Pretty good when fully ripe. This has been a strange year also very wet and then very dry. I didn’t care for them before they ripened but they got tastier. Not as juicy as Honey Jar but then nothing is.
They are productive. This was first year for a big crop. Deer got them the last couple of years. I’ve had a better dog pack this year. 
Here are some pictures of my Georgia jujubes, mostly planted in the winter of 2020/21. I also have Honey Jar, Chico and So growing in Las Vegas, so I can do an anecdotal jujube-to-jujube comparison between sites for those varieties. One confounding factor is that the jujubes grow better in the constant intense sun in Vegas (with daily irrigation, whereas the Georgia trees have to rely on the rain). After several years, they are now much bigger than the Georgia jujubes (more than 2X trunk caliper) so the Vegas fruit has the advantage of being produced by more mature/established trees.
So:
The fruit from So shows the biggest difference between sites. This may be due to the varieties actually being different, as it has long been suspected that there are at least two distinct versions of So out there (a JFAE version and a Burnt Ridge version). In my case, the Georgia tree came from OGW and the Vegas tree came from Bob Wells Nursery, both in late 2020. Thus, the differences I am observing might be due to the different environments, or they might be due to the cultivars actually being different. Both trees seem to exhibit an equivalent amount of contortion in their branches.
The fruit from the Vegas So is very like that of the Vegas Honey Jars, perhaps a little less sweet, but of similar size or slightly larger, and with very similar (good) texture, with Honey Jar having the edge for crunchiness / juiciness. The fruit from the Georgia So is much denser, much drier, and has a tartness to it that is almost absent in fruit from the Vegas So. There is also greater variability in fruit size, with some being smaller than Honey Jar fruit, and some notably larger. The Georgia So did not set much fruit this year.
Chico:
The fruit are similar in shape, but the Georgia fruit are about 25% smaller (but still larger than Honey Jar or So). However, the Georgia tree was the victim of a lawnmower incident just before the 2023 growing season, and had to spend all of last year growing back from a stump. Despite this, it also set more heavily than the Vegas Chico, and carried more of its fruit (the Vegas Chico dropped a lot of developing fruit around the week of this year’s 120-degree record-breaker – the only one of my jujubes to be so affected). This could account for the smaller fruit size.
Notably, the Georgia Chico is ripening its fruit earlier than the Vegas Chico, despite starting its growing season later (the other Vegas jujubes have already ripened their first crop and are at least several weeks ahead of the Georgia jujubes). No cracking so far in either location.
Flavor-wise, the Chico is a standout (to me) in both locations, with a sweet/tart complexity. The texture is superior in Vegas (more crisp), but the Georgia fruit is still acceptable. For now, it is my favorite jujube in both locations.
Autumn Beauty:
This tree was attacked by rabbits in both 2021 and 2022, and barely survived on about a quarter-inch of cambium. It also suffered the most serious damage of all my jujubes from a bad late frost in 2023. It pulled through, but is by far the smallest of its cohort – quite a bit smaller than the Chico that was mowed to the ground and had to regrow from a stump. Nevertheless, it set heavily this year for its size. The fruit is quite large – the largest fruit of all my jujubes (I should have included a penny or something for scale in the picture, but I have large hands). It is not quite ripe, but several were cracking and so I picked and ate them. They were good, but of inferior texture and sweetness to Honey Jar. The flesh is light rather than dense like the Georgia So.
Black Sea:
This tree flowered heavily this year and is right in the middle of the rest of the jujubes, yet set only one little jujube. It spent the energy on vegetative growth instead, and is now one of the most handsome trees among my Georgia jujubes. I hope for a good crop next year.
Li:
This tree is in an inferior location (less than ideal sun) and has suffered repeated chomping from deer. It has been growing slowly as a result. It set fruit last year, but dropped it all. This year looks a little more promising, but the fruit has some time to go before it will be ripe.
GA-866:
This tree flowered and set fruit both last year and this year, but dropped it all, but it is known to be a shy bearer. It is in an isolated location with only Li as a proximate pollination partner, and has also been set back a bit by deer attacks.
Honey Jar:
I have two Honey Jars in each location, all from different nurseries. All set fruit heavily this year. The Vegas fruit is bigger, crunchier, and sweeter, but the Vegas trees are also much larger. Most of the Georgia fruit was still good – crunchy and juicy (for a jujube) and very sweet, but one discouraging thing I noted was that some of the Georgia Honey Jar fruit was… mushy, almost like the consistency of a ripe sour cherry. The mushy fruit looked normal otherwise. I didn’t eat any of the mushy ones and picked them off and discarded them. We had a big rain after a period of relative drought before I noticed this, so I don’t know if the rain is related.
Honey Jar is the favorite of my family so far, probably since it is still quite good to eat when underripe.
Sugar Cane:
This tree is the most vigorous grower of the Georgia jujubes, and is about 12 feet tall and wide. It set fruit last year but dropped them. This year, it set very heavily, keeping almost all the fruit, and the fruit are quite large – almost as big as Autumn Beauty, and bigger than Li. They are not ripe yet, but I ate a few that had been damaged by birds and had prematurely ripened as a result. They are almost as sweet as Honey Jar, but denser and much drier (though this could be due to being underripe).
I get that a lot here in a lot of varieties of jujubes. Usually it won’t be all the fruit on the tree. I have contributed it to the humidity here and it is worse on years with a lot of rain.
After all these years and like100 of varieties out there on trial in the USA but the Good old Honey Jar still the top dog. A must have for Jujube growers.
Tony
brief tiktok video of “Vegas Meaty” juju 
trying to find tangible differences between sherwood and vegas booty. Glad to have kept a few sherwood pits from few yrs ago, and found some that actually had thick solid seeds, one of which was viable as shown below
Over the years have cracked dozens more of v. booty pits which we found either empty or have broad but floppy paper-thin ‘seeds’ void of cotyledons. Have yet to find any with viable seed
My Sawmill that is supposed to be closely related to Sherwood has empty pits also.
maybe sawmill and v booty are sterile descendants of sherwood?
The tension is killing me, lol
I’m sure they are. It makes me wonder what causes some of the varieties to be sterile. In this case we have genetic proof of ancestry being aooo closely related.
And Redlands might be a sterile descendent of Li
Was the fruit cracked from the rain? Cracked fruit will rot if not picked almost immediately. After a rain, I go around picking the cracked fruit and either eat it or dry it for winter.
I think your Sugar Cane is mis-IDed. Maybe it is a Li. My Sugar Cane produces fruit a bit before Honey Jar. And the texture is less dense than HJ and just as crisp. And Li should be bigger than Sugar Cane, which is a mid-sized fruit, smaller than Li and Autumn Beauty, but bigger than Honey Jar and Black Sea.
Here’s a pic I took the other day. Note that this was one of only 3 Honey Jar on the tree that was ripe, while there were a lot of Black Sea and Sugar Cane.
That’s not my reading of prof Yao’s paper. It seems to say they are all either identical or at most branch sports. But, she hasn’t gotten back to me on my questions. I guess this is a good reminder to ping her about it 
While many of my trees didn’t produce good crops, what there is seems to be ripening a few weeks early. I had my first big picking on 9/13 this year, while last year it was late September. (9/28 from the records I have, but I may have missed something a day or two earlier).
I normally put Sugar Cane and Black Sea on a similar level. But based on what I’ve seen this year, I think BS is pulling ahead a bit. While Sugar Cane is bigger, BS has more usable fruit and higher brix. Sugar Cane not only has a bit more cracking, but there are also some fruit on the tree that for wahtever reason lost their crisp texture before ripening. Not a ton- maybe 5%, but enough to be annoying. Especially when compared to 0% for Black Sea.
One interesting thing I noticed is that a Sandia graft has curled leaves. The rest of the tree has normal leaves.
Hi Bob,
Do you have a photo of ECG fruit. I am just curious about the size, taste, and maturity date @BobVance
Thanks
I have gotten viable seeds from Redlands and have three small Redlands seedlings. However it’s a small percentage of fruit that have the seeds and it seems like that it occurs some years but not every year that I find seeds. I planted ~50 seeds to get the three seedlings. I haven’t found that many seeds in succeeding years and I didn’t even look this year. It’s a lot of fiddling to get viable seeds and they don’t really impress me with the viability and even the growth of the seedlings so it isn’t worth it to me.
But that information seems to be at odds that both are seedlings that sucker true to variety. I know Sawmill has to be a seedling as it produces clones by suckering. I think it could be a Sherwood seedling but if the genetics are true it cannot be an exact match.
Maybe a seedling of a sport???
maybe am just too stiff and admittedly too nerdy about glossary of terms. There were three key words in the tables have seen:
“Identical”–such as Fucuimi and “BaBaHong”
“Synonyms”-- such as Li and Redlands
and “Closely related”-- such as the rest that are neither identical nor synonyms
by definition and analogy, the word “identical” to the word huge is huge, while the “synonym” for the word huge is enormous.
Fucuimi being identical to Babahong meant that they are genetically identical
While Li being synonymous with redlands supposedly means that they are not genetically identical, but the codons transcribed will generate the same amino acids(which means the same protein phenotype is produced) mainly because there are redundant or “synonymous” codons(even though the dna template is different).
perhaps what i’ve been reading online was an older genetic study at NMSU, as i didn’t really see anything mentioned about the cultivars being limited to either being identical or bud sports.
if i germinate a sihong seed, and the seedling blooms and pollinates its mother, the resultant offspring will theoretically be more closely-related to the original sihong tree and not the resultant seedling’s mother, and if this offspring is further used as pollen source for the original sihong tree, the would-be seedling produced will likely be more closely-related to its great grandma sihong.
It is early, but not the first. Generally after Sugar Cane, but before Honey Jar. I picked the first few on Friday. It is generally pretty high brix. These fruit didn’t last long enough to get home and be tested, but I remember seeing brix over 30 in the past from them.
In terms of size, it isn’t far off from Sugar Cane. Bigger than Black Sea and Honey Jar, but smaller than Li. Good crisp texture. One mild negative is that the pit is a bit long and pointed and it does crack in the rain, similar to Sugar Cane.
I think you mentioned a similar thing about Li. Only a few had seeds.
Do we know that for sure? I thought there was at least one possible that Raf had for Vegas Booty, and hadn’t heard anything specific about Tx Sawmill.
Just because there are clones from suckering doesn’t mean it is a seedling. It just isn’t grafted. It could be a rooted cutting or transplanted sucker.
A seedling of a sport isn’t much different from a seedling of the original. There are very very few differences between a sport and the original tree, while the seedling of a sport has 50% of the original sports genetics and 50% of whatever pollinated it.
I think there are 2 (3?) separate papers and the one with the identical vs closely related that you mention is the oldest one from 2019. The newest one (2024) has Sherwood, Vegas Booty, and Tx Sawmill in the same “synonymous group” (group 5).
Yes, you could back-cross to get back toward the original Sihong. That is what a group (I forget who) is doing with the American Chestnuts to breed the disease resistance in from Chinese chestnuts.
But even after a couple back-crosses you are only at 87.5% Sihong (1/2 for seedling, 1/4 for first, and 1/8 for the 2nd). I did a quick Monte Carlo simulation in Calc (free version of Excel) and even assuming 2 back-crosses, in 50 tries I never got more than 143 of 147 (the number considered in the study) to match. That assumes that there are only two values for each genotype each at 50 percent. While that isn’t an accurate assumption, the study does mention discarding the SNPs where most samples have the same value (ie if most jujubes have a given value, it isn’t useful in this context. That brought their SNPs down from 159 to 147.
After I did this, it occurred to me that an easier way to consider that would get me to an answer, rather than just showing it doesn’t happen in 50 random tries. If 87.5% of the SNP match (due to back-crossing), that means that there are only 18.4 (12.5%) left to consider. What is the chance you flip a coin 18 times and it comes up heads each time?
By my math, it is 1 in 262,124, or 0.0003815%.
The paper actually calculates this value for unrelated pairs at 1.4 x 10 to the -20th power. In order to get a similar value with my method, I would back into about 73% pf the genes in a random sample matching by chance. Using that value for the 18 genes not covered by an 87.5% overlap, I get a value of 0.34% (1 over the inverse of .73, raised to the 18th power). So the study could incorrectly mistake a double back-crossed seedling for the parent 0.3% of the time. Though, if you keep back-crossing you soon reach the point where the study fails to differentiate because so many of the genes match. But, while interesting, this seems like a fairly specific situation and not something that would be likely by a random seedling.
thanks as always for the engaging and meticulous exchange @BobVance 
there can be considerable differences between a sport and the tree it grew out of. There even are radical ones. Navel orange is one such, producing a mini orange at the bottom of every fruit. A version of exorcist occurring in the plant world. And for some of us who’ve grown coconuts, there is this sport that is considered a delicacy(macapuno),which results in a glutinous growth inside the coconut endosperm that retains sweetness of green coconuts even when the coconut has turned brown. It is more of a seed sport instead of bud sport. Red d’Anjou pears actually grew out of green ones,
speaking of exorcist and navel oranges, there is this bizarre growth(teratoma) that occurs in animals, including humans, wherein germ cells of an individual attempt to asexually produce another organism . Have worked in a pathology lab and seen ovarian blobs that had hair, muscle, even teeth inside of them.
also interesting to note that several bud sports have been found growing out of washington navel orange branches, which were radically different enough from the original washington branch to be considered totally different cultivars. Caracara navel, lane late, etc
really cool to see what have always suspected even before genetic studies were published about sherwood and v booty! There were stark similarities which have been suspicious of and paranoid about as have been thinking Mr Meyer may have given us self-rooted cultivars. And that TX sawmill is incuded all the more makes it exciting. Also happy to hear sherwood, v booty, and sawmill were mere synonyms, and not identical, if the glossary of terms were adhered to in Prof Yao’s studies, which i could safely conclude it was considering it being a university publication
i guess the permutation of possibilities are reduced to three-- genetic synonyms are either:
-bud sports from suckers/branches,
-or seed-grown from self-pollinated cultivars(where the only pathway to change is meiosis),
-or seed-grown from serial in-breeding/backcrossing as mentioned earlier
while the math cannot be disregarded, the passage of time makes things possible even though statistically not probable. Humans have been selectively cultivating jujus for thousands of years. Sherwood was reportedly seed-grown in usa, so the tree it may have come from may also have siblings from the same tree source(or sources) which homogenized it into a group with notable synonymy
No, that’s the odd thing. The Honey Jar fruit looked perfect, but immediately upon grasping it to pick it, you could tell that it was soft. I bit into one experimentally and it tasted odd, with no sweetness, so I spat it out. Only a small fraction of the fruit was affected.
My Chicos are ripening now in Las Vegas, and I had the same strange phenomenon with some of them – several were soft, with no visible cracking. Inside, the flesh of the soft ones was dark, very unappealing-looking, and tasted like nothing. I also had a couple of cracked ones this year, but the rest of the Chico fruit has been absolutely superb.
That’s definitely possible. I have around 20 jujubes total, ordered willy-nilly from different nurseries, and the probability that all of them were properly labeled is pretty scant.
I do have a (purported) Li as well, and its fruit ripened about a week or so after my (purported) Sugar Cane, but it is also in an inferior, shaded spot, which could delay fruit ripening. I will note that once the fruit ripened on the (purported) Sugar Cane, it became juicier and less dense, and seemed around as crisp as Honey Jar. I wouldn’t call it lighter than Honey Jar, though, but it was crisper and less dense than Chico.
Another point is that my (purported) Sugar Cane tree is not terribly thorny (my Chicos are definitely thornier). I’ve always heard that Sugar Cane is supposed to be a very thorny variety. My tree, whatever it is, is an upright grower and the most vigorous of all my jujubes.
Do you know if there are any obvious leaf differences, or other morphological differences, between Sugar Cane and Li? I’d like to get to the bottom of this.
My Li (s) are much later ripening than Sugar Cane In fact Sugar Cane fruits are mostly gone when Li is starting to ripen.
I’m sure mine has thorns but I think Chico has many more and larger thorns than SC. Sugar canes growth could be described as upright as compared to most others. The wood is very stiff and though I bend most limbs down to pick Sugar Cane is much more resistant than others.
A lot of my fruit do that and some varieties seem more prone than others. I will not eat that fruit. I think it has an unusual smell also. Is this in Georgia only? I’m glad to know others have this same thing going on. This year was bad and nearly 30% or more of my fruit was like this. We had torrential rain in Spring and through much of fruit growth and then it turned off dry except for a few showers that caused splitting. I don’t think many split fruit became mushy.
