Select the tab for the type of search. Each tab has everything you need to do to perform that type of search.

See note [on record for PI 539442] this date. (EM Nauer, 09/1988)

This accession was apparently received as seed in June, 1952 from France (or possibly "French Colonies"...no additional information available at this time). A portion of the seeds were planted in CRC 11D-70-7,8 at the Citrus Experiment Station in Riverside and another portion sent to be planted in Santa Barbara County by Farm Advisor George Goodall. This was due to Riverside being in the "Quick Decline Quarantine Area" and Santa Barbara County not being therein (letter from Jim Cameron to George Goodall, April 15, 1951). Apparently 'Satina' did not do well in Santa Barbara County and was removed before some of the other seed-source accessions sent there. At Riverside, it apparently was also not among the most impressive as one document on file lists "Fate: ?". However, it was repropagated from CRC 11D-70-7 to CRC 6D-32-11,12 in 1977. It was planted in 12D for observation and possible accessioning in May, 2013. I cannot find much about this variety at this time. (RR Krueger, 2013-04-30)

"9. Citrus sunki Hort. ex Tanaka.

"Tree upright with thorny branches bearing a small sour fruit somewhat like a tangerine. Rind much thinner and lighter in color than that of C. ponki. Not edible but used for candy making. Seedlings largely used for stock in the Ch'ao-an district and in Formosa.

"9.a. Var Nin-kat or Tung-hung-kat is a typical late variety of the kat group so far not classified specifically. Fruit small with a star-like russet mark at the center of the apex; color cadmium orange. Season from late December to May; sour early in the season but later becoming sweet. A low-priced orange consumed on a large scale by the masses."

(RR Krueger, 06/03/2009)

This is a second introduction of the same genotype as RRUT 195, which did not establish and was inactivated. (RRK, 03/2007)

According to Siebert et al (2010): "`Lemonade? is reported to be a sweet lemon hybrid of un- known parentage with a very pleasant taste, and can be readily but not easily peeled. The fruit is small-medium, and not very seedy. The trees are semi-dwarfed (on trifoliate rootstock), but quite productive.The main crop matures in early spring in New Zealand, with much smaller summer crops also occurring. Un- fortunately there is no commercial production in New Zealand, although it is a popular home garden tree. It is susceptible to citrus scab disease; however, in a drier climate this should be less of a problem. (This information redacted from an email from Andrew Harty via Peter Chaires, 12/07/2005) Although the budsource trees are derived from trees at the CCPP that tested negative for all known graft-transmissible diseases, trees of `Lemonade? propagated in Riverside have shown a tendency to develop small brown to black lesions on the bark. The reason for these lesions is currently unknown.`Lemonade? trees propagated at Riverside are not particularly vigorous but the relationships of this to the observed lesions is not known". (RR Krueger, 01/03/2011)

Information on this accession from the CVC website.

Information on this accession from the CCPP website

This accession is stated to be an example of the 'Araras' strain but little information is available as to how this differs from the standard 'Bahianinha'. There have been various other selections recently brought into the US that are probably quite similar: 'Bahianinha' (PI 133261), 'Bahianinha' (RCRC 4167), and 'Bahianinha Monte Parnazo' (RRUT 184). (RRK, 12/2006)

'Imperial' is an extremely early maturing mandarin, equivalent in this regard to 'Owari' satsuma. Brix:acid ration reaches 7:1 around mid-March in the earliest regions of Australia, with later regions reaching this ratio in early June. 'Imperial' can be harvested up to July or August, depending upon the region. Fruit quality is considered good with a good balance or sugar and acid and good internal color. The skin is thin and soft, and although adherent, it peels easily. Juice levels are 35 % and greater and fruit are firm when peeled. Granulation is sometimes a problem because of the low juice content. There are usually 4 or less seeds per fruit in both solid and mixed plantings. The fruit is medium sized (or small in heavy crop years). The external color is yellow orange, but is more intense in regions where fall temperatures are cool. Fruit generally must be clipped from the tree rather than plucked. De-greening is necessary when fruit are harvested early and the post-harvest life is short at 2 - 4 weeks. 'Imperial' responds poorly to heat and cold treatments for pest disinfestation, which makes it unsuitable for export (from Australia).

'Imperial' performs adequately on a variety of rootstocks, although incompatibilities have sometimes been noted on 'Carrizo' and 'Troyer'. 'Cleopatra' produces high quality fruit. 'Cleopatra' and 'Troyer' are the most commonly used rootstocks in Queensland, whereas 'Carrizo' is more popular in southern areas. There is a tendency towards alternate bearing, which sometimes is managed by thinning. The tree's habit is vigorous and upright. Cross-pollinators may hep with set, yield, and size.

This information was summarized from The Citrus Industry, 1967, I:516; and Saunt, 2000, 'Citrus Varieties of the World', pp 65-66. A fact sheet is available from Citrus Australia Limited. (RR Krueger, 12/2006; link updated 02/18/2010)

'Hickson' is resistant to brown spot and was initially considered a promising alternative to 'Ellendale'. However, 'Hickson' declines when propagated on rough lemon rootstock due to probably genetic or physiological reasons. It is also susceptible to a crotch rot associated with Phomopsis and in addition does not perform well on trifoliate. For these reasons, it is no longer as popular in Australia.

Information summarized from: Jorgenson, 1972, Queensland Citrus Bulletin, 1972:23-24; Cox, 1975, NSW Dept of Agriculture, Bulletin H2.2.6; Broadbent et al, Proceedings, ISC, 1978:207-208; Forsyth et al, 1985, NSW Dept of Agriculture, Agfact H2.1.4. A fact sheet is available from Citrus Australia Limited. (RR Krueger, 12/2006; link updated 02/18/2010)

Regarding the origin of this accession, the INRA San Giuliano website, 'Avana apireno' originated in 1810 in Italy (most probably Sicily). However, Russo et al (1977), referencing Russo et al (1975), state:

"The 'Avana Apireno' mandarin was discovered in a 'Avana' orchard in the Picanello area of Catania 1962. At that time 3 trees that produced fruit with few seeds were recognized. From that time, the clonal offspring of those trees tested for many years in different places of Southern Italy have confirmed this quality...The production and quality of the fruit are similar to that of the 'Avana' and the 'Avana Apireno'...A nucellar line produced from one of the 3 original trees in 1962 has confirmed the low seediness of the mother tree. However the nucellar line has fewer seed per fruit than the mother tree..." (RR Krueger, 03/21/2008)

The present accession, 'Femminello siracusano 2KR' is apparently a selection of the 'siracusa' type. It is probably considered to be superior but we currently have no information on what characteristics might be superior to the older selections. (RRK, 12/2006)

See "Pedigree" section for more information on the development of this variety. According to the developer (Giuseppe Reforgiato Recupero, ISA, Acireale, email of 11/16/2007): "The mean characteristics of this selection are: large productivity, few or absent thorns in the branch, fast growth of the fruits so Femminello Siracusano 2KR can be considered an early selection". (RR Krueger, 12/2007)

More information is available here. For more on Femminello lemons in general, look here. (RR Krueger, 07/08/2011)

'Verna' is described (The Citrus Industry, 1967, 1:561) as "Fruit medium in size, oval to broad-elliptical; neck or collar short; nipple well developed. Seed content variable, but usually few to none. Color bright yellow at maturity. Rind medium-thick (thinner in summer crop); surface somewhat pebbled, rough; tightly adherent. Crops comes mainly in winter but holds well into summer, with undesirably large fruit, however. Tree very vigorous, upright-spreading, large, and productive." The fruit have a high juice content but with lower acids than other varieties (Agusti , Citricultura, 2000).

Saunt (2000) and Agusti (2000) state that this variety flowers twice or occasionally thrice, but that the second crop is of inferior quality. According to Gonzalez-Silicia (1968), the main period of production is from February to July. When another crop is forced by the verdelli method (referred to as "redrojo" in Spain), 'Verna' fruits gave the finest and least thick rind of any produced in this time period. 'Verna' tends to be altenate-bearing, especially following a verdelli treatment and is out-yielded by 'Fino' (Saunt, 2000). In California, 'Verna' is stated to appear much like 'Lisbon' (The Citrus Industry, 1967, 1:561).

This particular selection of 'Verna' ('Verna 50') is stated to be of medium to high vigor, usually flowering twice, with most fruit held inside the tree (Gardiabzabal-I et al., 2001, Proceedings ISCA, pp. 171-174). This last reference shows 'Verna' to have the lowest total production of the varieties tested. (RRK, 12/2006)

Because of this budsource, the Florida Persian lime industry became virtually free of wood pocket by the early 1970s. Richard Lee stated that when he started working at the University of Florida, he had no indication that this malady existed or had ever been a problem.

Note: This budsource has been of much pre-release interest to many different persons in many areas of the world. It should, however, be used with caution until it is verified that it does not develop wood pocket under local conditions and cultivation practices. This is particularly true in very hot areas such as Oman, where development of this problem is more rapid and intense.

Additional information on wood pocket may be found on the Ecoport website as slideshows in english and in spanish or as an eNarrative. (RRK, 12/2006)

It is not known how this selection differs from the older 'Ugli' accession (PI 132372/RCRC 2780). The older accession was accessed directly from Jamaica (in fact from F.G. Sharp of Trout Hall, who originally popularized this variety), whereas the present accession was accessed from New Zealand. If any selecting was done in NZ, which has a cool climate, it may have resulted in a selection that obtains better quality in less tropical conditions. However, this is not known at this time. (RRK, 12/2006)

Information on 'Ugli' from the UC Riverside Citrus Clonal Protection Program.

'Maltaise (demi-) sanguine' is maintained as PI 654873 (RCRC 4085) and RCRC 4224. Those records have links to additional information on 'Maltaise (demi-) sanguine' that also contain some incidental information on 'Boukhobza'. (RR Krueger, 07/08/2011)

''Bouquetier de Nice' is vigorous and upright growing. The flowers are double with a very large pistil, which gives rise to a flat fruit of medium size that is also double, having a secondary fruit deeply embedded within the primary fruit. The leaves are large, broad, and slightly tapered. See The Citrus Industry, 1967, 1:491, and Chapot, 1964, Les Bigardiers Bouquetiers, 1 Partie, Al Awamia, 10:55-95.

Important note for fans of funky fruit: this selection was chosen for introduction to the US due to the cute horned fruits observed during the ISCN post-conference tour to Corsica in 1997. However, 'Bouquetier de Nice' is consistently described and shown in the literature as having flattened fruit (also refer to the alternate cultivar name of 'Bouquetier de Nice a Fruits Plats'). It is possible that this will end up not having horned fruits. It is also possible that the Corsica selection was mislabelled and did indeed represent a corniculated selection. In any event, there are other corniculated sour oranges presently under quarantine so at some point our desire for them should be satiated. (RRK, 12/2006)

'Apopka' is not grown commercially in California nor to best knowledge in Florida. Based upon its receipt as seed, it is quite possible that it was never considered a cultivar in Florida. In a trial at Lindcove Field Station (Tulare County, California), 'Apopka' was compared with established California navel budlines. "Although ['Apopka'] had the largest total yield, its small fruit size effectively rules it out as a commercially useful strain for California. It is similar to the high-acid navel variant which was a considerable problem in California in the 1960's..." (Nauer et al, 1985) (RR Krueger, 03/17/2008)

"The first fairly complete description of this species, under the name Citrus japonica, was published in 1784 by Thunberg in his Flora japonica; it reads in translation, as follows: "petiole winged, leaves acute, shrubby stem. Japanese: Kin Kan, vulgo Fime tats banna, Kaempf., Am. ex., Fase. V. p. 801. Growing here and there, often cultivated for its little fruits. Stem shrubby, compressed-subangulate, erect, glabrous, scarcely a foot high. Branches and branchlets alternate, compressed-angular, spinose, glabrous, erect, green. Spines solitary, in the axils of the leaves, erect divergent. Leaves few, with winged petioles, ovate, somewhat acute, entire, somewhat concave, glabrous, dark green above, paler below, erect, spreading, 1 in. [2.5 cm] long, with very minute glands ('poris'). Petioles winged. 1 line [2 mm] long. Flowers axillary, often solitary, rarely paired, pediculate, nodding. Pedicels glabrous, hanging down, 1 line [2 mm] long. Parianth, 1-phyllous, green, glabrous, minute, 5-toothed. Petals 5, white, oblong, somewhat concave, spreading, somewhat claw-like. Filaments 19, subulate, compressed, erect, in 5 more or less coherent bundles, connate, forming a cylinder, shorter than the corolla, nearly equal in length, white. Anthers oblong, small, yellow. Ovary superior, subglobose, glabrous. Style solitary, cylindrical, slightly shorter than the stamens, greenish white. Stigma simple, globose, yellow, striate, many-locular within. Fruit with fleshy peel, vesicular pulp, 9-locular [sic], the size of a cherry. Differs from the other species of Citrus especially in being a very small shrub with minute fruits; thus it can scarcely be considered as a variety of orange. It resembles Citrus medica in the axillary flowers, but differs in the winged petioles; it differs from the orange in the axillary flowers, which are solitary or paired, never in panicles. Fruit ripens in December and January, is very sweet, agreeable and edible."
"This description was evidently drawn from a very small plant, perhaps an artificially dwarfed one, such as are commonly grown in Japan. The very small leaves with axillary spines, and the fruits "the size of a cherry" strongly indicate that Thunberg was describing the round kumquat and not the oval kumquat (F. margarita). His plate of this plant published in 1800 shows a flowering twig with small leaves and well-developed axillary spines.
"Hume (1903 and 1926) described this species as follows:
"'Tree similar to Nagami [F. margarita], except that it is slightly thorny, and has the leaves somewhat smaller and rounder at the apex. Leaves oval; apex obtuse; margin crenate halfway down the length; veins slightly more conspicuous than in Nagami; borne on short rigid, inconspicuously winged petioles, 1/4 to 1/2 in. [6-13 mm] in length. Fruit spherical or somewhat oblate, 1 to 1 1/4 inches [2.5-3 cm] in diameter; golden yellow, short stalked; calyx small; rind smooth, thin, spicy to the taste and aromatic when bruised; oil cells large; pulp sparse; juice acid; sections four to seven; seeds one to three, small, oval, greenish; cotyledons two, greenish. Season same as Nagami.'" (Swingle and Reece, 1967, pp 331-332)

Information compiled by TJ Siebert. (RR Krueger, 06/03/2011)

Information and nice pictures from the UC Riverside Citrus Variety Collection

Information and nice pictures from CCPP

"[Australian navel orange] has been used indiscriminately to designate several navel orange types, all of which are very vigorous, upright growers, but shy bearers of rough, coarse fruits. The name was first applied unwittingly to a navel orange introduced from Australia which supposedly was the superior Brazilian orange that we now know as the Washington navel. Owing to the vigorous tree growth of these worthless strains, they were unintentionally propagated extensively before methods of bud selection based on fruit character and yield were introduced." (Webber, 1943, p 526-527)

"In general, the fruits are smaller than Washington, flatter in form, and sometimes broadly pointed at the apex. The navel is smaller and more deeply embedded, and the rind is thicker and rougher. The flesh is softer in texture and commonly juicier than Washington, and the season of maturity is considerably later, the flavor remaining tart until late in the season...The origin of this type of navel orange is obscure, but it is known to have gone from Brazil to Australia, from whence it was probably taken to California and South Africa. It may have originated in Brazil, as did the Washington variety, but it seems more likely to have been taken to Brazil from Portugal where a navel orange variety has long existed (Risso and Poiteau, 1818-22)." (Hodgson, 1967)

(RRK, 08/2007)

Although this accession was sanitized and released from quarantine by NCGRCD, it was given to CCPP for VI processing. (RR Krueger, 05/31/2018)

This accession tested clean at NCGRCD as I2000-17. It was given to CCPP in order to get a VI and be accessible to California residents. More information is available in Swingle and Robinson (1923) (RR Krueger, 06/10/2017)

Based upon ISSR, a nucellar seedling was selected. Trees were propagated from this seedling and planted in the field for observation. The fruit matched the description and it was decided to officially accession this variety. (RRK, 08/2007)

'Ambersweet' is PI 539648. PI 600671 was mistakenly assigned. When the mistake was noticed, PI 600671 was inactivated. PI 539648 should be used for 'Ambersweet'.

General descriptions of 'Ambersweet' can be found in the citations below: Anonymous (1989), Tucker et al (1998), Jackson and Futch (2003), and Saunt (2000). 'Ambersweet' was originally released as a dual use "orange" for processing and fresh market. It has the advantages of being early (mid-October - December in Florida) and moderately cold-hardy. It is interesting that extensive studies had to be done in order to classify this complex hybrid as an "orange" for processing purposes (see citations below). After being extensively planted in Florida early in its release life, various problems became apparent. As stated by Tucker et al (1998): "Trees up to six years old in commercial plantings have produced relatively low yields of poor quality fruit. However, the outlook for both production and quality improves with age especially where irrigation and nuitrition programs are carefully managed...Rooststock selection, precise cultural management and innovative marketing are some of the keys to the successof Ambersweet as a commercial variety." As per Jackson and Futch (2003): "Fruit produced on trees in solid plantings of Ambersweet are likely to be nearly seedless, while trees in mixed plantings are usually seedy due to the influence of cross pollinators. Yields of Ambersweet have proven to be commercially unsatisfactory and many plantings have been removed or topworked to more desirable varieties...Low yields and poor juice quality have relegated this variety to the dooryard...Some Ambersweet trees...have been slow starters. Trees sometimes languish for several years before commencing anticipated growth normal for a young citrus tree." Consequently "Ambersweet's potential in Florida now looks far from certain...It is losing popularlity and few plantings have been made in recent years" (Saunt, 2000, p22). See also Albrigo et al (2001) for more on the pollination issues. Teetter (1999) offers an interesting perspective on these problems from the breeder. (RR Krueger, 11/11/2010)

Fruit quality data and additional information is available from CCPP.

Information from CCPP is available here.

Note: This should not be confused with the acidless Imperiale from Spain. (WP Bitters, ca 1980?)

This accession had exocortis and probably seedling yellows, removed by shoot tip grafting (STG 60-1). (EM Nauer, 1985)

Fruit is variegated, having corregated rind with varying color stripes; flavor is fair. Might have ornamental potential. (EM Nauer, 03/23/1987)

Fruit has pretty good flavor but moderately seedy. Will plan to enter this accession to a new VI and move to the Lindcove foundation block. (EM Nauer, 01/13/1988)

Was entered as VI 473in fall 1988 but had psorosis; put into Thermo, which plants did not push well. Sched to re-enter in 1990. (EM Nauer, 11/1989)

This accession was mistakenly given PI 600658. When the error was discovered, PI 600658 was inactivated. PI 539606 should be used. (RR Krueger, 11/10/2010)

View Fruit quality data and other information from the CCPP.

"'Lemonquat' (TR 26) is a chance hybrid found at Beeville and tested at Crystal City, Texas...The 'lemonquat' has value for backyard culture in areas where standard lemons are injured by cold, since it has acid fruit, is cold-hardy, and blooms several times a year. It can be propagated as cuttings." (Olson and Sleeth, 1965)

"The fruit of this Lemonquat are very similar to those of Sunquat which suggests to us that this is another mandaquat (perhaps it has Clementine or Dancy tangerine as a parent). Circa 1981, Chapman suggested such a possibility and Mortensen agreed that the Rio Grande Valley Lemmonquat could also be a mandaquat." (Loeblich and Walden, 1993)

At the time of donation, Dr Loeblich reiterated his belief that this accession is probably a "mandaquat". Olson and Sleeth (1965) recommend as a rootstock 'Cleopatra' mandarin or calamondin. (RRK, 08/2007)

SSR maker analysis, performed in the laboratory of Prof Mikeal Roose, University of California, Riverside by summer intern Leonardo Lara indicated that all three accessions are genetically identical. A total of 12 trees from the 3 accessions were identical at all loci using 9 markers. This is interesting, as all are seedlings and C halimii is monoembryonic (Stone et al, 1973). I recall a number of years ago, somebody from Florida (possibly Fred Gmitter) called asking about this, as all their seedlings appeared to be identical. Indeed.

It therefore appears that all C halimii at Riverside are identical. As noted by Ed Nauer, it does not do well under our Riverside conditions. When planted in Irvine, the trees do somewhat better but are still sensitive to Southern California winter temperatures. They do, however, set fruit and seed. (RR Krueger, 02/26/2013)

Information and lovely pictures of PI 539196 [= RCRC 3780] from the University of California, Riverside Citrus Variety Collection are available here.

This accession appears identical to [PI 539554] - Moro. See notes this date [on records for PI 238796 and PI 539554. (EM Nauer, 2/4/1988

Nucellar Moro (PI 539554) appears to be identical to this one, why keep both? (EM Nauer, 10/1988)

Why indeed? PI 539442 is the VI'ed budline. It is not clear why Bill Bitters made this seedling selection but, as Ed Nauer stated, it does appears superfluous and is therefore inactivated. Never the less, additional information andpictures are available from the UC Riverside Citrus Variety Collection. (RR Krueger, 07/03/2015)

According to Soost et al (1961) (both citations), "The Frost Navel originated as a nucellar seedling obtained in 1917 by Dr HB Frost, from a Washington Nvel tree growing in the Rubidoux Tract property of the Citrus Experinment Station in Riverside. The parent tree was not especially selected for fruit quality or yield, but was one of several varieties used for a general study of juvenility and senescence in citrus. Four budded trees were planted in 1933 on the station grounds. These, and four other trees set out in 1942, have provided budwood which has been distributed to nurserymena and growers for trial since 1947."

Hodgson (1967) (pp 480-481) states that "Frost Washington is the first, and currently much the most important, nucellar budline of the Washington navel. It was originated by HB Frost, the geneticist and breeder, at the California Citrus Research Center, Riverside, from a controlled cross made in 1916. It was not released until 1952, however. Since that time its popularity has increased until it is now more widely planted in California, Arizona, and Morocco than any other clonal selection of Washington."

'Frost Washington' is known to decline when budded onto trifoliate rootstocks (Schneider and Pehrson, 1985). (Note: As per BIll Bitters in archival material maintained at NCGRCD, the title of the cited paper is misleading since the only navels examined were Frost nucellars). Frost Washington nucellar is less planted currently than at the time of the citations due to the availability of sanitized old line 'Washington' (maintained as PI 539360. (RR Krueger, 05/2011)

Information and nice pictures of 'Frost Washington' from the UC Riverside Citrus Variety Collection.

Information and fruit quality data from the Citrus Clonal Protection Program.

Additional information is available in the release notice (citation below) and from the UC Riveside Citrus Variety Collection. (RR Krueger, 12/31/2012)

Additional information is availalbe in the release notice (citation below) and from the UC Riveside Citrus Variety Collection. (RR Krueger, 12//31/2012)

"Maybe similar to CRC # 3193. See page 40 -- Citrus Fruits of Assam." (WP Bitters, 1971[?])

"A long axis type of Mexican lime. Polyembryonic. (50 seeds planted, 35 germ., 11 multiples.)

"Very firm fruit with slightly thicker rind than Mexican lime; would be difficult to squeeze for juice. About as seedy as Mexican lime" (EM Nauer, 11/09/1987)

"From Malaysia. Long axis Mexican lime type, rind thicker than Mexican, as seedy as Mexican, green turns to yellow at maturity in RIverside climate, flesh color green --> yellow, polyembryonic." (TE Williams, ca 1988)

"The lime in general has not assumed any commercial importance in Assam, although there is immense scope for its cultivation. Of the two varieties of lime, Abhayapuri variety occupies a considerable area and is particularly found to grow in PAthsala, Pathasarkuchi, Bongaigaon and Abhayapuri in the district of Goalpara. This variety mostly predominates in the Assam Valley, although round type of lime is not altogether absent. Most of the production finds its way into Calcutta and Gauhati markets where demand for lime is very great. Being prolific and having comparatively bigger fruits this variety is particularly recommended for large scale production. It is extensively used for various culinary uprposes and for preparing pickles, chutneys and sherbet.

The variety is very much susceptible to gummosis, scab and canker and as such control measures are always essential for successful cultivation. Lime is suppsoed to be short lived and the yield decreases progressively with advancing age. Regular cultural treatments, especially manuring, are necessary to keep up the high level of production. Propagation is generally carried out by marcottage or air layering and occasionally by seeds". (Bhattacharya and Dutt, 1956, pp 40-41; this source also contains an extensive description of the fruit and tree characteristics)

USDA 88-2 is an early season, small- to madium-sized mandarin hybrid that is easy-to-peel, seedless, and has good flavor and color. (RRK, 04/2007)

Yelenosky et al (1995) found this genotype to be more cold tolerant than some other experimental hybrids. Trees in the Lake Wales area were only slightly injured during the 1989 freeze. This genotype is considered "moderately cold hardy" by the authors. (RR Krueger, 02/06/2009)

Pictures of USDA 88-2 are available from the UC Riverside Citrus Varieties Collection and fruit quality data is available from the UC Riverside Citrus Clonal Protection Program.

USDA 88-3 is an early season, medium-sized mandarin hybrid with good flavor and color. However, it is quite seedy with an average of about 15 seeds per fruit. (RRK, 04/2007)

Pictures of USDA 88-3 are available from the UC Riverside Citrus Varieties Collection and fruit quality data is available from the UC Riverside Citrus Clonal Protection Program.

Genotype is the derived from PI 227929. See also the original Plant Inventory record. This was one of eight PI's (PI 227929 - PI 227936) of 'Shamouti' received as budwood at the same time from the same source. One cultivar name on file, 'Shamouti Israeli seedling #1', may refer to the fact that the different trees were seedlings in Israel.; however, this is not known. The source history of this accession is somewhat conjectural. It was apparently received by PIO, but how it got form there to California is not documented as far as known. There is a 'Shamouti' maintained by the USDA-ARS US Horticultural Research Laboratory and it is possible that it went from PIO to USHRL and from there to Riverside; however, this is not known. It does not appear to have gone to the US Date and Citrus Station in Indio before going to Lindcove. In any case, it was apparently rquarantined and released by USDA, then planted at Lindcove before being indexed and released by CCPP and moved to Riverside. CCPP archival materials definitely state that the source of the original tree at Lindcove was PI 227929. For more information, see the source mentioned by Ed Nauer and noted below. (RR Krueger, 11/10/2010)

View fruit quality data and other information from the CCPP.

View nice fotos and more information from the Citrus Variety Collection.

All propagations dead. De-accessioned (inactivated) (RRK, 03/19/2009)

Fruit compared with VI 413 Sanguinelli. VI 413 has better internal color by far -- This one is discarded forthwith. (EM Nauer, 02/1990)

Ed's reference to CRC 3828 and to VI 413 refer to the same genotype, maintained as PI 539552. PI 539555 was apparently received at CCPP, compared in the screenhouse as per Ed, and discarded as being inferior. Apparently it still existed at the time the PI was assigned in 1990 but was never included in the collection. This record was added for competeness. (RR Krueger, 09/27/2010)

This was in the same shipment of whatever from China (see CRC 3981 accession card) but Dr. Bitters wants this one in the variety collection. Our current C. erythrosa (CRC 3292)) traces back to an o. p. seedling and may not be true-to-type. (EM Nauer, 04/1988)

Dr. Bitters says this is incompatible on Troyer and Carrizo, so we will propagate it on Cleo (probably). However, the seedling line of C. erythrosa (CRC 3292) is thriving on Carrizo and C35 at 12B-29-15,16. How so? Perhaps it is not true C. erythrosa. C. erythrosa is supposed to be cold tolerant, similar to Changsha mandarin (according to USDA info which came with this import). (EM Nauer, 08/1989)

This was received as C. erythrosa with the cultivar name 'Caoshixiangju' and the apparent Institute identifier "1-11-12". Apparently someone in Riverside decided that since it had the same binomial as PI 539190 (= RCRC 3292) it must be identical and so applied the same Japanese cultivar name 'Kobeni mikan'. However, the actual identity of this accession with PI 539190 is unknown and the cultivar name 'Caoshixiangju' should be used. Archival materials on file at NCGRCD and CVC suggest that Japanese and Chinese sources of C. erythrosa may not be identical (materials currently maintained in "Citrus Germplasm China" file). Note that this accession is still under quarantine restrictions so it cannot be evaluated or compared with anything. (RR Krueger, 08/26/2011)

1/24/90- No fruit but foliage appears lemon x citron hybrid like. (EM Nauer, 01/24/1990)

No fruit yet. (EM Nauer, 11/13/89)

This probably is pure Mexican lime. (EM Nauer, 01/14/1988)

Appears to be another Mexican lime duplicate. (EM Nauer, 10/1988)

Note received date refers to date that this was propagated from Field 21D to Field 18B. Incorporated into NCGRCD holdings at time of establishment in 1988. This has insufficient passport data and appears to be just another Mexican iime, probably a seedling of another accession. We already have several other Mexican limes and PI 539151 (RCRC 1710) is the one usually distributed as an indicator. Therefore, this accession is inactivated. (RR Krueger, 05/16/2011)

View information and fotos of this accession from the University of California, Riverside Citrus Variety Collection.

No fruit yet. (EM Nauer, 11/1989)

The origins of this accession are somewhat unclear. There is a series of Chinese materials that were received as both budwood through the Plant Germplasm Quarantine Office in Beltsville and subsequently CCPP and as seed directly to Bob Soost (and possibly people in Florida). However, there is no current active budwood-derived accession of 'Goutoucheng'. RRUT 149 is an accession derived from budwood during this same exchange but it is currently under quarantine. The current active accession of 'Goutoucheng' is PI 539173. PI 539173 is pathogen tested and available both through the NCGRCD and with a VI number through the CCPP. There is another inactive accessions of 'Goutoucheng': RRUT 80. PI 539170, PI 539173, and RRUT 80 all appeared identical via ISSR markers (Krueger and Roose, 2003), so there is no need for more than one active accession. PI 539170 was therefore inactivated. RRUT 149 appeared to be quite different via the markers and also morphologically. It is possible that it was misidentified at some point. (RR Krueger, 05/24/2011)

Also came in as budwood import, see CRC 3983 [= PI 539645]. (EM Nauer, 01/1989)

The whole story on these (CRC 3981-3985) imports is that they came in as both budwood and seed is that the seed went to Dr Soost in 1985; the budwood went to Glenn Dale in 1985 and increase budwood came here in 1987 and went into CCPP for processing. However, in the meantime, Dr Soost grew seedlings in the greenhouse but did not inform anyone in CCPP that this material was there until he retired in 1987 and the seedling budlines were propagated for the variety collection. (EM Nauer, 01/1989, from record for PI 539172)
Note: The seed sources RCRC 3981-3985 = PI 539172, PI 539644, PI 539645, PI 539646, PI 539647 and the budwood sources RCRC 3981 = PI 539171, RCRC 3983 = PI 539641, RCRC 3984 = PI 539642, RCRC 3985 = PI 539643.

Original USDA spec sheet says this has "high total soluble solids." (EM Nauer, 06/1989)

Additional info re Jincheng received from Dr Bitters this month: This is called 'Brocade orange', also 'S26'. This variety is at No 1 place on sweet oranges recommended for Sichuan Province. All its characteristics and origin are similar to those of Xianfengcheng [PI 539644] but for differences in fruit shape (more oblong) and rind color (darker reddish-orange). 168 g per fruit, solids 12.2 %, 8 seeds per fruit; ripens earlier than Xianfengcheng, stored until May. (EM Nauer, 08/1989)

No fruit yet. (EM Nauer, 11/13/1989)

The active accession of 'Jincheng' is PI 539645, which was received as budwood and has been sanitized. This accession (PI 539641) was received as seed and was not sanitized, so there is no reason to maintain it and it is inactivated. (RR Krueger, 05/25/2011)

The whole story on these (CRC 3981-3985) imports is that they came in as both budwood and seed is that the seed went to Dr Soost in 1985; the budwood went to Glenn Dale in 1985 and increase budwood came here in 1987 and went into CCPP for processing. However, in the meantime, Dr Soost grew seedlings in the greenhouse but did not inform anyone in CCPP that this material was there until he retired in 1987 and the seedling budlines were propagated for the variety collection. (EM Nauer, 01/1989, from record for PI 539172) Note: The seed sources RCRC 3981-3985 = PI 539172, PI 539644, PI 539645, PI 539646, PI 539647 and the budwood sources RCRC 3981 = PI 539171, RCRC 3983 = PI 539641, RCRC 3984 = PI 539642, RCRC 3985 = PI 539643.

Original USDA spec sheet says this has "high total soluble solids." (EM Nauer, 06/1989)

Additional info re Xuegan received from Dr Bitters this month: A sweet orange variety, originated in Fijian Province. 120 - 140 grams per fruit, SS 11 - 13.5 %, acid 0.65 - 0.9, ripens Nov - Dec. Too many seeds (14 - 18 per fruit). (EM Nauer, 08/1989)

No fruit yet. (EM Nauer, 11/1989)

The active accession of 'Xuegan' is PI 539646. PI 539646 was received as budwood and has been sanitized. Therefore, there is no reason to maintain PI 539642 and it is inactivated. (RR Krueger, 05/26/2011)

The whole story on these (CRC 3981-3985) imports is that they came in as both budwood and seed is that the seed went to Dr Soost in 1985; the budwood went to Glenn Dale in 1985 and increase budwood came here in 1987 and went into CCPP for processing. However, in the meantime, Dr Soost grew seedlings in the greenhouse but did not inform anyone in CCPP that this material was there until he retired in 1987 and the seedling budlines were propagated for the variety collection. (EM Nauer, 01/1989, from record for PI 539172).
Note: The seed sources RCRC 3981-3985 = PI 539172, PI 539644, PI 539645, PI 539646, PI 539647 and the budwood sources RCRC 3981 = PI 539171, RCRC 3983 = PI 539641, RCRC 3984 = PI 539642, RCRC 3985 = PI 539643.

Original USDA spec sheet says this has "low acid". (EM Nauer, 06/1989)

Additional info re Xinhuicheng received from Dr Bitters this month: A sweet orange variety which originated in Fujian Province (Canton). An acidless orange. 110 - 113 g per fruit, SS 13 - 16 %, sugar 11 - 15 %, acid 0.1 - 0.7 %. Ripe Nov - Dec. (EM Nauer, 08/1989)

No fruit. Both trees chlorotic and beginning to self-defoliate. Incompatibility? Phytophthora? Need to repropagate on Ro lemon at Rubidoux to save budline. (EM Nauer, 12/1989)

In fact, the trees were not repropagated on rough lemon but rather on citranges but not until 2005 - 2006, even though one tree did die as of 2001.. Never the less, since this was received as seed and PI 539647 was received as budwood and has been sanitized, PI 539643 is inactivated and PI 539647 is the active accession of 'Xinhuicheng'. (RR Krueger, 05/27/2011)

Citrus halimii was published as a new Citrus species by Stone et al (1973) although, according to Bill Bitters (letter dated April 15, 1983 on file to David Jones) "No way can [Ben Stone] convince me that C halimii is a valid species". Indeed. There are currently 3 accessions of Citrus halimii maintained at Riverside: PI 539196, PI 539197, and PI 600639. Information on archival accession card states the source of PI 539196 as "Scora - Malaysia". However, Stone et al (1973), after listing locations of specimens examined, state "In 1971 Lowry and Scora visited the Genting Sempah tree...some seedlings have been grown at the Citrus Research Center, University of California, Riverside." Therefore, information from Stone et al (1973) has been incorporated into the Source information. PI 539197 and PI 600639, although donated at different times by different persons, are apparently from the same source.

SSR maker analysis, performed in the laboratory of Prof Mikeal Roose, University of California, Riverside by summer intern Leonardo Lara indicated that all three accessions are genetically identical. A total of 12 trees from the 3 accessions were identical at all loci using 9 markers. This is interesting, as all are seedlings and C halimii is monoembryonic (Stone et al, 1973). I recall a number of years ago, somebody from Florida (possibly Fred Gmitter) called asking about this, as all their seedlings appeared to be identical. Indeed.

It therefore appears that all C halimii at Riverside are identical. As noted by Ed Nauer, it does not do well under our Riverside conditions. When planted in Irvine, the trees do somewhat better but are still sensitive to Southern California winter temperatures. They do, however, set fruit and seed. (RR Krueger, 02/26/2013)