Borneo red Rangpur lime
Citrus limonia Osbeck
PI 109723, 539341
Photos by Toni Siebert and David Karp, CVC. Photo rights.
Source: Received as a live plant from CPB, 1930.
View original Plant Inventory data (PDF format)
Parentage/origins: Parents unknown.
Rootstocks of accession: Yuma Ponderosa
Season of ripeness at Riverside: The main crop is winter and early spring.
Notes and observations:
This is obviously a "Rangpur Lime" type--WPB.
One plant, labelled "CPB 11845 - Borneo lemon (DWI - cutt.)" received from CPB Sept 1930. Pltd in lathouse & moved to nursery the following spring. Balled out 6/33 & pltd Fd 12-10-2. One tree budded from orignal plant, on rough lemon pltd June 1933 in Fd 12-6-15. This is a Rangpur lime type. (WP Bitters, circa 1960's)
This accession had exocorits which was removed by shoot tip grafting (STG 220-3). Rangpur is described in [Hodgson, 1967], pp 532. (EM Nauer, 1986)
See note this date on CRC 131 accession card. (EM Nauer, 1/14/1988)
This was erroneously assigned PI 539341 in the early 1990's. The observations were taken when it was designated PI 539341. (RR Krueger, 5/14/2014)
Description from The Citrus Industry Vol. 1 (1967):
" Fruit small to medium in size, variable in form but mainly depressed globose to round or broadly obovate; sometimes with furrowed collar or low neck; often with short nipple partially or entirely surrounded by a shallow furrow. Rind color yellowish to reddish-orange; thin, and moderately loose, with surface minutely pitted and smooth to slightly rough. Segments 8 to 10, loosely adherent; axis large and hollow at maturity. Flesh orange-colored; tender, juicy, and strongly acid. Seeds fairly numerous, small, highly polyembryonic, and with light green cotyledons. Fruit holds on tree for a long period.
Tree usually vigorous and productive, medium-sized, spreading and drooping, with slender twigs, comparatively few and small thorns; foliage dull-green and mandarin-like, and new shoot growth lightly purple-tinted. Flowers small and mandarin-like and buds and petals deeply purple-tinged. Hardy to cold.
The description of the Rangpur given above is generalized. Several clonal varieties of this mandarin-like fruit have been selected and named and a comparatively wide variation exists in fruit characters in regard to form, color, smoothness and adherence of rind, and acidity and flavor.
Common names used for the fruit include Rangpur in India, Canton lemon in South China, hime lemon in Japan, cravo lemon in Brazil, Japanche citroen in Java, and Rangpur lime or mandarin-lime in the United States. Other Indian names include Sylhet lime, surkh nimboo, sharbati and marmalade lime. The name lime employed in connection with this fruit is misleading and should be avoided since the only similarities between it and the true limes are that both have small flowers and because they are both highly acid can be used as substitutes.
Resemblances between the Rangpur and mandarin are obvious and numerous, and for this reason it is best included under the mandarin-like fruits. The rough lemon and Rangpur also exhibit rather close similarities and important differences.
Almost certainly of Indian origin, the Rangpur early spread throughout the Orient and to the East Indies. According to Webber (1943), it was introduced into Florida in the late nineteenth century by Reasoner Brothers of Oneco, who obtained seed from northwestern India. The Rangpur is of horticultural importance primarily as a rootstock both in the Orient and South America and as an ornamental.
The clone or clones grown in the United States correspond with the general description given above. It seems probable that one principal clone is involved, since this fruit is highly polyembryonic and reproduces remarkably true from seed. As grown elsewhere, apparently there are several rather similar clones. This appears to be the case in the Orient (Hodgson, Singh and Singh, 1963) and is suggested by the observation of minor differences in a collection of a dozen or more accessions from widely separated sources assembled in California. The differences seem to be concerned principally with the form of the fruit and nature of the rind surface.
How to Support the Collection
Page created by: Center for Visual Computing
Maintained by: email@example.com