Apples: diploids, triploids - part two

[FB.]

If you haven't already read the previous topic, please do so before reading or contributing to this because it sets the stage for what this topic will cover.
Link here:
http://www.growfruitandveg.co.uk/gra...ure_76277.html

Below are additional sets of pictures of apple varieties.
Each set contains one definite diploid; occasionally two.
The remaining pictures in each set are varieties that seem highly suspicious.

Most of the apples pictured below, especially the "suspicious" ones, are noted for being tough, disease resistant, large flowers of particularly attractive quality, often long-lived and often with the large, rounded, thick, dark, glossy leaves often seen in triploids, and, incredibly, many are reported to have a good degree of self-fertility (but how good are they at pollinating others?) despite the apparent triploid features!
But I note that many old fruit catalogues and books (from a century or more ago) list a large number of now-known-to-be-triploid varieties as self-fertile - including Bramley!
But some modern studies have suggested that the average triploid is more self-fertile than the average diploid - in other words the average triploid without a pollinator is more likely to produce a bigger crop than the average diploid without a pollinator.
So is it surprising that some triploids would be listed as self-fertile?

At least one variety below is known to be triploid but is self-fertile too.

So as for the previous topic, please state which picture in each set looks like diploid or triploid.

Thanks,
F

[FB.]

-

Set A

1. Barnack Beauty. Diploid.

2. Lord Derby - listed as diploid but strongly resembles the triploids and has the triploid-like immense disease resistance and resilience, yet is claimed to be self-fertile (but why are the pips of such poor quality if it is so fertile?).

3. Annie Elizabeth - listed as diploid but strongly resembles the triploids and has the triploid-like immense disease resistance and resilience, yet is claimed to be self-fertile (but why are the pips of such poor quality if it is so fertile?).

4. Alfriston - listed as diploid but strongly resembles the triploids and has the triploid-like immense disease resistance and resilience (but why are the pips of such poor quality if it is a fertile diploid?).


-

[FB.]

-

Set B

1. D'Arcy Spice - listed as diploid but strongly resembles the triploids and has the triploid-like immense disease resistance and resilience, yet is claimed to be self-fertile* (but why are the pips of such poor quality if it is so fertile?).
* having extensively grown and experimented with this variety myself, I am convinced that it will produce fruits without a pollinator - often seedless or with poor quality pips and low germination rates.
The tree has large attractive blossom too. It doesn't have the high vigour usually associated with triploids but when the growing conditions get difficult it grows better than the diploids and as well as the triploids.

2. Orleans Reinette. Triploid. But also listed as self-fertile! Peculiarly the pips and core look almost normal, although the tree is noted for disease resistance and resilience.

3. Brownlees Russet - listed as diploid but strongly resembles the triploids and has the triploid-like immense disease resistance and resilience, yet is claimed to be self-fertile (but why are the pips of such poor quality if it is so fertile?).
My experience of Brownlees Russet is that it has thick dark leaves and is much more vigorous than expected - similar vigour to many triploids.

4. Chivers Delight. Diploid.


-

[FB.]

-

Set C

1. Katy. Diploid.

2. Arkansas. Triploid.

3. Newton Wonder - listed as diploid but strongly resembles the triploids and has the triploid-like immense disease resistance and resilience, yet is claimed to be self-fertile (but why are the pips of fairly poor quality if it is so fertile?).

4. Arthur Turner. Listed as diploid but looks like it needs further consideration. Being listed as vigorous is common with triploids, as is large fruit, as are many of the suspicious-looking varieties reported as self-fertile.



-

[FB.]

-

Set D

1. Dumelow's Seedling - listed as diploid but strongly resembles the triploids and has the triploid-like resilience and hardiness (but why are the pips of fairly poor quality if it is so fertile?). Notice the resemblance with its alleged offspring Annie Elizabeth which is another variety with triploid-like features.

2. Ecklinville - listed as diploid but strongly resembles the triploids and has the triploid-like immense resilience and high vigour (but why are the pips of such poor quality if it is a fertile diploid?).

3. Ellison's Orange. Diploid.

4. Scotch Dumpling - listed as diploid but strongly resembles the triploids and has the triploid-like resilience and hardiness, (but why are the pips of such poor quality if it is a fertile diploid?).




-

[FB.]

-

Set E

This set was influenced by an email chat with Orangepippin

1. Liberty. Modern(ish) variety with some doubts as to whether it is diploid or triploid (it has been assumed diploid but some researchers have evidence it is triploid). The deformed-looking core and quite small pips would persuade me to assume triploid until proven otherwise by scientific testing.
Maybe it's aneuploid but closer to diploid than triploid.

2. Winston. Diploid. (it is not as disease resistant as is claimed: I gave up with my Winston trees due to being susceptible to scab and only average resistance to mildew despite claims of being very resistant).

3. Adams Pearmain. Thought to be diploid but one study showed evidence of triploid. Maybe it's aneuploid but closer to diploid than triploid.

4. Pinova. Thought to be diploid but one study showed evidence of triploid. Maybe it's aneuploid but closer to diploid than triploid.

-

[Glutton4...]

The only thing I know about Apples, is that Set A is the one I'd choose to eat!

Sorry. As you were.

[FB.]

The only thing I know about Apples, is that Set A is the one I'd choose to eat!

Sorry. As you were.

I would recommend set B as by far the tastiest eaters. Don't judge a book by its cover.

That's the trouble with the supermarket culture: we're conditioned to look for round, smooth, shiny, unblemished and with plenty of red/orange colour - and the commercial growers are experts at manipulating us into buying poorly-flavoured fruit just because it looks nice.
The popularity of Red Delicious stemmed from it looking immaculate on the outside (due to its smooth, shiny, tough red skin) long after it had gone like mashed potato inside and with a fermented taste.

Set E would be the next best eaters, although only average as far as eaters go.

Sets A, C and D have a decided bias towards "cooker", or to eaters that are sharp-tasting or which are rather a "some love it, some hate it" acquired taste.

But until a few more people have had a go at "spot the diploid, spot the triploid", or unless one of the other fruit experts on here can name them all, the variety names will remain a secret.

[Glutton4...]

...until a few more people have had a go at "spot the diploid, spot the triploid", or unless one of the other fruit experts on here can name them all, the variety names will remain a secret.

Fair enough - I wouldn't know where to start.

I like a tangy crunchy apple with some juice. I have been known to eat a cooker - the big fat ones. I do find, though, that the ugly ones are generally the tastiest!

Oh, and I meant the top one in set A!

[veggiechicken]

Set 2
A. - D T ?D T
B. - T D T D
C.- D T D T
D.- D T D T
E. - D D T T

[FB.]

Set 2
A. - D T ?D T
B. - T D T D
C.- D T D T
D.- D T D T
E. - D D T T

PM enroute.

[boundtothesoil]

This looks a much harder set -haven't got a clue about them.

set A: D T T D?
set B: D? T T D
set C: D T D T
set D T D T T
set E: D? D D D?

[FB.]

This looks a much harder set -haven't got a clue about them.

set A: D T T D?
set B: D? T T D
set C: D T D T
set D T D T T
set E: D? D D D?

PM enroute in a moment.

[FB.]

Anyone else want to have a go before this thread is left to fall into the archives?

[FB.]

Variety names now added.

Suspicious varieties currently listed as diploid but which look suspicious:

Set A: Lord Derby, Annie Elizabeth, Alfriston.

Set B: D'Arcy Spice, Brownlees Russet.

Set C: Newton Wonder, possibly Arthur Turner.

Set D: Dumelow's Seedling, Scotch Dumpling.

Set E: a peculiar bunch - make up your own mind (but I'd err on the side of caution and assume Liberty, Adams Pearmain and Pinova are triploid or poor pollinators of other varieties until proven otherwise).

The general trend for those varieties is their well-above-average (as a group) disease resistance and tolerance of challenging conditions. Just what we'd expect from a triploid variety with the extra chromosomes from which it would have a better chance of carrying a gene that allows it to cope better.

Four of them are listed as self-fertile. One is listed as a particularly good pollinator (which is unlikely, if it is triploid).
Or is it that the screwed-up genetics of a triploid allows the tree to produce seedless fruits?