Talk:Blackberry/Archive 1

Archive 1

Old talk

Some old talk can be found at Talk:Blackberry (disambiguation) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toby Bartels (talk • contribs) 15:13, 20 August 2002 (UTC)

Additional data by TerrapinDundee from his site http://www.brickfieldspark.org/data/bramble.htm with permission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andre Engels (talk • contribs) 22:03, 11 October 2002 (UTC)

Too Many pics

The extra pics need to be moved to commons and a link added tot here. Those pics add little to the article the way they are right now. This link is Broken 18:36, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm yeah. There are rather a lot of blackberries there! - Nojer2 23:43, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Native range

What is the original native range of blackberries? Are they Old World or New World, or both; temperate or tropical, or both; etc.? --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 17:16, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

As far as I know they are found in most temperate places --Theredstarswl 06:09, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

which means they come from Asia, both Americas and Europe. Modern Cultivars have been created thru interbreeding and selection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.131.137.50 (talk) 01:05, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Marion Barry

Is the marionberry named after Marion Barry? or, less likely, perhaps after Marion Berry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Youdontsmellbad (talk • contribs) 18:15, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

The Marion berry is a cultivar of Rubus ursinus (blackberry) first developed in the early 1950s in Marion County, Willamette Valley, Oregon. This region is famous for commercial Rubus berry cultivation, and is the only location in the world for growing native marionberries. Here's the website, http://marionberries.com/ --Paul144 21:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I was just thinking about that. It is interesting that it is a homophone of the longtime mayor of Washington DC... Valley2city 16:44, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

What Toxins?

Where is the evidence that blackberries accumulate "toxins from the traffic" ?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.143.67 (talk) 01:14, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

dust from cars going by, people walking by, spitting on them, dogs peeing on them, exhaust from cars, garbage thrown from cars. I always avoid bushes on streets, along with most people I know. 75.100.155.44 (talk) 00:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Superstition

"Superstition in the UK holds that blackberries should not be picked after 15th September as the devil has claimed them...." I've read of this in British literature, but the versions I saw always said Michaelmas, not the 15th. The association with the devil makes rather more sense on that day than on the 15th, as well (though the 14th is Holy Cross Day). -GSwift 04:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Definately Michealmas - the devil lands in a blackberry bush after being eject from heaven by Michael. BTW I like the euphemism - leaves his mark the way a dog might - what is wrong with urinate? MStreets — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.108.130.2 (talk) 10:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I think that I would like to settle this - the day is October 11, or October 10 according to some sources, which is Old Michaelmas Day, traditionally the day in which Satan fell from Heaven. I have put more information on this on the article on Michaelmas, including a useful external link. ACEOREVIVED 19:04, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, I have now seen that the book Cooper, Q. & Sullivan, P. (1994). "Maypoles, Martyrs and Mayhem". London: Bloomsbury. ISBN: 0 7475 18070 does actually give Michaelmas (September 29) as the date beyond which blackberries should not be picked, but I first learnt of this legend through Morrell, who gives the date as Old Michaelmas Day, not Michaelmas, in "Festivals and Customs" (Morrell, 1977).

Reference: Morrell, P. (1997). Festivals and Customs. Piccolo: Pan. ISBN: 0330252151 ACEOREVIVED 19:41, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Eurocentric vs. NewWorldcentric

I think the cranky note over the cultivars section is unnecessary. If information on other parts of the world is necessary, why not simply add the information rather than complain about it? After all, the fact that devil posseses blackberries after Sept. 15 in the British Isles is also a rather localized fact. We don't have the devil in the brambles here. As it is, three-quarters of the horticultural and botanical articles in Wiki are rather obviously Eurocentric, and quite stubbornly so. (By the way, there's nothing European about dewberries.) It's a bit like the Russians--they invented the potato, you know.  :-) NaySay 17:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Plant Edibility

Are all parts of the plant edible? i.e. leaves, stems,... etc. 24.83.178.11 10:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC) BeeCier

Vaccinium

Is this a member of Vacciniums? Does it contain resveratrol? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.5.38.189 (talk) 17:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Blackberry belongs to the Rubus genus of vines from plant family Rosaceae -- the same as roses and strawberries. Blueberry, bilberry, cranberry and huckleberry are common bush berries from the genus Vaccinium. Click the internal links or search Wikipedia for any of these terms for background. I checked PubMed for medical literature and found no citations for resveratrol being present in Rubus species whereas it is common in Vaccinium and Vitis (grape) species. --Paul144 22:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Tasteless cultivars

I know of no tasty cultivated blackberries: those found in the wild are far better! If anyone knows some good cultivars then add to my own comments on the article. Peterlewis (talk) 13:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

This is only your opinion so is not WP:NPOV and is not appropriate for the article. The most commercially successful blackberry is the Marionberry cultivar favored by gourmet restaurants and individuals worldwide. --Paul144 (talk) 14:33, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

It is not used in Britain at all. The wild variety of many foods is often much better than the cultivars, and this is not a POV, but accepted by all country lovers. I am reverting you thoughtless edits. Peterlewis (talk) 15:59, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

If so - give a reference - otherwise delete. In general the cultivars are designed to suit commercial growers, in general I agree with you, but we cannot just give our own opinion. ClemMcGann (talk) 16:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

We have reached WP:3RR so any further edits or reverts should be reported to an administrator for dispute resolution. Wikipedia encourages disputes to be debated here on the Talk page to build consensus under WP:CON, which I'm willing to do, but remain unconvinced from the exchange today. Your edits are only opinions which have no place in an encyclopedia.--Paul144 (talk) 16:46, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure about blackberries but comercial cultivars of many fruits like apples or peaches have been selected to extend their shelf life thus they taste worse than some older cultivars or selfpurpose garden cultivars. The impression of "tastelessness" in blackberries may also be result of washing that reduces aroma. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.131.137.50 (talk) 00:57, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Larvae infestations

I only recently discovered that in my region that ripe local blackberries are almost all infested with insect larvae (appearance of maggots). After googling around a bit, it's apparently a common problem and some families have passed down the instruction to always soak picked blackberries, as this forces the larvae to leave the fruit and float to the surface to avoid drowning. I've found a few government and research sites that confirm that various insects do hatch their larvae to feed inside blackberries.

For me the knowledge that most ripe blackberries in my area are infested with larvae was a huge turn off and I wish more people knew about it so that they know what they are eating when they are picking wild blackberries. I did try a couple amateurish attempts to introduce this information to the article but I admittedly can't find the right kind of sources to include this information the way I want to.

Am I the only one that thinks this is notable info to include in the article? I can find multiple google hits that confirm this is a common problem [1][2] but nothing encyclopedic that screams out that this is a notable issue. But I guess it's more of an "ew" thing than the kind of thing that gets on the NY times. Jozsefs (talk) 21:53, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Our comments all have to do with the quality and clarity of information added to wikipedia, and to thinking that you just needed some hints and wanted to do this yourself. Please carefully read the suggestions in the edit summaries and on your talk page. SmartSE has pointed you to a wealth of information, on the assumption that you were interested in doing some extended research. If you don't want to spend the time on that, no problem, someone else might like to take up the challenge. Nadiatalent (talk) 13:47, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Rearranged article

The sections in this article were all over the place, and I have rearranged them into what I hope is a logical structure. I have not changed any text, other than adding one or two extra section titles. There is a lot of work still to be done on the article and I will do what I can in the next days. It seems to me that the text regarding domestic cultivation needs major revision, and in particular the section "Other Berries: The Berry Family" needs a rewrite. The text regarding medical uses and nutrition also needs revision. Newburyjohn (talk) 12:02, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Noxious weed

I came here looking for information about why "wild blackberry complex" is listed on various state lists of noxious weeds. It would be nice if the article at least mentioned that cultivation and even mere posession of these plants is banned in some places. 18.26.0.5 (talk) 17:50, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Proposed split of article into Blackberry and Rubus fruticosus

This article covers two related but separate topics

1. Plants and their fruit, known as blackberries, and including several species, primarily Rubus fruticosus but also R. armeniacus and R. laciniatus (mentioned in Ecology section); and also a number of hybrids mentioned in the Cultivation section
2. The single (aggregate) species Rubus fruticosus

There are separate articles on R. armeniacus, R. laciniatus and many of the hybrids and cultivars, but no separate article for R. fruticosus, even though this is probably the best known and most important species of blackberry.
I suggest that the information relating to blackberries in general (which would be most of the information in sections Uses and Cultivation) should remain in the Blackberry article, and a new article (titled Rubus fruticosus) be created for the information specific to that species. Newburyjohn (talk) 16:19, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I support this split (although I'm not sure how much information would be left in an Rubus fruticosus article). Not only is blackberry a common name for many species in the subgenus Rubus, but Marionberry is one of the fruits most often marketed as "blackberry", although it's a hybrid whose parents include a Raspberry, a blackberry, and a Dewberry. I'd also suggest merging dewberry with blackberry. My impression is that dewberry is a fairly obscure common name for some species that many would call blackberries, and dewberry does not correspond to a scientific name at all. Dewberry is used for several not very closely related species of that I've also heard referred to as "trailing blackberries". Many of the species listed at dewberry have common names with "blackberry". Currently, Rubus ursinus is listed in the taxobox on the blackberry page, but the dewberry page also claims it as a dewberry. Plantdrew (talk) 19:17, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

An article on Rubus fruticosus may well be justified, however there really isn't any thing here to split off and so a split tag is not really the appropriate tag. If and when you decide to write the article, you just need to write the article. Op47 (talk) 23:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Medical uses

The section on medical uses is full of dubious and/or exaggerated claims. The references for the claims are entirely insufficient. They are incomplete and unlikely to meet criteria for sourcing medical claims that are required by WP:MEDRS. The whole section should, in my opinion, be removed until someone can write a replacement based on reliable medical sources. 173.62.218.74 (talk) 16:33, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree. The references marked as questionable (the ones attributed to M. Dyer and K. McEvoy) are actually from very unreliable Livestrong articles, despite being cited like books. I looked through WikiBlame and noticed that the entire health benefits part was written as part of a school assignment over the summer of 2012. None of those editors are present to defend their work, and I'm not sure what to do. Opinions? I'll wait before removing the entire thing. Wieldthespade (talk) 06:56, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

But they are sour

To Gandydancer, have you tried them? They can be extremely tart, especially wild blackberries! When are they not sour? Perhaps only when they are almost over-ripe. They should be included in the Category:Sour fruits, along with citrus and strawberries. Good day! Glacier2009 (talk) 14:23, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I sure have tried them...on both coasts as a matter of fact. They grow here in Maine--the "basket of wild blackberries" in the article are berries picked on our property. They also grew in Palo Colorado Canyon (CA) when I lived out there (they were HUGE and sweet). They are generally very large and sweet, though, strangely, one sometimes finds a "less sweet", which could perhaps be called "sour", bush. On the other hand, if strawberries are considered a sour fruit, they would be as well...perhaps. Can you document that strawberries are considered sour? BTW, nice to talk with you. Gandydancer (talk) 15:19, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

@Glacier2009: If you think that blackberries are sour, you aren't picking them properly. You need to wait until the fruit is both a little bit soft and pulls easily off the plant. If you think strawberries are sour, I think you should stop eating fruit altogether, you are getting them from a source that doesn't pay attention to best agricultural practice. (The same goes for oranges, which are not at all sour and are citrus fruits.) Sminthopsis84 (talk) 21:59, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

@Gandydancer: Thanks, its a fun subject! But if blackberries and other berries are not sour, they are tart (or acidic). Perhaps I should make a category called "tart fruits" instead. Would this be a good compromise? Glacier2009 (talk) 12:00, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

All fruits are acidic to a certain degree. That's why you can can them (and tomatoes) using a hot water bath rather than a pressure cooker. Gandydancer (talk) 13:38, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Tartness is not just sourness, it can also mean bitterness. A category "tart fruits" would also be ambiguous because it would seem to suggest fruits that are used to make tarts. I don't think a category of this type, or of sour fruits, is workable. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 21:25, 17 October 2016 (UTC)