Washington Seedy (sec. Cottin 2002)
Citrus x aurantium L., pro sp. [Sweet Orange Group] (sensu Mabberley 1997, Bayer et al. 2009); Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck (sensu Swingle and Reece 1967; sensu Tanaka sec. Cottin 2002)
Hodgson (1967) noted that: "The origin of Gillette is unknown, but it is presumed to be a limb sport that was accidentally propagated about 1935 by the Gregg Nursery of Anaheim, California. It came to light in 1945 when four scattered trees were found in an orchard owned by the Gillette Brothers at Hemet, California, which had been planted in 1936 by the Gregg Nursery. Although not promoted by any nursery company, plantings of this variety now occur in all the more interior navel orange sections of California."
Crown compact or dense, not weeping. First-year twig surface glabrous; second- or third-year twig surface striate; thorns absent or not persistent' prickles absent or not persistent. Petiole glabrous, length short; wings medium, adjoining the blade. Leaflets one, margin bluntly toothed, shade leaflet blades weakly conduplicate, sun leaflet blades weakly conduplicate. Scent of crushed leaflets sweetly orange-like. Fruit as broad as long or longer than broad; rind yellow (7-10), yellow-orange (11), orange (12), or red-orange (13); rind texture slightly rough (4-5); firmness leathery; navel present; flesh orange; taste acidic-sweet.
Hodgson (1967) provided the following additional notes on the cultivar:
"Fruit large, spherical; navel well developed but not prominent; seedless. Well-colored. Rind thick and moderately pebbled. Flesh color, texture, and flavor similar to Washington. Very early in maturity (about ten days earlier than Washington) and holds well on the tree.
Tree vigorous and distinctive in appearance; leaves large, thick, cupped, and somewhat grapefruit-like, clustered toward the tips of erect branchlets. Fruit said to be less subject to sunburn and splitting than Washington. Moderately productive.
In comparison with the Washington variety, the fruit of the Gillette is slightly larger and more spherical. The rind is also somewhat thicker. The tree is distinctively different in appearance."
Bayer, R.J., D.J. Mabberley, C. Morton, C.H. Miller, I.K. Sharma, B.E. Pfeil, S. Rich, R. Hitchcock, and S. Sykes. 2009. A molecular phylogeny of the orange subfamily (Rutaceae: Aurantioideae) using nine cpDNA sequences. American Journal of Botany 96: 668–685.
Cottin, R. 2002. Citrus of the World: A citrus directory. Version 2.0. France: SRA INRA-CIRAD.
Mabberley, D.J. 1997. A classification for edible Citrus (Rutaceae). Telopea 7: 167–172.
Swingle, W.T. and P.C. Reece. 1967. The botany of Citrus and its wild relatives. In: Reuther, W., H.J. Webber, and L.D. Batchelor (eds.). The Citrus industry. Ed. 2. Vol. I. University of California, Riverside. http://lib.ucr.edu/agnic/webber/Vol1/Chapter3.html.
Search for this cultivar in NCBI Entrez
Additional information on this cultivar at University of California: Riverside Citrus Variety Collection
Citrus ID Edition 2
October, 2011
idtools.org
