testing in liquid products such as wine.
Glyphosate Test Results for Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc
None of the samples showed detectable residues above the laboratory’s reporting limits:
- Glyphosate: < 0.01 mg/L
- AMPA: < 0.02 mg/L
- Glufosinate: < 0.005 mg/L
For glyphosate, the reporting limit of 0.01 mg/L means that if residues are present, they are below the level this method can reliably detect. In practical terms, nothing measurable showed up in the finished wines tested.
What “Not Detected” Means in Glyphosate Testing
A “not detected” result doesn’t mean glyphosate was never used in vineyard management, and it doesn’t rule out residues below detection limits. Practices can vary between vineyards, blocks, seasons, and years, and a single round of testing can only answer a narrow question.
What these results do tell us is this: in the finished wine samples tested, glyphosate and related compounds were not present at detectable levels. From a consumer perspective, that’s reassuring information — and it’s worth reporting clearly.
How These Results Fit With Changes in the Wine Industry
These findings sit alongside changes already underway in parts of the wine industry. Internationally, regions like Napa Valley have moved away from Roundup after observing impacts on soil health and responding to growing consumer concern. In New Zealand, the motivations may differ, but there has been increasing emphasis on sustainability certification, mechanical weed control, cover cropping, and long-term soil resilience.
We can’t attribute these test results to any specific practice or producer decision. However, they are consistent with a sector that appears to be gradually reducing its reliance on chemical weed control, at least to the point where residues are not showing up in finished wine at detectable levels.
Why Independent Testing Matters
At No More Glyphosate NZ, independent testing isn’t about chasing a particular outcome. When residues are found, we report them. When they aren’t, we report that too. Credibility depends on following the evidence wherever it leads, including when the results are positive.
What This Means for Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc Drinkers
For Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc drinkers, these results are good news. They show that, in the wines tested, glyphosate and related compounds were not present at detectable levels. That doesn’t resolve wider questions about glyphosate use in agriculture or public spaces, and it doesn’t remove the need for ongoing scrutiny, but it does provide a useful data point in a debate that is often driven by assumptions rather than direct measurement.
It’s also important to be clear about the scope of this testing. This analysis focused specifically on glyphosate, its primary breakdown product AMPA, and the related herbicide glufosinate. No testing was carried out for other herbicides, pesticides, fungicides, or agricultural chemicals that may also be used in viticulture.
As always, we’ll continue to test, report, and revisit these questions as new evidence emerges.
You can support the next round of testing right here.
Image Source & Attribution
We created the feature image on this page in Canva.
