No. I had a few Chicos come out that way in Las Vegas this year. They were all fine last year.
In Las Vegas, Honey Jar and So did not have any fruit with the issue. Honey Jar set very heavily this year and had identical growing conditions to Chico.
In Georgia, the variety that was primarily affected was Honey Jar. Other varieties had other problems (such as severe cracking on Li and Autumn Beauty with the drought + heavy rain cycle we had this year) but they did not experience the undamaged-but-mushy fruit phenomenon. Notably, the fruit on my Georgia Chico was fine.
I havenât noticed Sugar Cane being especially thorny. Iâm sure it has some, but nothing that stood out.
Same for me- Chico likes to stab me. And doesnât even offer much fruit in return. From what Iâve heard it can be very productive in sunny areas. But in my area it is very stingy.
Wow- I donât think Iâve ever seen this. The only thing which causes gooey softness is either cracking or extreme overripeness. And not just a few days- the one time I had that happen was when I kept forgetting to bring a ladder to pick the top part of a Honey Jar at a rental and a bunch went overripe. I wonder if there is some fungal issue in the South which is causing it.
Crisper and less dense than Chico could still be Li. At its best it can be decent. I wouldnât go as far to say it is as good as Honey Jar, but the best Li might be like an OK or slightly sub-par Honey Jar. Though I donât get that many Li at peak quality.
One thing you could try is to crack the pits on the potentially miss-named Sugar Cane. If 99%+ of the pits donât have viable seeds then it is likely a Li. If it does have seeds, it could be a Sugar Cane (though behaving stragely) or something else.
My impression was that the genetic difference was small, even though the impact on the fruit could be large. Iâve assumed that it was only 1-2 genes changing, though I donât have any source for that. Have you seen anything that shows a large degree of genetic change in a bud/branch sport?
Also, that is really cool to know about Caracara. I had assumed it was something that got bred with a grapefruit and crossed back to an orange. Itâs pretty wild that someone found it growing on a normal navel tree.
The 1st and 3rd make complete sense to me.
For #2, can jujubes even produce that way? For example, say someone was able to have kids with themselves (letâs leave aside the whole M/F thingâŚ) and they had brown eyes, with a blue recessive (taking the overly simplified out-dated view that only 1 gene controls eye-color). Any kids would have a 25% chance of blue eyes, even though both parents had brown eyes and identical genes. Wouldnât it be the same for jujubes? Even if it pollinated itself, wouldnât there be differences based on which which of the alleles was passed on? As you can tell from the question/analogy, Iâm definitely not an expert hereâŚ
definitely not an expert either and I have NO IDEA if jujubes can do this, but IF they can work like citrus (Polyembryonic?) then the seedlings could be very very close to being clones of the original (apomictic?) probably a similar level of genetic change (small) to a bud sport, which, as you rightly point out, can still have a massive effect on fruit characteristics.
Obviously this looks like it is much rarer in jujubes than in citrus (if it happens at all) but this would absolutely give us a bunch of very similar genetics (indistinguishable using the methods in the UNM papers) clustering around the âmotherâ plant.
I am sort of favoring this interpretation because it seems to match up so well with the anecdotes on here about a lack of viable seeds with the exact same varieties that have multiple âsynonymouslyâ related cultivars (Li, Redlands, and other Lis, and Sherwood, Sawmill, and possibly vegas booty) that also seem to act at least somewhat differently in certain environments. it just seems like too much of a coincidence to me.
Yes, in the simplified example, there is a 50% chance of exactly matching the parent for that gene (one brown and one blue, with a 25% chance of two browns, and 25% two blues). But, keep in mind that there are 147 different SNPs being considered. So, even if there is a chance of one site matching exactly, the chances of that happening in all 147 is very low.
I checked the pollination study and based on only 1 yearâs data (many of the others had 2 yearâs worth), Sherwood does not produce fruit without pollination.
iâve had fruits like those this year too, and not just hj and chico. and every now and then some years, mostly when we have a late spring and the developing fruits get caught by extreme high temps. Fruits borne later in cooler weather are generally better in qualityâjuicier and sweeter.
our sugar canes have shorter thorns too, compared to, say li or chico. I think people find smaller thorns more bothersome than bigger ones mainly because it is easier to avoid a big one than a small one. The wild-types to me are the worst as their internodes are shorter so there are more thorns per unit length, and they can also have high incidence of having hooked thorns on their herbaceous fruiting stems, which is often absent in domesticated cultivars.
apart from thorn difference between li and sc, liâs foliage is a deeper green, like hj, and are generally broader/longer/ wider. Li foliage is also more glossy, while scâs is somewhat matte.
Of course, am not saying the li and the sc we have are the real ones, as we are only as accurate as the nurseries bought them from, lol
awesome that we have someone here who has the âluxuryâ of first-hand data points, having trees in both bone-dry vegas and humid georgia!
feel free to post all your findings @marten, ad libitum and ad infinitum
i canât throw in a percentage for characteristics, since manifestation of characteristics can be a multi-gene scenario, or a single gene(all or nothing) scenario, but am quite confident that self-pollination would result in the offspring being closely-related genetically(even though not phenotypically). May well be the closest thing to actual cloning when it comes to sexual reproduction. Self-pollination is considered sexual, since meiosis(or dna rearrangement of pollen and ovule) is involved. While am aware of jujubes undergoing meiosis, havenât come across anything re: sherwoodâs ability to self-pollinate(likely due to it having been born in the usa). We did a rudimentary study on burntridgeâs contorted where proved it able to produce fruit when flowers are bagged, but none of the pits had actual seed.
Of course the sample size was too small to be of significance, and the fruits getting baked by greenhouse effect in the ziploc bags likely compromised everything
will give it a try-- answering a most pertinent query! Recessive genes, just like dominant genes, are an all-or-nothing gene. For blue eyes, a person has to get the gene from both mom and dad for it to manifest, and all of that personâs children will have the gene(but not necessarily have blue eyes, unless the other parent also has blue eyes) With dominant genes, say, with viny growth of peas, the pea only needs one gene for the viny growth to manifest.
The advantage of recessive genes when it comes to selective breeding is that any offspring with the desirable trait will be pure-blooded(homozygous) for the trait, so when back crossing/in-breeding in the attempt to approach the genetics(other genes other than those for recessive trait/s) of the original parent, all one need do is select those offspring with the traits, and use to pollinate the original parent, and serially, any of the resultant offsprings that again present with the traits can be used to pollinate the original parent. This way youâd also be maxing out the chances of traits that manifest by multi-gene interaction. Height, shape and size of nose,etc are supposedly determined by multi-genes.
The thing about juju enthusiasts is that no one identifies as an expert, and everyone identifies as a student. Everyoneâs open to ideas/correction and happier proven wrong than right, myself included
i agree with you on this although i donât have proof myself.
the citrus genus is so intriguing, and quite weird. It can be so stubbornly conservative that when grown from seed, it will insist on being an exact clone of its mother(which most other species are incapable of if grown from seed)-- and conversely-- it can be so radically liberal for having stems readily evolving on the fly(which likewise, most other species are incapable of).
it is both a creationist and an evolutionist
quite successful with its intent to preserve how it was created, while also actively embracing evolution-- spontaneously transforming itself into something it is not
if havenât responded to your query itâs because i havenât found the literature that says it is possible. I just need to find the key words i originally used for google to lead me back to it
if remember it right it mentioned dong being able to produce seed via âself-serviceâ, which is good news for those who like hj types
will have to check my other pcâs and post it asap
finally found it @BobVance . Much is known about certain jujus being self pollinating(which helps produce fruit) but little is known about some being self-fertile(producing seeds), which could be reason behind cultivar groups with synonymy
more intriguing is that there are actually cultivars which seem to prefer self pollination to produce seed
9 March 2011
The influencing factors of the fruiting characteristics of Ziziphus jujuba.
Affiliation: Agricultural University of Hebei, Baoding 071001, China
Abstract
The factors influencing fruiting ability and fertility of Chinese jujube (Ziziphus jujuba) were analyzed based on an investigation of 124 cultivars in the Cangxian County Jujube Repository, Hebei and 156 cultivars in the National Jujube Repository, Pomology Institute of Shanxi. The results showed that Chinese jujube germplasm resources could be classified into 3 groups, i.e. self-fruitless, self-sterile (but self-fruitful) and self-fertile. Among them, self-sterile was the basic type, and it could convert with self-fruitless and self-fertile. However, the transform between self-fertile and self-fruitless was very scarce. Under natural pollination, all the cultivars and strains tested were able to bear fruits, but they were not all fertile, accounting for 42.31%, the rest sterile. The fruiting ability and fertility changed with genotypes (cultivars or strains), years, regional conditions and orientation of the canopy, of which genotype was the most dominant factor. The percentage of fruit to bearing shoot (PFTBS) and the percentage of fruit with seed (PFWS) were respectively in a range of 0-61.54% and 0-100% under self-pollination, and 4.17%-136.84% and 0-100% under natural pollination. PFTBS and PFWS in 36 strains of cultivar âJinsixiaozaoâ were respectively in a range of 0.89%-163.64%, 0-6.98% under self-pollination, and 10.71%-138.89% and 0-90.00% under natural pollination. For 5 strains of cultivar âWuhexiaozaoâ, the two parameters were 1.10%-81.72%, 0-100% under self-pollination, and 8.06%-137.04% and 0-2.70% under natural pollination; For the 3 strains of cultivar âDongzaoâ the two parameters were 25.00%-62.93%, 0-1.37% under self-pollination, and 11.32%-89.23% and 0% under natural pollination, respectively. The variation of fruiting ability was much bigger than that of fertility. Only 4.17% and 15.38% of the cultivars had stable PFTBS respectively between years and between regional conditions, while the corresponding ratio of the cultivars with stable PFWS was respectively 64.58% and 73.08%. The PFTBS under self-pollination was much higher in the south-west and north-west aspects of the canopy than in other orientations. Some excellent germplasms (with self-fruitless or self-sterile under self-pollination but fertile under cross-pollination), which were fit to be used as female parent in cross breeding, were preliminarily screened out.
I have avoided getting the jujube variety âLangâ all these years due to its reputation of being bland. Most say that it is better for drying and not for fresh eating.
I got the chance to sample fresh fruit from a tree at a county Master Gardener maintained site where I volunteer. The fruit was quite good and not bland. It was sweet with a hint of tart. Flavor and sweetness is similar to Sherwood for me. These trees are growing in a field with plenty of Texas sun!
I dried a few in the sun for a few days while the temps were hovering in the high 90âs. The fruit was already brown and begining to dry on the tree. These were quite good as well.
I have a Lang tree that I have grafted many varieties on to. I have eaten some that were quite good. I have eaten some that were quite badâŚ.as in straight styrofoam. IMO the fruit is not consistent and bettered by so many other cultivars.
Lang was actually the first temperate juju i ever got to try. I spat out the first one within a second or two of chewing on it.
Since i bought about half a pound of it, there were several left on the kitchen counter which ripened a bit more for several days and re-tried them which made me like them a little more to try antoher cultivar, li, which i thought was better. Thatâs when i figured it best for me to grow them
myself as quite certain grocery store jujus were likely not as good compared to homegrown ones
and yeah, lang is not the best eaten fresh, but they do make great dried dates
Our Tree-giving on T-giving is currently on at our youtube video below. As always, first-come-first-served, if interested, pls post your request there at the comments section of the video
looks like everyoneâs busy this holiday. Thereâs one last vegas booty juju up for grabs. Would like to get it finalized by end of day as might not be able respond soon enough if request is posted tomorrow.
Offer still holds even if youâve already been a beneficiary on previous thankgiving giveaways
