Talk:Citrus

Reverted addition of non-citrus

Was that edit so bad that it needed to be reverted? The anonymous editor added several scientific names, and most of the entries looked genuine. Was all of it wrong? --DannyWilde 13:49, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I altered words to American spelling, with no harm meant to the author. --TKE

Merge proposals

No, Trifoliate orange and Kumquat should not be merged with Citrus. Melchoir 02:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Fortunella and Poncirus are distinct genera and should have separate articles. — TheKMan^talk 02:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, on the basis of genetic evidence these two genera should be merged into Citrus (refs: Mabberley, D. J. 1997. A classification for edible Citrus (Rutaceae). Telopea 7 (2): 167–172; Mabberley, D. J. 1998. Australian Citreae (Rutaceae) with notes on other Aurantioideae (Rutaceae). Telopea 7: 333–344.). That doesn't mean that their wiki pages should also be merged, as they remain distinct species within an expanded genus Citrus, though they should be linked from here in the Citrus species list. Something I've been meaning to do for a while, but it's a big editing job! - MPF 13:31, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. So, does the new genus Citrus encompass the old (as in Swingle and Reece 1967) subtribe Citrinae of 13 genera, or the old tribe Citreae of 28 genera, or just the 3 we've been talking about...? Melchoir 13:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Have to check on that. Unfortunately, the Telopea website was down when I tried to access it just now (seems to happen quite often! - it maybe only operates during Australian office hours or something like that) - MPF 14:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Also de Araújo et al. (2003) What is Citrus? Taxonomic implications from a study of cp-DNA evolution in the tribe Citreae (Rutaceae subfamily Aurantioideae). Organisms Diversity & Evolution 3 (1): 55-62 abstract (unfortunately one of those annoying journals where you have to fork out your life savings to get an 8 page article :-(( so I'll not be able to read it - MPF 22:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Editing Citrus

It has come to my attention that every time I edit this article someone reverts it to its original state. The changes I made were the following:

Species Citrus maxima - Pomelo Citrus medica - Citron Citrus reticulata - Mandarin & Tangerine Citrus aurantifolia - Key lime**

Cultivated Citrus may be derived from as few as four** ancestral species.

Prior to human cultivation, the genus Citrus originated in Southeast Asia and consisted of just a few species:

• Citrus maxima, the pummelo, from the Malay archipelago
• Citrus medica, the citron, from India
• Citrus reticulata, the mandarin and similar, from China
• Citrus aurantifolia, the key lime, from India**
• Citrus halimii, a more recent discovery, from Thailand and Malaya

The parts that I changed are denoted by two asterisks. It's OK that they change it. The point is to make Wikipedia the best Encyclopedia possible. However, I would like that person to be aware of the following:

I have only seen ONE source that classifies Citrus aurantifolia as a hybrid. All other sources that I have seen classify it as a pure species & one of the wild four (without Citrus halimii even being mentioned). Also it is official that the genera Microcitrus & Eremocitrus are now classified by most Botanists as part of the genus Citrus. I'm not shure if the same can be said for Poncirus & Fortunella. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.237.255.79 (talk • contribs)

Can you provide scientific references for the acceptance of C. aurantifolia as a species, please? I'll be happy to have it so listed, once the evidence is there - thanks, MPF 22:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Index Kewensis (fide ipni.org). It was named as a species, and there is no evidence either that (1) it has a published nothotaxon name, or (2) that it is actually a nothotaxon (the Nicolosi abstract says that genetic evidence shows the species to be of hybrid origin, which is not the same thing as being a nothotaxon. (I'd be happy to go on at length, because hybrid speciation is my research specialty.) If it weren't for Mabberley's (IMO mistaken) use of the name, I'd pass it off as original research. At any rate, if C. aurantifolia does in fact grow in the wild, it is not a nothospecies, whether it is of hybrid origin or not.--Curtis Clark 23:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

References

Morton, J. 1987. Mexican Lime. p. 168–172. In: Fruits of warm climates. Julia F. Morton, Miami, FL http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/morton/mexican_lime.html

In this work it does not directly state that it is a pure species, but it can be deduced from certain clues that the author percieves it to be one.

Examples: The Mexican lime grows wild in the warm valleys of the Himalayas and is cultivated not only in the lowlands but up to an elevation of 4,000 ft (1,200 m).

According to this Key Limes can be found in the wild. To the extent of my knowledge there are no wild hybrid citrus. Also this website has other citrus pages and they specify if it's a hybrid and how it originated.

I don't know about that... anyway, the reference is 1987. In the 2002 collection Citrus (in the article References), none of the authors claim aurantifolia as a species. Melchoir 03:50, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

They may not claim it as a species, but do they claim it as a hybrid? I would like a reference if you can give one. By the way, Clymenia polyandra & Oxanthera neocaledonica are sometimes classified as citrus. Can someone give me their point-of-view on either subject? 06:37, 24 June 2006

Mabberley (1997; A classification for edible Citrus (Rutaceae). Telopea 7 (2): 167–172) treats C. × aurantiifolia [s.i.c.] as a hybrid, one parent C. maxima, the other unknown, probably also hybrid. The other two, have to wait until the Telopea website is up again (I forgot to save a copy of Mabberley's second paper when I looked at it online) - MPF 17:52, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not shure I'm comvinced, but then I'm not a professional botanist. I will leave you to decide on the proper classification but I would get the opinion of a few more people before conforming to either classification scheme. Good luck with the article.

The Telopea site is accessible again; the two Mabberley papers can be found here:

• [1] Mabberley, D. J. 1997. A classification for edible Citrus (Rutaceae). Telopea 7 (2): 167–172
• [2] Mabberley, D. J. 1998. Australian Citreae (Rutaceae) with notes on other Aurantioideae (Rutaceae). Telopea 7: 333–344.

MPF 22:56, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Mirrors my confusion. This article gives the Persion lime and Key lime as hybrids, but click on those 'hybrid' names and you get to artocles where the fruit is a full species - what is the current reality?? --Dumarest 19:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea, but if you find out let me know.

Well, for all. I am tempted o use the http://www.plantnames.unimelb.edu.au/Sorting/Citrus_1.html site to go through this article and edit so that all the species names are consistent according to what is 'correct' [if this site is the gospel]. Comments please???? --Dumarest 00:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

It would be a lot more helpful to describe, within the article, the range of treatments popular in the scientific community and the evidence that contributes to those understandings. For that, I wouldn't trust any website; who knows how it was assembled? Melchoir 02:16, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Consistency is the hobgoblin of petty minds, it is said. But I am feeling petty. I think that a consistent classification of Citrus here and in the linked species pages would be correct for Wikipedia, and there are more than one current analyses of the state of such classification. I am looking at taking a full modern current analysis, describing its premises, and 'consistent-izing' the applicable pages. Is this a good thing to do? opinions welcome. --Dumarest 13:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Nomenclature question

In the list of species, many have something like this # Grapefruit, C. × paradisi

Now, out of ingnorance, what does that mean? I assume a hybrid, one of which is C. paradisi, the other something, but it confuses me. --Dumarest 13:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

You are right. Those species which carry an x before the name are hybrids. Citrus x paradisi is a hybrid of C. maxima & C. x sinensis(C. reticulata x C. maxima)

That is equally confusing. Your answer has nowhere in it the word 'paradisi' except as a mix of maxima and sinensis or of reticulata and maxima. Still leaves me blubbering. --Dumarest 20:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

paradisi is a name which was originally coined when the plant was believed to be a species or subspecies. If just a hybrid then the 'x' comes in...Cas Liber 23:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Ponderosa lemon

Ive recently made the article ponderosa lemon but I was unsure about the the latin name. Ive put it as C.limon at the moment but i dont know. Any ideas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjwebb (talk • contribs)

How about Citrus medica × Citrus ×limon?--Curtis Clark 13:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for, that ive changed it to what you suggested. --Bjwebb (talk) 17:50, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Citrus peel extract

Does anyone here have any idea about which compunds are present in the extract of Orange peels?Perhaps it varies with the species,but i am not very sure about it.Akshaysrinivasan

"ripen time" too narrow, imo. needs editing for growing locale?

the HP (consumer gardening books publisher) _Citrus_ has ripening time range charts. and IIRC if in coastal climate, with collection of certain cvs of citrus, you can have some ripening throughout the year (or near that). Lance Walheim (UC Riverside www.google.com/search?q=Lance+Walheim+UC+Riverside) contributed to the book, so i think the ripen charts should be accurate (excepting possible publishing errors!) --2z2z 09:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

add calamansi to 'limeade' sentence in 'culinary' section?

http://www.google.com/search?q=calamansi+juice+rop+%7C+pilipino+%7C+philippines or is calamansi juice too regional? --2z2z 14:10, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Kinnow

Kinnow needs taxobox and species. Badagnani 17:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Triphasia trifolia

The citrus relative Triphasia trifolia needs taxobox and more info. Badagnani 02:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Shatkora info needed

The shatkora, a Bengali lime-like citrus fruit, needs an article and species name. Badagnani 20:16, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Got it--it's Citrus macroptera. Badagnani (talk) 23:32, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Citrus taxonomy

Can anyone tell me which citrus are hybrids (or have hybrid ancestors) and which are naturally evolved species? And what are the ancestors of the hybrids & hybrid species? I'd appreciate it if someone filled in the blanks, and added "species" if there were any more (No complex, recent & completely domestic hybrids like the clementine or the eremolemon). - Wyvern J. Wynderunner 21:50, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

• • Citrus species - Hybrid ancestors 1 & 2 (if applicable)/Pure species, synonymy with other species (if applicable).
• Citrus reticulata -
• Citrus maxima -
• Citrus medica -
• Citrus aurantifolia -
• Citrus latifolia -
• Citrus limon -
• Citrus jambhiri -
• Citrus volkameriana -
• Citrus limetta -
• Citrus limettioides -
• Citrus limonia -
• Citrus ponderosa -
• Citrus meyeri -
• Citrus unshiu -
• Citrus deliciosa -
• Citrus nobilis -
• Citrus reshni -
• Citrus aurantium -
• Citrus bergamia -
• Citrus sinensis -
• Citrus paradisi -
• Citrus natsudaidai -
• Citrus tachibana -
• Citrus amblycarpa -
• Citrus depressa -
• Citrus sudachi -
• Citrus lumia -
• Citrus macrophylla -
• Citrus macroptera -
• Citrus taiwanica -
• Citrus ichangensis -
• Citrus hystrix -
• Citrus (Poncirus) trifoliata -
• Citrus (Clymenia) polyandra -
• Citrus (Fortunella) polyandra -
• Citrus (Fortunella) hindsii -
• Citrus (Fortunella) japonica -
• Citrus (Fortunella) margarita -
• Citrus (Fortunella) crassifolia -
• Citrus (Fortunella) obovata -
• Citrus (Eremocitrus) glauca -
• Citrus (Microcitrus) garrawayi -
• Citrus (Microcitrus) australasica -
• Citrus (Microcitrus) inodora -
• Citrus (Microcitrus) gracilis -
• Citrus (Microcitrus) australis
• Citrus (Microcitrus) waburgiana -
• Citrus (Microcitrus) wintersii -

Need species name

The Vietnamese cam sành (whose rind is bright green, but flesh is bright orange)^photo is variously called C. nobilis, C. reticulata, and C. sinensis, as well as various hybrids of the aforementioned species. Does anyone have solid information on which of these is correct? Badagnani 07:23, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Article created at Cam sành. Badagnani 21:19, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review for Category:Japanese citrus

See Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 November 26 Badagnani (talk) 19:11, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Inconsistent Hybrid Nomenclature

I posted this over on Limequat, but thought there might be more attention paid to this page, and I assume that the problems I note below might apply to the many other hybrid citruses.

Limequat is listed as "Species: Citrus X Fortunella", which is a hybrid formula for a genus, not a species. Citrofortunella is another way to describe the hybrid genus, with limequat listed on that page as "Citrofortunella x floridana". List of Rutaceae genera doesn't include hybrid genera (e.g. Citrofortunella). Kumquat treats Fortunella as a subgenus of Citrus (in which case, the limequat genus would be a pretty straightforward "Citrus"). Obviously, the hybrid citruses can be named in a number of ways, but it would be good to pick a consistent standard (i.e., using either hybrid formula "Citrus x Fortunella" or condensed formula "Citrofortunella"), as well as making sure taxonomy is consistent across different (e.g., not having "Fortunella" listed as a subgenus on some pages and a genus on others) 63.78.97.2 (talk) 22:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Shatkora

I see no mention here of an Indian citrus fruit named Shatkora. It is a culinary favourite amongst people of the Indian subcontinent [3] and is perhaps worth including. Saajan99 (talk) 14:32, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Citrus inflorescences - cymes?

It is my understanding that Citrus inflorescences (at least C. sinensis) are cymose and not corymbs. This is also stated in "Biology of Citrus" by P. Spiegel-Roy and E.E. Goldschmidt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.23.2.37 (talk) 22:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Producers

The ranking of countries by citrus fruit production is shockingly wrong. Just look for the separated production ranking of each fruit, it simply doesn't match. If you take the features for orange, you can see that a lot of countries that are not on the list here (like Brazil, USA, Mexico) produce more oranges than the total citrus fruits that Nigeria (the 1st ranked here) produces. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.55.122.187 (talk) 17:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Citrus Fruits and Essential Oils

Another important use of citrus fruits is the production of essential oils and this is not mentioned at all; in fact the presence of these volatile compounds in the exocarp is one of the hallmark features of a hesperidium! Seems a very big thing to overlook! These essential oils are used for all sorts of purposes, from aromatherapy (medicine) to household cleaners (remember orange-GLO, everyone?). I'm not sure how I would write this section myself, but I thought I would make note of it so those of you who are more savvy about Wikipedia's editing policies and such can work on it. 75.167.112.163 (talk) 00:57, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Naartjie

The recent addition of this "cultivar" brings up a larger problem. I've changed the Naartjie page to update the taxonomy, but there is quite a tangle here. I've requested that the redirect at Citrus unshiu be deleted, so that Satsuma (fruit) can be moved there. Hopefully we'll soon be able to achieve a readable and detailed account of this species. Nadiatalent (talk) 14:51, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Revision of species naming

The Plant list, produced by Kew and Missouri Botanical Gardens, has placed many of the old style hybrids listed in this article as separate species, based on WCSP reviews, see http://www.theplantlist.org/browse/A/Rutaceae/Citrus/. Therefore should we not follow these authoritative sources and edit both the names in the article and the titles of the relevant other articles. It would be nice to see plants treated as plants first and as items occasionally used for people as subsidiary to that.Brunswicknic (talk) 14:09, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Cedar Cone

I removed the text on the use of a cedar cone during sukkot. Other than this one book, which does not reference a primary source, I was unable to further verify this claim. Ehgarrick (talk) 21:51, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Citrus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101005084855/http://www.unctad.org/infocomm/anglais/orange/characteristics.htm to http://www.unctad.org/infocomm/anglais/orange/characteristics.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205061009/http://websites.lib.ucr.edu/agnic/webber/Vol1/Chapter4.html to http://websites.lib.ucr.edu/agnic/webber/Vol1/Chapter4.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040604204203/http://lib.ucr.edu/agnic/webber/ to http://lib.ucr.edu/agnic/webber/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.grcp.ucdavis.edu/publications/doc22/Appx.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060615092509/http://fundecitrus.com.br/english/menu_us.html to http://www.fundecitrus.com.br/english/menu_us.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:29, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Citrus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121003070722/http://www.botgard.ucla.edu/html/botanytextbooks/economicbotany/Citrus/b1241tx.html to http://www.botgard.ucla.edu/html/botanytextbooks/economicbotany/Citrus/b1241tx.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101120091049/http://health.ucsd.edu/news/2010/4-22-kidney-stones.htm to http://health.ucsd.edu/news/2010/4-22-kidney-stones.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080216105534/http://www.bioversityinternational.org/Publications/Pdf/501.pdf to http://www.bioversityinternational.org/Publications/Pdf/501.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.bioversityinternational.org/fileadmin/bioversity/publications/pdfs/359.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050624235046/http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/tropical/lecture_32/lec_32.html to http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/tropical/lecture_32/lec_32.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080216105526/http://www.bioversityinternational.org/Publications/Pdf/712.pdf to http://www.bioversityinternational.org/Publications/Pdf/712.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:04, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Citrus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090120155922/http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/splist.pl?2640 to http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/splist.pl?2640

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:22, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Illiterate

Bits of this are shamefully illiterate. Like the following: "King Louis XIV of France housed citrus in orangeries, to protect the tropical fruit to be grown in the 1600s France." This is meant to be an encyclopaedia, not a blog or a chat group. I'm not an expert on the subject or I'd try to clean it up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.181.141 (talk) 12:33, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Need for update of this article

I added the 2018 citation for the evolutionary origin of citrus. I am methodically going through the recent citrus literature, and finding that there is great botanical complexity, with some apparent contradictions and lack of consensus in the literature. This is perhaps reflected in this wikipedia citrus article. We need a botanist familiar with citrus genetics to help sort this out. If there were a recent comprehensive review article that incorporates the findings of Wu et al, that would be very helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbelknap (talk • contribs) 17:57, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Contested statements

@Mark Marathon: In this edit, we have two contested statements.

One concerns the native range of citrus species. User:Mark Marathon demands a citation for the statement, “Citrus plants are native to subtropical and tropical regions of Asia, Island Southeast Asia, and Near Oceania…” with explanation that the article also notes “Australasia” as the range. The citation by Wu as already given includes the “second radiation” across the Wallace Line into Australia, so I assume Australia went missing due to its lack of participation in the “first” domestication. I have reworded, and deleted any claim to “first” domestication, since the source only discusses on domestication (mandarin oranges) with no claim of that being the first.

The second avers that there is a contradiction in the statement Citrus plants diverged from a common ancestor about 15 million years ago, which was about when it diverged from the closely related severinia, for example the Chinese box orange. About 7 million years ago, citrus plants diverged into two groups, the main citrus genus and the ancestors of the trifoliate orange (Poncirus trifoliata). There is no contradiction. The article does not state that citrus originated from Severinia; it means that Citrus evolved from its ancestor Citreae about the same time that Severinia evolved from the same ancestor Citreae. Much later, Citrinae diverged into two groups: those that led to modern citrus, and those that led to Poncirus. Hence, the article does not claim that citrus originated with either Servinius or Poncirus. I have deleted the “which” template and reworded. Strebe (talk) 03:09, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Outdated reading for the archive

These "Further reading" sources are years-to-decades old, so moving here to archive. --Zefr (talk) 15:23, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

• Andrews, A.C. (1961). "Acclimatization of citrus fruits in the Mediterranean region". Agricultural History. 35 (1): 35–46.
• Araújo, De; Freitas, E.; de Queiroz, L. Paganucci; Machado, M.A. (2003). "What is Citrus? Taxonomic implications from a study of cp-DNA evolution in the tribe Citreae (Rutaceae subfamily Aurantioideae)". Organisms Diversity & Evolution. 3 (1): 55–62. doi:10.1078/1439-6092-00058.
• Duarte, A.; Fernandes, J.; Bernardes, J.; Miguel, G. 2016. Citrus as a Component of the Mediterranean Diet. Journal of Spatial and Organizational Dynamics – JSOD, IV(4): 289–304.
• Nicolosi, E.; Deng, Z.N.; Gentile, A.; La Malfa, S.; Continella, G.; Tribulato, E. (2000). "Citrus phylogeny and genetic origin of important species as investigated by molecular markers". Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 100 (8): 1155–1166. doi:10.1007/s001220051419.
• Calabrese, Francesco (2002): Origin and history. In: Dugo, Giovanni & Di Giacomo, Angelo (eds.) (2002): Citrus. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 0-415-28491-0
• Ellis, R.H.; Hong, T.D. & Roberts, E.H. (1985): Chapter 64. Rutaceae. In: Handbook of Seed Technology for Genebanks (Volume II: Compendium of Specific Germination Information and Test Recommendations). International Board for Plant Genetic Resources, Rome, Italy. HTML fulltext
• Frison, E.A. & Taher, M.M. (eds.) (1991): FAO/IBPGR Technical Guidelines for the Safe Movement of Citrus Germplasm. FAO, IOCV, IPGRI. PDF fulltext
• International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI) (1999): Descriptors for Citrus (Citrus spp.). PDF fulltext
• Luro, F.; Laigret, F.; Bové, J.M. & Ollitrault, P. (1995): RFLP analysis of cytoplasmic and nuclear genomes used for citrus taxonomy. In: Mandarines – développements scientifiques récents, résumés oraux et posters: 12–13. CIRAD-FLHOR, San Nicolao, France. HTML abstract
• Molina, A.B.; Roa, V.N.; Bay-Petersen, J.; Carpio, A.T. & Joven, J.E.A. (eds.) (2000): Citrus, Proceedings of a regional workshop on disease management of banana and citrus through the use of disease-free planting materials held in Davao City, Philippines, 14–16 October 1998. INIBAP. PDF fulltext
• Sackman. Douglas Cazaux (2005): Orange Empire: California and the Fruits of Eden.
• University of California Division of Agricultural Sciences (UC-DAS) (1967–1989): The Citrus Industry. HTML fulltext of Vol. 1, 2, & Vol. 5, Chapter 5

I don’t understand your justification. Years old? So what? (I agree the list is too long, contains tangential material, and otherwise needs curating.) Strebe (talk) 21:57, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Most of these sources are redundant with those used as references in the article, and meet several criteria of WP:ELNO. I think the Janick-Purdue source actually is good for its comprehensive images, so will replace it. --Zefr (talk) 22:30, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

The K-word is offensive in South Africa

A large aount of south Affricans speak English too so call it the Makrut lime.2A00:23C6:708D:A901:6991:2291:1204:8F48 (talk) 20:36, 22 December 2021 (UTC)MaxBr3

What is the "button" of a citrus fruit?

Some texts describe a "disbuttoning" process, the removal of the button from a fruit, which helps to prevent the spread of fungus. Can someone tell me exactly what the "button" is on a fruit? Please ping/alert me. Thanks. 2A00:23C5:FE18:2700:7894:E73E:8630:EEB8 (talk) 10:29, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Reversion

Hello @Strebe: Can you explain your reversion? Invasive Spices (talk) 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I don’t know what reversion you refer to, but that last two reversions were spam links that replaced legitimate material. Strebe (talk) 21:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I see more has you must mean the reversion on the article page of the material you added. As I wrote in my edit comment, Can’t access that, but what does it even mean? Citrus isn’t “a fruit”. What is the category of citrus being compared against? Why should we compare categories, rather than individual fruits? Wouldn’t it be better to state and cite what proportion of total fruit trade consists of citrus? Strebe (talk) 23:33, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

• I did read the edit summary. I asked for further explanation because I don't understand it. "Can't access that" is a problem on your side and the rest is answered by the text I added and citation I provided. Invasive Spices (talk) 14 May 2022 (UTC)

I asked for further explanation…. You didn’t. the rest is answered by the text I added… It isn’t. I don’t know what you don’t understand about my explanation; please be specific about your question. Strebe (talk) 00:53, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

• Is English your first language? Are you still unable to access the citation I provided? Invasive Spices (talk) 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Do you actually have a question about my explanation? Strebe (talk) 04:25, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Those are questions. Unfamiliarity with the phrase "citrus fruit" is unusual for an English speaker and I can access the source without trouble. Invasive Spices (talk) 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Whether or not English is my first language (it is my first language) isn’t relevant to understanding my explanation. Implying that I’m unfamiliar with “citrus fruit” (I am familiar) isn’t relevant to understanding my explanation. Sorry. I can’t help you unless and until you make clear what about my explanation you don’t understand. The fact that you have access to some book isn’t relevant to my objections to your edit; I only mention that I don’t have access to it in order to explain that I can’t see what the context is and therefore how I can fix the text you inserted instead of just deleting it. The text as you inserted it has the problems I noted in my edit description. If you are interested in improving the article, I propose we discuss what’s relevant to improving the article. Strebe (talk) 18:14, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

• Here is the list:

• It really isn't incumbent on me to justify your removal of text. If you cannot access a source then I have satisfied my WP:BURDEN. Removal of cited text because you cannot access a source that anyone else can access is totally inappropriate. The cited text is 1 Introduction Citrus fruits (Citrus spp., Rutaceae) are among the most important fruits produced for human consumption in the world and rank first in terms of value of international trade.
• Citrus isn’t “a fruit”. is very strange in English and yet you are certainly familiar enough with the language. Why say that? And if you believe that why not also remove the preceding sentence which also gives statistics on "citrus fruits"?
• What is the category of citrus being compared against? is answered in the text. In the international fruit trade. I also note that here you have no problem understanding what "citrus fruits" are.
• Why should we compare categories, rather than individual fruits? is a strange thing to remove text for. I'm sure those are relevant in the individual articles and, if significant enough, also here.
• Wouldn’t it be better to state and cite what proportion of total fruit trade consists of citrus? is also a strange thing to remove text for. It would be useful to also have those statistics.

I'm being as generous and patient as I can. If you were an IP editor or a very new editor I would revert and refuse to respond. This reversion remains indefensible and undefended. Invasive Spices (talk) 19 May 2022 (UTC)

• If you cannot access a source then I have satisfied my WP:BURDEN. I explained that my inability to access the text is not relevant to why I reverted your edit. It’s not clear to me why you would proceed to ignore that in order to claim that you have satisfied your burden. Your burden here is not to provide a reference; it is to explain what your reference means and how your reference contributes to the usefulness of the article.
• Citrus isn’t “a fruit”. is very strange in English Citrus is a category of fruits related by genetics. Banana is “a fruit”. Orange is “a fruit”. Citrus is a genus of fruits, as the first paragraph in the article states clearly. It does not state that citrus is “a fruit”. It states Plants in the genus produce citrus fruits. It is a fallacy to treat “a fruit” and “a genus of fruits” as the same thing.
• What is the category of citrus being compared against? is answered in the text. In the international fruit trade. That is not what citrus is being compared against in the text you gave. The text you gave does not state what fraction of the international fruit trade economy consists of citrus; it states that it is “the largest” — at least, according to your edit. The largest… what? The largest individual fruit, which is how it reads? It’s not; citrus is not “a fruit”, and meanwhile bananas are the largest single fruit in international trade. The largest “category” of fruits? In which case, what is a category and what are the other categories? Does the statement mean that citrus is larger than all other fruits combined? Larger than any other single fruit, in which case, why would comparing a category of fruit against a fruit be a useful or “fair” comparison? So I asked, what are we comparing citrus against? And you answer “the international fruit trade”, which is non sequitur.
• I'm being as generous and patient as I can. I recommend researching what patience and generosity actually mean. You’ve come across to me as discursive, deflecting, arrogant, and passive aggressive.
• This reversion remains indefensible That’s a matter of opinion that I obviously disagree with. and undefended That’s blatantly false.

The remainder of your points are covered by my explanation above. In summary, your edit, as it reads, does not strike me as providing useful information because all it says is the that citrus is the largest chunk without giving any clues about how the other chunks that it’s implicitly being compared against are aggregated. A useful statement would tell what fraction of the global fruit economy consists of citrus. Strebe (talk) 05:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)