Fact sheet result(s):

Citrangequat
Cultivar or taxon

Citrus x georgiana Mabb. [=Citrus x insitorum Mabb. X Citrus japonica Thunb.] (sensu Mabberley 2004); (Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck x Poncirus trifoliata (L.) Raf.) X Fortunella sp. (sensu Swingle and Reece 1967; sensu Tanaka sec. Cottin 2002)

Synonyms

None

Origin

Swingle and Reece (1967) noted that:

"These were the first trigeneric hybrids to be produced artificially from definitely known parents. Swingle succeeded in making this cross in 1909 by using pollen from Willits and Rusk citranges (Poncirus trifoliata X Citrus sinensis) on properly safeguarded flowers of the oval kumquat (Fortunella margarita) and the round kumquat (F. japonica ). Several of these citrangequats were described and illustrated by Swingle and Robinson (1923, pp. 230-33, pls. 1, 2, 3). The Thomasville, Sinton, and Telfair citrangequats, described and figured by Hume (1926, pp. 40-42, fig. 45), are the best known of these hybrids."

Description

Crown compact or dense, not weeping. First-year twig surface glabrous or pubescent; second- or third-year twig surface striate; thorns absent or not persistent or straight, prickles absent or not persistent. Petiole glabrous or pubescent, length short or medium, wings absent, narrow or wide, adjoining the blade, tucking beneath blade or absent. Leaflets one, margin entire (by misinterpretation), crenate/crenulate or bluntly toothed, shade leaflet blades weakly conduplicate, sun leaflet blades weakly or strongly conduplicate. Scent of crushed leaflets spicy or peppery. 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) or medium rough (6-7); firmness leathery; navel absent; flesh orange or yellow; taste sour.

Hodgson (1967) provided the following additional notes on the cultivar:

"Combining the cold-hardiness of the kumquat and trifoliate orange, the citrangequats appear to be more cold-resistant than the citranges or the Calamondin and kumquat, for they are said to succeed in regions too cold for these fruits (Ziegler and Wolfe, 1961, p. 63).

Swingle and Reece (1967) additionally noted that:

"Citrangequats vary greatly in size, color, flavor, etc. The Thomasville citrangequat has obovoid fruits borne on long pedicels, 1.5 to 3 cm long and 2 to 2.5 mm in diameter at the base, but swollen and pulvinoid at the top, 8 to 10 mm, and permanently curving as the fruit matures until it hangs down, making an angle of 45° to 90° with the base of the pedicel. This character is unknown in any of the three parent species and shows how taxonomically new characters can arise in complex hybrids."

Notes

Swingle and Reece (1967) additionally noted that: "Three varieties are described by Webber (1943, pp. 665-66), all of which produce fruits with marked resemblances to the kumquat and two of which are characterized by a high percentage of trifoliolate leaves.""

References

Cottin, R. 2002. Citrus of the World: A citrus directory. Version 2.0. France: SRA INRA-CIRAD.

Hume, H.H. 1926. The cultivation of citrus fruits. The Macmillan Co., New York. 561 pp.

Mabberley, D.J. 2004. Citrus (Rutaceae): A review of recent advances in etymology, systematics and medical applications. Blumea 49: 481–498.

Swingle, W.T. and T.R. Robinson. 1923. Two important new types of citrous hybrids for the home garden, citrangequats and limequats. Journal of Agricultural Research. 23: 229–238.

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.

Webber, H.J. and L.D. Batchelor (eds.). 1943. The Citrus industry. Vol. I. History, botany, and breeding. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. 1028 pp.

Webber, H.J. 1943. Cultivated varieties of citrus. In: Webber, H.J. and L.D. Batchelor (eds.). The Citrus industry. I: 475-668. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.

Ziegler, L.W. and H.S. Wolfe. 1961. Citrus growing in Florida. University of Florida Press, Gainesville. 248 pp.

Resources

Search for this cultivar in NCBI Entrez

 

Kumquat-like hybrids
Notes

Kumquats and kumquat hybrids

For diagnostic purposes, cultivars in this group can be divided into three classes based on fruit size. As fruit size varies to some extent on an individual plant, it is necessary to gauge the approximate average size when attempting to place a cultivar into one of the three classes. Within the size classes, cultivars can be differentiated to some extent by leaf scent, color of the fruit flesh, and subtle differences in leaf dimensions.

Small-fruited cultivars (fruits usually < 1.5 cm long). This group includes the procimequats and some calamondins. The two can be distinguished by the scent of the crushed young leaves. Calamondins have a distinctive, bready doughy scent, whereas procimequats do not. Procimequats also generally bear smaller fruits (0.7 to 1.2 [1.3] cm long). Fruits of calamondins vary from 1.5 to 3 cm long. Fruits of both cultivars are generally as broad as long or broader than long. Leaf blades also vary in general dimension. Procimequats tend to exhibit narrow elliptical leaves with bases and apices often tapered to about the same degree (and thus exhibiting a rather symmetrical shape). Calamondin leaves tend to have a higher length to width ratio, with leaves frequently at least half as wide as long.

Medium-fruited cultivars (fruits usually 1.5 to 3.5 cm long). This group includes calamondin, Crassifolia, Meiwa, and Nagami (among others). Fruits in this group tend to be distinctly longer than broad. Calamondin can be distinguished from all others in the group by the distinctive bread doughy scent of the crushed young leaves. Meiwa plants grown in the UCR Citrus Variety Collection are distinctive in that they generally do not exhibit a petiole wing articulation. The blade is thus extends uninterrupted to the petiole base. A few leaves on a given plant may exhibit incomplete articulation, but the vast majority show no articulation at all. This condition appears to be unique to Meiwa, at least in Riverside, and is not shared by any other kumquat or kumquat hybrid seen in the course of this developing this tool. Fruits of Meiwas are about 1.4-2.4 (-2.7) cm long and the flesh is the orange one might associate with a mandarin (from here on “mandarin-orange”). Aside from the articulation, Meiwa is difficult to distinguish from plants known as Crassifolia. Crassifolia fruits are about 1.8-2.5 cm long and exhibit a mandarin-orange colored flesh. Nagami can be distinguished from both Meiwa and Crassifolia in that its fruits generally have a higher length to width ratio. Nagami fruits usually fall in the range of 2.2-3.5 cm long with flesh that is also mandarin-orange colored.

Large-fruited cultivars (fruits usually 3 to 6 cm long). As in the medium-fruited group above, fruits in the large-fruited group tend to be distinctly longer than broad. This group includes the citrangequats, mandarinquats, and orangequats. The scent of crushed young leaves can be helpful in recognizing plants in one of these three hybrid categories. Citrangequats tend to be either somewhat malodorous or exhibit a scent similar to Trifoliate Orange. Mandarinquats tend to exhibit a scent reminiscent of mandarins. Orangequat tend to exhibit a sweetish scent, reminiscent of sweet oranges. Flesh color can also be useful diagnostically. Citrangequats tend to exhibit fruit flesh of a similar color as Trifoliate Orange, in contrast to the mandarinquats and orangequats which tend to exhibit a mandarin-orange colored flesh.

Citrangequats. Sinton and Thomasville can be distinguished from one another in part by subtle differences in leaf blade size and length to width ratio. Sinton tends to exhibit leaves shorter (ca. 4-6 cm long) and broader relative to their overall length (slightly less than half as long as wide). Sinton also tends to bear somewhat shorter fruits (ca. 3-4.5 cm long). Thomasville in contrast tends to exhibit leaves longer (ca. 5.5-8.5 cm long) and narrower relative to their overall length (width about 40% of the length). Thomasville fruits tend to be in the range of 4-5 (-6) cm long.

Mandarinquats. Indio exhibits some of the largest leaves among kumquat hybrids (ca. 7-9 x 3-3.5 cm). Its young leaves when crushed exhibit a typical mandarin scent. Its fruits are mandarin-orange colored and about 4-6 cm long.

Orangequats. Nippon exhibits leaves in the range of 4.5-5.5 (-7) cm long. Leaves tend to be between 33 and 37% as wide as long. The crushed young leaves are reminiscent of sweet orange. Fruits fall within the range of 3.5-4.5 cm long.

Kumquats (Common)
Notes

Kumquats and kumquat hybrids

For diagnostic purposes, cultivars in this group can be divided into three classes based on fruit size. As fruit size varies to some extent on an individual plant, it is necessary to gauge the approximate average size when attempting to place a cultivar into one of the three classes. Within the size classes, cultivars can be differentiated to some extent by leaf scent, color of the fruit flesh, and subtle differences in leaf dimensions.

Small-fruited cultivars (fruits usually < 1.5 cm long). This group includes the procimequats and some calamondins. The two can be distinguished by the scent of the crushed young leaves. Calamondins have a distinctive, bready doughy scent, whereas procimequats do not. Procimequats also generally bear smaller fruits (0.7 to 1.2 [1.3] cm long). Fruits of calamondins vary from 1.5 to 3 cm long. Fruits of both cultivars are generally as broad as long or broader than long. Leaf blades also vary in general dimension. Procimequats tend to exhibit narrow elliptical leaves with bases and apices often tapered to about the same degree (and thus exhibiting a rather symmetrical shape). Calamondin leaves tend to have a higher length to width ratio, with leaves frequently at least half as wide as long.

Medium-fruited cultivars (fruits usually 1.5 to 3.5 cm long). This group includes calamondin, Crassifolia, Meiwa, and Nagami (among others). Fruits in this group tend to be distinctly longer than broad. Calamondin can be distinguished from all others in the group by the distinctive bread doughy scent of the crushed young leaves. Meiwa plants grown in the UCR Citrus Variety Collection are distinctive in that they generally do not exhibit a petiole wing articulation. The blade is thus extends uninterrupted to the petiole base. A few leaves on a given plant may exhibit incomplete articulation, but the vast majority show no articulation at all. This condition appears to be unique to Meiwa, at least in Riverside, and is not shared by any other kumquat or kumquat hybrid seen in the course of this developing this tool. Fruits of Meiwas are about 1.4-2.4 (-2.7) cm long and the flesh is the orange one might associate with a mandarin (from here on “mandarin-orange”). Aside from the articulation, Meiwa is difficult to distinguish from plants known as Crassifolia. Crassifolia fruits are about 1.8-2.5 cm long and exhibit a mandarin-orange colored flesh. Nagami can be distinguished from both Meiwa and Crassifolia in that its fruits generally have a higher length to width ratio. Nagami fruits usually fall in the range of 2.2-3.5 cm long with flesh that is also mandarin-orange colored.

Large-fruited cultivars (fruits usually 3 to 6 cm long). As in the medium-fruited group above, fruits in the large-fruited group tend to be distinctly longer than broad. This group includes the citrangequats, mandarinquats, and orangequats. The scent of crushed young leaves can be helpful in recognizing plants in one of these three hybrid categories. Citrangequats tend to be either somewhat malodorous or exhibit a scent similar to Trifoliate Orange. Mandarinquats tend to exhibit a scent reminiscent of mandarins. Orangequat tend to exhibit a sweetish scent, reminiscent of sweet oranges. Flesh color can also be useful diagnostically. Citrangequats tend to exhibit fruit flesh of a similar color as Trifoliate Orange, in contrast to the mandarinquats and orangequats which tend to exhibit a mandarin-orange colored flesh.

Citrangequats. Sinton and Thomasville can be distinguished from one another in part by subtle differences in leaf blade size and length to width ratio. Sinton tends to exhibit leaves shorter (ca. 4-6 cm long) and broader relative to their overall length (slightly less than half as long as wide). Sinton also tends to bear somewhat shorter fruits (ca. 3-4.5 cm long). Thomasville in contrast tends to exhibit leaves longer (ca. 5.5-8.5 cm long) and narrower relative to their overall length (width about 40% of the length). Thomasville fruits tend to be in the range of 4-5 (-6) cm long.

Mandarinquats. Indio exhibits some of the largest leaves among kumquat hybrids (ca. 7-9 x 3-3.5 cm). Its young leaves when crushed exhibit a typical mandarin scent. Its fruits are mandarin-orange colored and about 4-6 cm long.

Orangequats. Nippon exhibits leaves in the range of 4.5-5.5 (-7) cm long. Leaves tend to be between 33 and 37% as wide as long. The crushed young leaves are reminiscent of sweet orange. Fruits fall within the range of 3.5-4.5 cm long.

References

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.

Han, Y.-c. 1923. Han Yen-chih's Chü lu (written 1178). Monograph on the oranges of Wenchou, Chekiang. Translated by Michael J. Hagerty, with introduction by Paul Pelliot. T'oung Pao, Leiden, Ser. 2, 22: 63–96.

Hume, H.H. 1903. The kumquats. Florida Agricultural Experimental Station Bulletin 65: 550–566.

Hume, H.H. 1909. Citrus fruits and their culture. Orange Judd & Co., New York. 587 pp.

Mabberley, D.J. 2004. Citrus (Rutaceae): A review of recent advances in etymology, systematics and medical applications. Blumea 49: 481–498.

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.

Swingle, W.T. 1910. New types of citrus fruits for Florida. Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society 23: 36–41.

Swingle, W.T. 1913. New citrous fruits. American Breeders Magazine 4: 83–95.

Swingle, W.T. and T.R. Robinson. 1923. Two important new types of citrous hybrids for the home garden, citrangequats and limequats. Journal of Agricultural Research. 23: 229–238.

Trabut, L. 1912. Chinois et kumquat. Revue Horticole [Paris] 84: 564–567. 3 figs.

Trabut, L. 1914. Le kumquat. Bulletin Agricole de l'Algerie et de la Tunisie II 20: 2–11.

Volckamer, J.C. 1708-14. Nürnbergische Hesperides, oder gründliche Beschreibung der edlen Citronat- Citronen- und Pomeranzen-Füchte… Bei dem Authore, Nürnberg. 2 vol.

Limequat
References

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.

Hodgson, R.W. 1967. Horticultural varieties of Citrus. In: Reuther, W., H.J. Webber, and L.D. Batchelor (eds.). The Citrus industry, rev. University of California Press. http://lib.ucr.edu/agnic/webber/Vol1/Chapter4.html.

Hume, H.H. 1926. The cultivation of citrus fruits . The Macmillan Co., New York. 561 pp.

Mabberley, D.J. 2004. Citrus (Rutaceae): A review of recent advances in etymology, systematics and medical applications. Blumea 49: 481–498.

Swingle, W.T. 1914–17. Citrus and related genera. In: Bailey, L. H. Standard cyclopedia of horticulture. The Macmillan Co., New York. 6 vol.

Swingle, W.T. and T.R. Robinson. 1923. Two important new types of citrous hybrids for the home garden, citrangequats and limequats. Journal of Agricultural Research. 23: 229–238.

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.

Webber, H.J. 1943. Cultivated varieties of citrus. In: Webber, H.J. and L.D. Batchelor (eds.). The Citrus industry. I: 475-668. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.

Sinton
References

Cottin, R. 2002. Citrus of the World: A citrus directory. Version 2.0. France: SRA INRA-CIRAD.

Hodgson, R.W. 1967. Horticultural varieties of Citrus. In: Reuther, W., H.J. Webber, and L.D. Batchelor (eds.). The Citrus industry, rev. University of California Press. http://lib.ucr.edu/agnic/webber/Vol1/Chapter4.html.

Mabberley, D.J. 2004. Citrus (Rutaceae): A review of recent advances in etymology, systematics and medical applications. Blumea 49: 481–498.

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.

Swingle, W.T. and T.R. Robinson. 1923. Two important new types of citrous hybrids for the home garden, citrangequats and limequats. Journal of Agricultural Research. 23: 229–238.

Thomasville
Origin

Hodgson (1967) noted that: "This citrangequat is of the same parentage as Telfair and was first fruited at Thomasville, Georgia. The cross was made in 1909, and the variety was named and described in 1923 (Swingle and Robinson 1923, p. 230)."

References

Cottin, R. 2002. Citrus of the World: A citrus directory. Version 2.0. France: SRA INRA-CIRAD.

Mabberley, D.J. 2004. Citrus (Rutaceae): A review of recent advances in etymology, systematics and medical applications. Blumea 49: 481–498.

Swingle, W.T. and T.R. Robinson. 1923. Two important new types of citrous hybrids for the home garden, citrangequats and limequats. Journal of Agricultural Research. 23: 229–238.

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.

Other page result(s):

Fact sheets (1)