Cereoid-UR12- schreef
It does appear that you never do your own homework.

In Spjut, R.W. (1994) A SYSTEMATIC TREATMENT OF FRUIT TYPES.
Memoires of the N. Y. Bot. Gard. 70: 93, the fruit of a banana would be
considered to be a Pepo! The use of the term is not restricted to the
Cucurbitaceae. The more specific term that has been given is a Musidium.

+ + +
Hey, progress! You actually went and opened the book.
Maybe there is hope for you yet!
PvR

mel turner schreef
I'd hesitated at first because I'd vaguely remembered reading somewhere
that avocados actually varied as to whether there was an appreciable
development of a hard endocarp [possibly the same differences pointed
to above?], and thus would vary as to whether the fruit would be
classified as a drupe or as a 1-seeded berry. I then checked briefly,
and initially didn't find anyone calling the fruit a berry, but did
find several calling it a drupe:

http://www.csdl.tamu.edu/FLORA/Wilson/pp/f97/fruits.htm or
http://www.csdl.tamu.edu/FLORA/Wilso...u98/fruits.htm

+ + +
This is not very convincing, as these don't meet what you yourself said
about berries and drupes. This actually goes a long way in supporting
Cereoid!
+ + +

http://www.csdl.tamu.edu/FLORA/Wilso...g/laupage1.htm

The typical fruit type for the family - a drupe -

+ + +
This is a remarkable statement.
In his Flowering plants of the world, Heywood states that the fruit in
Lauraceae is a berry or drupaceous

Also note:
http://biodiversity.uno.edu/delta/an...w/lauracea.htm
+ + +

http://flora.huh.harvard.edu:8080/fl...taxon_id=10479

+ + +
dead
+ + +

http://pas.byu.edu/AgHrt100/avocado.htm
"The fruit is a drupe, having a stony endocarp."

+ + +
? ? ? This is a remarkable statement, maybe unique?
+ + +

http://www.cas.muohio.edu/~meicenrd/...logy/dln11.htm

+ + +
This site has interesting view of taxonomy:
" Artificial Group Floriferae Polypetalae Subclass Rosidae "
+ + +

http://www.botgard.ucla.edu/html/bot...y/Persea/index
..html
"This berry is truly unusual, not only because it is oily, not sweet,
but also because it never softens while still on the tree, where it
remains hard and continues to grow.

+ + +
What I think noteworthy is that the Lauraceae expert at the Missouri Bot
Garden is avoiding the use of terms like "berry" and "drupe" when describing

new species.
PvR

A drupe consists of exocarp, mesocarp, endocarp and seed.

And if the amateur botanist is in the dark about all these distinctions, is it
called carpel tunnel syndrome?
Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)

A drupe consists of exocarp, mesocarp, endocarp and seed.

Iris Cohen schreef
And if the amateur botanist is in the dark about all these distinctions,
is it called carpel tunnel syndrome?

+ + +
Depends.
The professional botanist is said to suffer from carpel tunnel vision.
The amateur likely just feels lost at sea, and is on the lookout for a
carpel tunnel steamer.
PvR

I've been doing actual research and citing references all along.

You might try doing the same, Arsewipe.

You might learn something and actually know what you are talking about for a
change.

You are the hopeless one, Rinkytink.


P van Rijckevorsel wrote in message
...
Cereoid-UR12- schreef
It does appear that you never do your own homework.

In Spjut, R.W. (1994) A SYSTEMATIC TREATMENT OF FRUIT TYPES.
Memoires of the N. Y. Bot. Gard. 70: 93, the fruit of a banana would be
considered to be a Pepo! The use of the term is not restricted to the
Cucurbitaceae. The more specific term that has been given is a Musidium.

+ + +
Hey, progress! You actually went and opened the book.
Maybe there is hope for you yet!
PvR

You pretty much answered you own question as to why a banana is actually a
pepo. The banana-like fruit of some Yucca would be considered a pepo also.

Why not try looking in botanical dictionaries for the definitions? I know it
seems a radical thing to suggest but books in libraries are still far more
reliable as sources of info than the Internet. You don't want to be like
Rinkytink and just make it all up off the top of your head, do you?

If a fleshy fruit has several seeds with a stone endocarp, they would still
be called berries not drupes. 1 seed = drupe, several seeds = berry. That's
all there is to it. The presence or absence of a stone endocarp has nothing
to do with it.


mel turner wrote in message
...
In article ,
wrote...

And yet you insist the pulpy (not fleshy) fruit of a banana is a berry
when
in fact it is not.

Why isn't it?

Well, I've seen a wild banana species with more or less dehiscent,
self-peeling rinds, but other than that dehiscence, why not call
it a "berry"?

I've seen bananas called thus, e.g.:

http://www.csdl.tamu.edu/FLORA/Wilso...99/fruits2.htm

[I do recall a bright student in class stumping an instructor with

"Apart from not belonging to Cucurbitaceae, why isn't a banana a
'pepo'?"

The instructor had to agree that there was little or no
difference from the general definition of "pepo" that he'd given
the class.]

The classical definition of a drupe is that it is a one seeded berry.

Where can one find this definition? It's unfamiliar to me.

As I understand the usual definitions, "berries" can be one-seeded,
and "drupes" can be several-seeded, either with one several-seeded
stone or with several separate stones in one fruit.

See the "berries" of Ilex for an example of the latter form
of drupe:

http://biodiversity.uno.edu/delta/an...w/aquifoli.htm

"Fruit fleshy; indehiscent; a drupe. The drupes with separable
pyrenes (as many pyrenes as locules)."

Having a woody stone endocarp surrounding the seed has nothing at all to
do
with the definition.

Not your "classical definition" perhaps, but it has everything to
do with the only botanical definition of "drupe" I'm familiar with.

If the fruit has two seeds, it automatically becomes a berry by default.

Unless there is a stony endocarp, in which case it's a drupe.

So what about those plants that have fleshy fruit with 1 to 3 seeds in
them?

Berries or drupes, most likely, depending on whether there are
hard stony endocarps present.

Cereoid-UR12- schreef
If a fleshy fruit has several seeds with a stone endocarp, they would
still be called berries not drupes. 1 seed = drupe, several seeds = berry.
That's all there is to it. The presence or absence of a stone endocarp has
nothing to do with it.

+ + +
And the earth is flat and we should be careful not to go near the edge, for
fear of falling of.
PvR

Cereoid-UR12- schreef
You might try doing the same.

What, eat banana's? Or whatever passes for research with you ...
PvR

Too late for you, Rinkytink. Your head is flat and you've gone over the edge
long ago.
In any case, you are by far the most obnoxious flaming fruit in this group.


P van Rijckevorsel wrote in message
...
Cereoid-UR12- schreef
If a fleshy fruit has several seeds with a stone endocarp, they would
still be called berries not drupes. 1 seed = drupe, several seeds = berry.
That's all there is to it. The presence or absence of a stone endocarp has
nothing to do with it.

+ + +
And the earth is flat and we should be careful not to go near the edge,
for
fear of falling of.
PvR

Its a shame that your monkey brain cannot handle the concept. Most of your
kind loves bananas.

Research is a lot more than just surfing the Internet with your toes, Bonzo.


P van Rijckevorsel wrote in message
...
Cereoid-UR12- schreef
You might try doing the same.

What, eat banana's? Or whatever passes for research with you ...
PvR

Cereoid-UR12- schreef
Research is a lot more than just surfing the Internet

+ + +
Another glimmer of insight!
Now apply it to yourself.
PvR

Rinkytink, you are still hold the title as the biggest garden troll and
freelance fluffboy fruit on the internet.

Nobody can touch you nor would ever want to.

Now go and munch on some holly berries and see if they are really drupes!


P van Rijckevorsel wrote in message
...
Cereoid-UR12- schreef
Research is a lot more than just surfing the Internet

+ + +
Another glimmer of insight!
Now apply it to yourself.
PvR

Cereoid-UR12- schreef
Now go and munch on some holly berries and see if they are really drupes!

+ + +
Your ideas of research are really limited to eating fruits, aren't they?
PvR

Unless you're alluding to Halle Berry and me munching on tropical fruits on
some deserted Caribbean island, there is nothing more to say to you. I'm
much too busy doing research.


P van Rijckevorsel wrote in message
...
Cereoid-UR12- schreef
Now go and munch on some holly berries and see if they are really
drupes!

+ + +
Your ideas of research are really limited to eating fruits, aren't they?
PvR

In article , [P
van Rijckevorsel] wrote...
mel turner schreef
I'd hesitated at first because I'd vaguely remembered reading somewhere
that avocados actually varied as to whether there was an appreciable
development of a hard endocarp [possibly the same differences pointed
to above?], and thus would vary as to whether the fruit would be
classified as a drupe or as a 1-seeded berry. I then checked briefly,
and initially didn't find anyone calling the fruit a berry, but did
find several calling it a drupe:

http://www.csdl.tamu.edu/FLORA/Wilson/pp/f97/fruits.htm or
http://www.csdl.tamu.edu/FLORA/Wilso...u98/fruits.htm

+ + +
This is not very convincing, as these don't meet what you yourself said
about berries and drupes.

?? Oh. I get it. Yes, they incorrectly generalize that drupes are
always single-seeded and 1-carpellate, and that berries are multi-
seeded. Yes, that's a bad mistake.

I just cited them because they are examples of people calling avocados
"drupes" with ["_very_ thin"] stony endocarps].

This actually goes a long way in supporting
Cereoid!

I don't see how it could, other than the seed number
mistake that he also makes.

+ + +

http://www.csdl.tamu.edu/FLORA/Wilso...g/laupage1.htm

The typical fruit type for the family - a drupe -

+ + +
This is a remarkable statement.
In his Flowering plants of the world, Heywood states that the fruit in
Lauraceae is a berry or drupaceous

And I've seen and cited similar statements. Of course they mean by
this that the fruit is a drupe in some species [= with stony endocarp
present] and a 1-seeded berry in others [i.e., endocarp not stony].

Also note:
http://biodiversity.uno.edu/delta/an...w/lauracea.htm

Good link. [The Families of Flowering Plants]
+ + +

http://flora.huh.harvard.edu:8080/fl...taxon_id=10479

+ + +
dead
+ + +

It still works for me. [It's just the _Flora of North America_
online page for Lauraceae, which calls the fruit "drupes"].

http://pas.byu.edu/AgHrt100/avocado.htm
"The fruit is a drupe, having a stony endocarp."

+ + +
? ? ? This is a remarkable statement, maybe unique?
+ + +

The preceding other sites would presumably also agree [but
incorrectly?] that a ["very thin"] stony endocarp is present.

http://www.cas.muohio.edu/~meicenrd/...logy/dln11.htm

+ + +
This site has interesting view of taxonomy:
" Artificial Group Floriferae Polypetalae Subclass Rosidae "
+ + +

A tad archaic or idiosyncratic, perhaps.

http://www.botgard.ucla.edu/html/bot...y/Persea/index
.html
"This berry is truly unusual, not only because it is oily, not sweet,
but also because it never softens while still on the tree, where it
remains hard and continues to grow.

+ + +
What I think noteworthy is that the Lauraceae expert at the Missouri Bot
Garden is avoiding the use of terms like "berry" and "drupe" when describing

new species.

Is their expert unable or unwilling to section the fruits to see if a
stony endocarp is present, or does he perhaps feel the whole
definitional issue is just too confusing?

cheers