Talk:Mangosteen

Original Name

In Indonesia, it is called Manggis. I wonder why it's not written here. Yandri (talk) 12:49, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Endorsement

It is encyclopedic and imporant to know knowledge about praise and endorsements. You are wrong to have reverted it Unban keep it real

Taste

What does it taste like? An encyclopedia article about a fruit should probably mention something about the taste. Besides, I'm curious. =) --BeSherman 13:03, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I added a description of the taste. La Gringa 06:16, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Do your research

Before you start badmouthing this fruit, take a quick look on PubMed.gov. You will find that there is a substantial amount of legitimate research articles from peer-reviewed journals about this fruit. I am not commenting on any companies that sell any mangosteen products, I am just stating that there is real research out there that does indeed demonstrate that the mangosteen has health benefits. There is more compelling evidence for this fruit than for some pharmaceuticals. Also, you should note that the journal articles are in no way tied to any of the companies, and quite a few of them were written before any mangosteen supplement was ever brought to market. I am all for removing marketing and propoganda from Wikipedia, but you cannot let your personal biases against companies cloud your judgement about what the scientific community has put forth in their research. I am not standing up for marketing or any business/company, nor am I confirming what anyone has written about mangosteen's health benefits, but I am standing up for legitimate science. I am also not saying that all research articles are fact or flawless; however, you will find that the xanthones in the Garcinia mangostana are COX-inhibitors as well as histamine and serotonin inhibitors. You will also find that the xanthones have shown anti-cancer/anti-tumor properities in vitro, as well as being antibacterial, antifungal, and antiviral. Take a look for yourself, and you will find these journal articles. ARA 02:56, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

They once thought radium was good for you too. I'm not saying its anywhere near as harmful as that was but it just goes to show being snake oil salesmen is a profession that stands the test of time. CiXeL

Mangosteen aril "fruit" nutrition and antioxidant qualities are poor

If one looks carefully at the structure of mangosteen's fruit that is preferred for human consumption, it's clear immediately that the white flesh -- botanically, an aril seed covering -- is without pigmentation (read that as absent of antioxidants which are phenols with defensive roles usually on the outside of a fruit or vegetable).

Xango juice is made (apparently, as the method is proprietary) in a 3 step process. 1) juice is squeezed from the edible aril as a base for Xango; 2) juices of several other fruits are added; 3) xanthones from the inedible purple pericarp are added for color and antioxidant value.

This recent paper takes a factual look at mangosteen aril nutrient quality (poor, nearly absent), aril antioxidant value (must be nearly zero, as the plant does not need antioxidant protection deep inside the overall fruit structure, so the flesh is without pigmentation), and research underway on xanthones (an adolescent research field by comparison to other antioxidant phytochemicals).

http://www.npicenter.com/anm/templates/newsATemp.aspx?articleid=17613&zoneid=43

Conclusion: there isn't much to get excited about concerning Xango. A consumer would get more nutrition and probably equal antioxidant value drinking tomato, grape or cranberry juice at prices of what?, $2-3 per liter? whereas Xango costs about 10 times more? --Paul144 16:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

NPOV

Much of this page sounds like "an apple a day keeps the doctor away" – hardly encyclopedical. Mangosteen is currently being marketed. I'm trying to tone down the advertizing language and I'm removing dubious statements taken from the referenced links, where they appear with no source other than some MD's opinion.

I will also remove the claims about "many times the antioxidant capacity of popular vitamins" which I could not back up in gov or edu sites: [1], [2]. — Sebastian (talk) 06:41, 2005 Jun 22 (UTC)

I would agree with that. there is alot of hype surrounding the mangosteen due to xango. the mangosteen rind is mostly tannins. I'd like say thank you for all you wikipedians out there working hard to remove the Xango spam that routinely shows up on this article. CiXeL

If that is the case then why are so many people claiming to benefit from incorporating mangosteen juice into their daily health routine? There has to be some benefit to the fruit. Doesn't there?

I added in the info on the frozen version and the Oahu irradiation facility.

I simply CANNOT wait to see mangosteen juice die off like the noni juice fad so the snake oil salesmen stop. CiXeL

The USDA has published a standard test of antioxidant value called ORAC (Oxygen Radical Absorbance Capacity) that is used to rate antioxidant quality of foodstuffs, nutritional supplements and nutritional minerals (like Selenium.) Even One-A-Day and Centrum vitamins now state that they have antioxidant value.

We hear about tomatoes having lycopene, which is a food antioxidant. Good for heart health, and all that. Can I write an article about ORAC comparisons of various fruit and vegetable foodstuffs? Most red and dark berry juices have specified ORAC values (red grape wine, pomegranate juice, noni juice, mangosteen juice, cherry juice) all are high ORAC value foodstuffs.

Reference on high ORAC foodstuffs and the healthy benefits, from United States Department of Agriculture. From the article: Foods that score high in an antioxidant assay called ORAC may protect cells and their components from damage by oxygen radicals, according to studies of animals and human blood. ORAC measures the total antioxidant power of foods and other chemical substances. Early findings suggest that eating plenty of high-ORAC fruits and vegetables—such as spinach and blueberries—may help slow the processes associated with aging in both body and brain.

German Wikipedia claims a much higher nutritional and medical value to this fruit, specially as the best source of anti-oxidants. ! See the table on the page http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mangostane References include various modern studies from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?term=mangosteen&cmd=search&db=pubmed

Let's keep in mind the edible fruit itself is white (no pigments that would confer in vitro antioxidant effects). The only significant polyphenol source in mangosteen is in the inedible purple rind which is dense with tannins.

For nutritional content of the edible fruit, this appears to be the source of information[3] which cites an independent, government-approved lab with doing the assay. I am unaware of any other nutrient analysis done on mangosteen fruit, pulp or peel. What's in the peel, if its nutrients have indeed been assayed, seems irrelevant because the rind is both inedible and certainly unpalatable due to the high tannin content.--Zefr (talk) 00:42, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Whole fruit

I recently purchased some of these as whole fruit in NZ. Given NZ's extremely stringent phytosanitary standards which would probably be more stringent then those in the US in general, I suspect the mention of them being illegal to import in the US may be untrue. I don't know where these originated from (perhaps Australia) or how they were treated (perhaps irradiated although irradiated mangos that I've bought have been clearly labelled) however I'm guessing they can be imported (whether they are or not I don't know). They were extremely expensive of course... Nil Einne 06:17, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

They came from australia probably around innisfail/cairns. (I have a friend who is trying to start a mangosteen and durian plantation there). Not sure if theyre irradiated. They certainly are illegal to import into the US if they are not irradiated due to fruit fly larvae that can sit under the crown on the fruit. Thailand will be exporting the first irradiated ones to california in the coming months. CiXeL

Links

The question was asked in a check-in comment why we're keeping the montosogardens.com and proscitech.com.au links if the xango one is inappropriate. Personally, I have no problem with the montosogardens.com ("Montoso Gardens is a... botanical garden, tropical flower and fruit farm, and nursery with over 600 species of exotic tropical flowers, fruits, nuts, spices, and palms. ") & proscitech.com.au ("Serving Light, Electron Microscopy, general Science & Technology Laboratories in Australasia") links. Both of the pages linked to are actually pages for the mangosteen within a larger site, and not sites dedicated to selling mangosteen fruit juice via multi-level marketing ("The first company to harness the real power of the exotic Garcinia mangostana, XanGo not only leads the mangosteen-based dietary supplement market—we created it."). I feel WP:EL supports my interpretation, but I'm willing to discuss it here. -- Steven Fisher 17:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

You're absolutely correct. Information on websites from gardens, museums and the like is routinely used - the idea being that they're not really pushing a product in the manner of a true commercial site. The other link at proscitech goes to an isolated portion of the site that details information from a book. If we called that a commercial site, everything from webhosts that prefix their domain name would be out, and that would be silly. Shell ^babelfish 21:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Honestly, I got the impression that the only criteria that user was using for "commercial" was whether there was a .com in the domain name. I really can't see any other way that the XanGo site is related to the other two. -- Steven Fisher 21:43, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

XanGo link?

Would a link to the XanGo article be appropriate for the See Also section? Why or why not? I'm a bit torn on the subject -- although it promotes XanGo a bit, it also points out additional information about XanGo's marketing campaigns. -- Steven Fisher 16:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I've been monitoring the XanGo article and I also am torn. I don't want to promote those *unprintables*, but on the other hand, it would be good for potential marks to know it's an MLM scheme. Ask at the Village Pump? Zora 03:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Xango LLC Warned by the FDA About Marketing Practices and False Health Claims, Sept 2006

The FDA's take on Xango and any supposed dietary health product marketed with such exhorbitant anti-disease claims that accompany Xango juice is to assess whether the food or beverage qualifies as a "drug".

In other words, if a fruit has sufficient scientific proof that it prevents or cures diseases as Xango marketing material claims, then it must be a drug requiring the long series of expensive research including clinical trials required of any company developing a new drug from biotechnology.

See this warning letter issued to Xango in Sept. 2006 and apparently still under evaluation as there appears to be no further news to date in February 2007.

http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g6024d.htm

Xango LLC provides its position as of October 2006

http://www.naturalproductsinsider.com/hotnews/6ah28484.html

This information needs to be written into the Article. The public coming to Wikipedia for facts needs to know issues surrounding the description given here. If we hold mangosteen (that is, any fruit and its juice products) to the stringent standards of the FDA, then the public can be assured whether health claims are valid.

I will give this discussion area a few days for debate before providing an update to the Article, unless someone else would like to take it on. --Paul144 16:27, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

what does it taste like?

what does it taste like? are both the tree and the fruit called mangosteens? -Ravedave 02:05, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

It has the texture similar to soft canned peach, but the flavor is sweet-tart, kinda like tangerine. cecikierk

Rind is hard or soft?

Near the top of the article it says that the rind is hard. Near the bottom, it says that the rind is soft. I also question the statement that the fruit is usually torn apart rather than cut. That may be true in the field, but at a table, I'm sure it would be served cut due to the staining juices. Additionally the fruit inside is very delicate and can be damaged easily by any pressure on the rind. The pictures in the article, and every picture I've seen of the fruit, show it cut, not torn apart. La Gringa 08:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Note for opening the fruit: I first tried a mangosteen in Thailand. I was taught to open it by gently squeezing the top (where the green stem is) and the bottom (opposite) together. This causes the skin to crack open under the pressure. At that point you are able to rip a side of the skin right off. I usually start eating the fruit with half of the skin left on the bottom. The fruit is juicy and the skin left on the bottom keeps my hands clean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.248.135 (talk) 15:06, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

re: rind. we have a mangosteen tree at home and the rind is hard and soft. Hard on the outside and soft on the inside. It is better to open them by hand rather than by cutting them bec the pressure that your hand exerts just breaks up the outer hard rind really easily then you can just pull the halves apart. Besides, if you use a knife, it might slip and cut you bec. of the hard outer rind. The fruit is not that delicate that it would get damaged by opening the fruit by hand. karen

re: rind

A mangosteen's rind is usually a little less than half an inch thick. The outer rim of the rind is very, very thin but usually hard. The rest of the rind all the way up to the meat is soft. We usually use a really sharp knife to go around the fattest part of the fruit and split the rind in half. Then we just split it open and pull out the meat. The inside fruit is pretty soft, don't you think? Squeezing the rind can bruise it causing discoloration which is important if you want to pull out the meat and leave it its ringed form for presentation. Kallimina (talk) 06:53, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Their was/is (?) a picture of a Penis on this site which in no ....

way relates to the Garcinia Mangostana. Even if the name of Mango does signify the Sperm that relates to the reproductive process the fruit undergoes, a Homosapien Penis has nothing to do with this! No empirical evidence has been found linking the Male Genitalia with a Mangosteen. I am a scientist and I understand these things.

I have heard reports that mangosteen has Asperger's syndrome. Is this true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.75.110.235 (talk) 02:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Can mangosteen's skin be used/made as an INK?

i need to know for our further experiment..

The mangosteen pericarp is a dense purple, color given by pigments called phenolics (also called phenols), see the picture gallery[4], with a good discussion there about many aspects of this fruit. As with most plants having deep colors, natural plant pigments have been used for centuries as dyes for fabrics, cosmetics and even the food industry. For example, apparently over several decades until recently, the USDA used juice from black raspberries as a stamp ink for labeling fresh cuts of meat. --Paul144 01:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

XanGo

I have removed the majority of the text in the xango section of the article. The first paragraph read like an advertisement for Xango, and the rest of it was just copied and pasted from the xango article. Considering that it really dealt with the FDA/XanGo case, i dont think it was relevant for the article on the fruit. I've left the following text in: Several commercial mangosteen juices are on the public market, primarily in the United States and Canada. One well known juice company is XanGo. I think that will suffice. THE KING 00:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Etymology of name

What is the etymology of the name and is the name related to "mango"? Badagnani 08:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

It appears that John Ellis, a 1775 English explorer of the South Pacific islands, first heard the native words for the fruit, "mangoustay" or "mangostan", then anglicized these terms. See a good historical description at the primary mangosteen website, http://mangosteen.com/historyandfolklore.htm

Of interest is that the Swedish botanist, Carl Linnaeus, father of botanical nomenclature (1707-1778), received samples and information about this newly discovered plant from Frenchman, Laurent Garcin, when he was cataloguing his famous taxonomic system, still used scientifically for all plants today. Hence the binomial name for mangosteen -- Garcinia mangostana.

The mango is from an entirely different botanical family, Anacardiaceae, genus Mangifera. The name "mango" comes from the Tamil language "mangai" which was followed in Malayalam language as manga and popularized by the Portuguese after their exploration of the Asian mainland, hence the word 'manga' in Portuguese. --Paul144 13:39, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

The most likely etymology for mangosteen is from it's native name in Malay/Indonesian, "manggis". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.82.92.98 (talk) 06:20, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

In Thai folklore, the story goes that the name mangosteen came about when a European foreign was shopping at a Thai farmer's market. The foreigner picked up one of the purple fruit and asked "is this a mango" to which the clerk replied "Mango sun teen" or "Mango my foot" (in other words, a sarcastic remark meaning it wasn't a mango. And the name stuck from there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.26.225.22 (talk) 12:54, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Bolthouse Farms product

User:Paul144: In general, I agree that it's not encyclopedic to mention specific commercial products, but in this case I had two reasons for including the reference to Bolthouse Farms. 1. The page had very few things linking to it. 2. Mangosteen is, to the best of my knowledge, unavailable in the US in any other fresh form. If you think that's inadequate reasoning, feel free to revert again, but I'm going to restore my edit. --Keflavich 20:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Keflavich -- 1. internal links can be done by editing other related articles and using the internal link to mangosteen. A commercial brand is not the way to take care of this. 2. using a notable brand like Bolthouse Farms doesn't justify the commercial link. Readers may take it as endorsement which an encyclopedia does not make. If allowed, other brands would argue theirs is better. There are numerous mangosteen juice products -- usually adulterated with other fruit juices, but still branded as mangosteen -- making this an endless game of upmanship if allowed once. --Paul144 21:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Can you name any other fresh mangosteen-included juices? This is the only one I've seen, but I'll admit that my experience is limited. Perhaps more are available in Asian grocery stores? This was the first mangosteen product I'd ever seen in stores, but if there are others, I'd like to know about them. --Keflavich 21:49, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

"Fresh" is a matter of definition and probably is irrelevant anyway since no processed juice -- which includes pasteurization -- remains "fresh". There are many mangosteen juice products in the US retail and direct-sales markets. To name a few:

• XanGo has the largest revenues projected at more than $300 million for 2006 sales
• Genesis Today markets Mangosteen100[5]
• Pure Fruit Technologies markets MangoXan[6]

--Paul144 00:14, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I suppose you're right on the term fresh. Thanks for the links, I was unaware of these products. --Keflavich 16:31, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

WorldwideWarning.net -- Mangosteen Juice Scams

Captivating reading[7]. The site purports to expose scams and just tell the truth, so is worthy for each person to read and make one's own judgment. --Paul144 15:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think this is relevant here. The writer tries to trash network marketing as opposed to anything about XanGo, let alone the mangosteen fruit itself. It is just a matter of who shows it to them. There are going to be some fanatics when promoting anything, whether it be a company, a party, or a politician or political ideology. Now if XanGo itself made false claims, it obviously should be notable (they haven't, it was the 3rd party company promoting them), but if it is someone who just makes ridiculous claims about it then it has nothing to do with the company itself, but rather that individual's credibility. Arnabdas 19:06, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

As a discussion page is fair game for anything related to the article topic, I think this background is relevant and worthy of making others with an interest in mangosteen aware of critical writing about the fruit elsewhere on the web.

Arnabas said: "Now if XanGo itself made false claims, it obviously should be notable (they haven't, it was the 3rd party company promoting them)"

FYI this link[8] -- quoting the FDA letter:

1. Labeling used by distributors of your product promotes your product for use in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease. Products intended for such uses are drugs under section 201(g)(1)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) [21 U.S.C. 321(g)(1)(B)).
2. FDA obtained brochures promoting the health benefits of mangosteens and mangosteen juice through contact information...
3. "Labeling" is defined in section 201(m) the Act [21 U.S.C. 321(m)] as "all labels and other written, printed or graphic matter upon any article . . . or accompanying such article." The brochures we received as a prospective distributor of your product meet the definition of "labeling" in section 201(m) of the Act.
4. These claims cause your product to be a drug, as defined in Section 201(g)(1)(B) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1)(B)] . Because this product is not generally recognized as safe and effective when used as labeled, it is also a new drug as defined in Section 201(p) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 321(p)]. New drugs may not be legally marketed in the United States without prior approval from FDA

--Paul144 21:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

While everything you write is true, we didn't get to address my underlying point. Any organization cannot control the mouths of people in the organization, especially big organizations. A Ford employee can make some claim that Ford cars have teleporters that transport you and the car anywhere on Earth. Now if Ford itself did that, then that would be on the company. If some independent salesperson did that and the organization did nothing to correct the statement, then you are absolutely right it is on the organization. XanGo corrected itself...even to the point where it forbids brochures from even having the company name on it from my understanding. If XanGo did nothing, your argument is justified, but they did respond in a responsible manner, so that should be brought to attention.

Still, that is neither here nor there with regards to this page. The FDA warning should be noted on the XanGo page (which it is) as should the response by XanGo itself (that is too I think). Readers can decide for themselves whether the explanation is good enough for them to either try that product or not. Arnabdas 21:31, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair comments, Arnabdas. I felt it was important to reply to you because we are here on the Mangosteen page, not the one for XanGo.

My original comment was not intended to isolate one manufacturer, but rather to point out that the mangosteen juice product category seems vulnerable to exaggeration about the importance of mangosteen as a nutrient source (low) and as an antioxidant source (also low in the fruit itself). Comments about exocarp xanthones usually are made in the context of human health benefits, and these are indeed frank fabrications since this is such an undeveloped science. --Paul144 00:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, I understand your intentions. Still, if your intention was to show that sometimes the effects of the fruit gets exaggerated I still don't understand the notability of it. Anything can be exaggerated, not just mangosteen itself. This page should have any studies on the fruit itself and the sources arguing both the low nutrient and anti-oxidant sources as well as those who say the opposite. Arnabdas 18:36, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 11:22, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Queen of Fruits

I don't know anywhere else but here in Malaysia it is called the 'Queen of Fruits'. Also I've read some articles before saying that it is the queen of tropical fruits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.101.44.193 (talk) 00:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

It is also called the 'Queen of Fruits' here in the Philippines (and Durian the 'King of Fruits'). Although the fruit is known locally as Mangis or Mangostan, but the English name Mangosteen is equally popular the past years ;) --- Laibcoms (talk | Contribs) 14:58, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Accuracy of information on the aril and exocarp

Unregistered user 76.176.130.145 initiated this discussion on my talk page. As it is relevant in a general way to the overall article, I'm transferring it here. --Paul144 (talk) 00:20, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey Paul - you reversed some edits about mangosteen. There are two key points that could be considered misleading to someone who is honestly seeking accurate information. These statements are not inaccurate, but could use some greater illumination.

First is the statement: "Among six exotic fruits, the unpigmented, white fruit of the mangosteen was ranked lowest overall for these qualities." This is accurate, but for someone seeking to determine whether a mangosteen supplement is worth trying, he or she may not realize that some of the mangosteen supplements include outer, pigmented, dark skin is included. perhaps you would agree to add a statement like, "This test did not include the outer shell of the mangosteen, which is included in some mangosteen supplements."

The article is about the fruit as a whole and the parts of interest to mankind -- the edible arils. No human would eat the exocarp -- just like no human would eat a coconut shell -- so I don't see the issue about an artificial process making juice from the puree is relevant. I've drunk Xango, and I don't detect any fibrous elements in it so this argument you make about the puree having noteworthy properties (which I believe are physiologically trivial anyway) is beside the point of the article.--Paul144 (talk) 18:46, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... you are certainly assuming some things about my motives for creating an accurate article on mangosteen. That's okay. I think we both want the same thing - a non-bias, accurate article that only offers relevant information, right? - So to say that humans are not interested in the exocarp is short sighted at best. In fact, when it comes to anything related to the history of medicinal use of the mangosteen fruit, the exocarp is the only thing people have used as a medicine. Most commonly, the rind has been ground up and used like tea leaves to create a drinkable liquid often used to treat gastro-intestinal disease, fatigue and headaches. I do not think it is paramount that this is stated in the article, but it does seem fair to mention, at a minimum, that the skin of the fruit was not a part of the testing of any of the fruits. It should also be noted that the peel of an orange or a banana are not typically consumed by most humans, but both have medicinal applications.

My point was that the article already has more discussion of the potential health effects from the exocarp than I personally would prefer to see. It's not that the exocarp is uninteresting, it's that it would not be consumed typically by a human or forager. Xanthones and tannins in the exocarp are mainly acids which would deter consumption. Afterall, rind acids have the evident natural purpose of repelling animal or microbial pests and diseases.

The "history" of medicinal uses you refer to is only from Ayurvedic or other kinds of unscientific folk medicine,[9] not confirmed by science as fact. I also dispute that banana or orange peels have any "medicinal applications" as you say. Phytochemicals, some of which are scientifically interesting and have biological potential - yes; "medicinal" applications, no. --Paul144 (talk) 00:20, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Second is the case study about lactic acidosis. The article clearly states which brand is used - a cheap product that is manufactured by agrolabs and routinely sold at COSTCO. This is not a quality preparation of mangosteen juice and it should not be compared to whole food, whole fruit preparations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.176.130.145 (talk) 15:45, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't find this type of analysis pertinent at all to an article about the natural mangosteen. You can try to make your case on the Xango article. I monitor that one too.--Paul144 (talk) 18:46, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. If you really want to keep the article about the natural mangosteen fruit, then the entire case study about lactic acidosis would be irrelevant also, correct? The person in the case study did not eat mangosteen fruit, he drank a manufactured and processed juice. In fact, after re-reading the article which is well done, by the way, there really is no need to mention anything about any processed juices. Perhaps you will agree and make the changes?

I feel that reference to the lactic acidosis effect of mangosteen juice is fair, since it is from peer-reviewed medical literature. Any counterpoint to be made should likewise come from reputable literature.--Paul144 (talk) 00:20, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure where you located the case study on lactic acidosis, but an abstract summary can be easily accessed at the U.S. National Library of Medicine - website is [10]. A quick search for mangosteen reveals 75 articles. about 10 of them are neutral. These articles discuss things like a new xanthone that was discovered or how the trees grow, or things otherwise completely unrelated to health in any way. Exactly one of these articles discusses a potential health detriment. This is the case study of "A 58-year-old African American man presented to the emergency department with increasing cough and dyspnea. His medical history was significant for pulmonary sarcoidosis, metabolic syndrome, and chronic kidney disease. His home medications included amlodipine and inhaled albuterol." The remaining 66 articles demonstrate potential health benefits of specific elements in mangosteen. There are 12 articles that conclude that mangosteen have cancer prevention properties. Nine articles discuss anti-oxidant properties. Six demonstrate anti-inflammatory. Other potential health benefits include anti-bacterial (5 articles), anti-microbial (4), anti-fungal (3), anti-histamine (3), neuro-protective (2), anti-acne (2), anti-MRSA (2), anti-tumor (1), anti-allergy (1), anti-viral (1), anti-diabetic (1), anti-gum disease (1), anti-halitosis (1), and there are more. These are mostly in-vitro studies using human tissue, but the acne, gum disease and bad breath articles are human studies. Any fair discussion on mangosteen would have to include at least some of these references, if it includes the ONE negative study. Also, a search on "xanthones" produces over 1500 results and many of these specifically discuss xanthones that are found in the aril and skin of the mangosteen fruit.76.176.130.145 (talk) 16:11, 19 September 2008 (UTC) JBB

I have provided a link to the PubMed abstract for the article discussion of the potential lactic acidosis resulting from consumption of mangosteen juice. Since this is a published observation in humans, it seems warranted to include it.

The acidosis caused by tannins is well-described in experimental animals.[11] Tannins and oligomeric proanthocyanidins are the most abundant mangosteen exocarp phenolic groups[12][13] which would be included but not discussed as a constituent of mangosteen juice products containing exocarp extracts. It seems odd manufacturers of mangosteen juice focus on xanthones which appear to be a minor class, less well-understood phenolic.

For a 2007 brief review of research on xanthones and other mangosteen exocarp phenolics, see[14] under Mangosteen antioxidants stating "From the search statement “Garcinia” (mangosteen's genus), PubMed retrieved 281 total citations from the period 1959-2006 (search performed January 8, 2007), but only 46 of these were on the mangosteen species (mangostana) within the Garcinia genus."

That article concluded: "medical research on mangosteen and its xanthones is a relatively young scientific field with only preliminary laboratory evidence for anti-disease properties established to date." This was a specific summary of the mangosteen xanthone literature to 2007, showing a relatively thin body of evidence and preliminary understanding exist about xanthone properties. The Wikipedia article states this conclusion.

If there are human studies in reputable journals worthy of being discussed in the article, you could write the text which remains open for anyone to edit.--Paul144 (talk) 17:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Toxic to Mitochondria?

The "Nutrient content and antioxidant strength" section contains this paragraph:

A 2008 medical case report described a patient with severe acidosis possibly attributable to a year of daily use (to lose weight, dose not described) of mangosteen juice infused with xanthones.[10] The authors proposed that chronic exposure to alpha-mangostin, a xanthone, could be toxic to mitochondrial function,[11] leading to impairment of cellular respiration and production of lactic acidosis.

Reference 10 is in fact a single case report about a patient with severe acidosis. Then it is supposed that the authors attribute this to mitochondrial toxicity from alpha-mangostin, and reference 11 is cited. But reference 11 says that alpha-mangostin was toxic to Leukemia, not normal cells! The researchers conclude, "These results indicate that alpha-mangostin and its analogs would be candidates for preventive and therapeutic application for cancer treatment." I do not see anywhere that the authors of the case report in reference 10 actually attribute this problem to mitochondria toxicity, and in fact they would be pretty foolish to cite a study that shows alpha-mangostin being toxic to cancer cells! Please correct me if I'm wrong.

There are zero studies that show this effect on normal cells. Another study found that mangosteen induced apotosis in pheochromocytoma (adrenal cancer) cells via mitochondrial toxicity: http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jphs/95/1/95_33/_article

These aren't the only studies. Research on mangosteen xanthones for fighting cancer is pretty overwhelming, as indicated by this google scholar search: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=mangosteen+cancer&btnG=Search

Leukemia, adrenal cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer, the list goes on.

As such, I plan to remove the comment about severe acidosis being attributed to mitochondrial toxicity, which seems to only be the case in the mind of a creative wiki editor! I will then create a separate section on studies and cite the myriad studies (including the one in reference 11) that show Mangosteen's benefits for not only cancer, but other conditions like inflammation. NutrisaurusRex (talk) 18:16, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree that paragraph needed revision so I made changes in the article subject to further review and revision as needed.

I caution you to not over-interpret what seems to be "pretty overwhelming" evidence about xanthone anti-cancer activity. First, there is zero evidence for such xanthone effects in vivo. Second, by comparison to almost any other phytochemical that has been around in cancer or inflammation research over the past 30 years, xanthones are at a rudimentary level, decades away from being eligible for human clinical trials.--Zefr (talk) 20:29, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Excellent points, which I agree with completely. My "overwhelming" comments were in response to the antagonistic tone of the review of research, which definitely wasn't giving xanthones a fair treatment. However, there also isn't a complete void of in vivo cancer studies: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2635669#__secid515883 ... I plan to do a thorough write-up of the research. NutrisaurusRex (talk) 07:54, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

That study is one of the better ones for xanthone efficacy in cancer models but the in vivo part is very basic and lacks breadth, so remains unconvincing.

Fyi, I found some discussion going on about mangosteen in the natural products literature, here[15] and here[16].

By Wikipedia practices, it would be appropriate for you to post your write-up here on the Discussion page first for review and editing before going into the Article. Thanks. --Zefr (talk) 12:59, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I think it's odd how you say "no conclusions about possible health benefits for humans are warranted presently," but then a single case report has you say "a possible adverse effect may occur from chronic consumption of mangosteen juice containing xanthones." This case report is a very isolated incident and the attribution to mangosteen is nothing more than a shot in the dark from 2 doctors. And regarding my edits, I'll plead the fifth (as in, #5 of the Five pillars). NutrisaurusRex (talk) 19:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Well... 1) I'd feel safe saying "no conclusions about possible health benefits for humans are warranted presently" since none has been shown, and 2) the case report was by physicians who came to their own conclusions. Case reports are useful for botanicals because they raise the possibility of occult toxicity which applies particularly to mangosteen pericarp xanthones used for decades as insecticides. --Zefr (talk) 20:17, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Check this out... hot off the press: http://www.physorg.com/news175204116.html NutrisaurusRex (talk) 07:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Nothing can be concluded about the role of mangosteen constituents from this study.[17] And, contrary to the Physorg description, this study is not a peer-approved clinical trial, but rather a preliminary pilot experiment in humans, with poor design.

First, other variables of diet and life activity apparently were not controlled in the subjects over the 8 week study period, confounding any possible conclusion about the specific effects of one small diet component -- twice daily intake of juice -- on the biomarker assessed.

Second, the commercial juice tested, XanGo, is a composition of 9 juices [18], among which are fruits (grape, blueberry, raspberry, strawberry, cranberry and cherry) each having evidence for anti-inflammatory activity in lab studies.

A loosely designed and uncontrolled study like this on a composite juice has little chance of being developed into a more formal and peer-accepted clinical study -- the only route for a fruit like mangosteen to be proved applicable to human physiology and disease. Further, this study contributes nothing to our understanding of mangosteen properties, questioning whether rigorous editorial practices were applied to allow the report to be published. --Zefr (talk) 12:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Fruit price in the US?

I just purchased some mangosteens for $5.79 a pound at a local Asian market (and was shocked to see fresh mangosteens). I assume these are irradiated and from Thailand. Are they now becoming more generally available and cheaper nationally? The article mentions them coming from Puerto Rico for $45/lb in NYC. The Puerto Rican mangosteens doesn't really seem worth mentioning if they are now more widely available for a price in line with other imported tropical fruits.70.245.236.202 (talk) 05:33, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Valid point so I made edits to that discussion. Also applies to several cities in Canada where mangosteens can be found in Chinatowns and common grocery stores for $6 per lb and up.--Zefr (talk) 11:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Potential refs

• Akao, Y. et al. ”Anti-Cancer Effects of Xanthones from Pericarps of Mangosteen”, International Journal of Molecular Sciences (2008),9(3):355-370.
• Shan, T. et al. “Xanthones from mangosteen extracts as natural chemopreventive agents: potential anticancer drugs”, Current Molecular Medicine (2011),11(8):666-677. Abstract only.

--Ronz (talk) 22:51, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion and suggestion.

These reviews are meant for readers who would like to delve deeper into the subject. The reviews are placed in the “further reading” – section because the Wikipedia guideline for this section read: “… publications that would help interested readers learn more about the article subject. The Further reading section (…) should normally not duplicate the content of the References section” (WP:FURTHER).

The Wikipedia content guideline for “Identifying reliable sources (medicine)” (WP:MEDRS) read: “It is usually best to use reviews and meta-analyses where possible.”

The reviews in question reflect the latest research (last 10 years) in the field, they are scholarly and peer-reviewed, and they are published in academic journals. Granateple (talk) 22:47, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Mangosteen scale v2.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Mangosteen scale v2.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on June 25, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-06-25. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! —howcheng {chat} 20:10, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the day

A whole purple mangosteen fruit (Garcinia mangostana) and the cross-section of another. The fruit is sweet and tangy, juicy, and somewhat fibrous, with an inedible, deep reddish-purple colored rind (exocarp) when ripe. The evergreen mangosteen tree is believed to have originated in the Sunda Islands and the Moluccas of Indonesia.Photo: S. Masters

Info based upon two individual studies removed

Given the notice above, I quickly looked at the medical information to see what progress we've made in the article contents. There were two short paragraphs sourced only by individual studies which I removed [19] per WP:MEDRS. The previous, relevant discussion here made no note of MEDRS applying. --Ronz (talk) 22:29, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Cultivation

<content copied to article> Nina.elle (talk) 16:10, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Assuming that you intended to add this content to the article itself, I have moved it there. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:26, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Pest and diseases on mangosteen

Lukamuel (talk) 13:27, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Here there is the reorganized Diseases and Pests part - less information about the different species and own part for control measures. I hope it is easier to understand.

Pest & diseases

The pathogens which attack purple mangosteen (Garcinia mangostana) are common in other tropical trees. The diseases can be divided into foliar, fruit, stem and soil-borne diseases.

Pestalotiopsis leaf blight (Pestalotiopsis flagisettula (only identified in Thailand)) is one of the diseases which infect leaves especially young ones. Furthermore the pathogen lets the fruits rot before and after the harvest. Additional stem canker and dieback are caused by the pathogen. Some of the symptoms of stem canker are branch splitting, gummosis and bark blistering.The main areas where the disease was observed are Thailand, Malaysia and North Queensland.

Another common disease is the thread blight or white thread blight disease (Marasmiellus scandens) whereas the name comes from the mycelia which looks a little bit like a thread. Beside the leaves twigs and branches can be damaged by the disease. The spores spread with the help of wind, small raindrops and insects. The disease like shady, humid and wet conditions to begin with the distribution.

The most important postharvest disease on mangosteen especially in Thailand called Diplodia fruit rot (Diplodia theobromae). As a secondary pathogen D. theobromae enters the host plant through wounds. The pathogen has also saprophytic and entophytic life forms for the survival without a living host .

Phellinus noxius lives on the roots and trunk bases and causes the brown root disease. The brown look of the mycelium also caused by the binding of soil particles on the fungal structure gave the disease its name. The mangosteen which stay on former jungle or rubber land are often infected by this fungus. The distribution of the fungus happens through the contact with infected wood or thick rhizomorphs of tree stumps.

There are a few pests which feed on mangosteen leaves and fruits including leaf eater (Stictoptera sp.), leaf miner (Phyllocnictis citrella) and fruit borer (Curculio sp.). Especially in nurseries the larval stage of the leaf eater can cause visible damage on young leaves. Most of the time the pests don’t cause serious infestation and can be managed by biological control agents. The larval stage of fruit borer (Curculio sp.) feeds on different part of fruits before they are getting ripe.

Control measures for diseases and pests

There are different management options to control the diseases. As a preventive action the likelihood for sun scalding should be reduced because there is a higher possibility for leaf blight and stem canker. Secondary a reduction wounds caused by insects and storm damages help to minimize the entries for diseases. Additional a better aeration and faster drying of the leaves could reduce the disease pressure. This change of the microclimate could be achieved by a looser tree spacing and a corrective pruning. The chemicals applied on root collars and tree stumps can control the diseases on roots. Whereas the use of legume cover crops for the reduction of the pathogen nutrient stock and the support of antagonistic organisms is another management measure.

A helpful management practice is to take the infected branches and trees away. This practice reduces the spread of the disease on woody parts of mangosteen. Another measure which could stop the distribution of the disease is to burn down the attacked plant parts. Finally fungicides are an option to control the fungus by the reduction of the inoculum.

For the control of insect pests by [[biological control agents] ] can be one measure. Futhermore the use of insecticides can also help to reduce the population. The monitoring of the diseases as well the pests is important that the appearance can be realized early enough to initiate control measures.

Lukamuel (talk) 13:27, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Genetic preconditions for breeding, breeding aims

Lukamuel (talk) 13:43, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Genetic preconditions for breeding, breeding aims

In breeding of perennial mangosteen the selection of rootstock and the grafting are two big issues. The target of these breeding issues is to deal with constraints to production, harvesting or seasonality. Most of the genetic resources for breeding are in germplasm collections whereupon some wild species are cultivated in Malaysia. The above described conservation methods are chosen because storage of seed under dried and low temperature conditions isn’t possible. Especially the wild species are important to get information about ecological tolerances.

Because of the long duration until the trees yield fruits and the long resulting breeding cycles, mangosteen breeding isn’t an attractive research topic. Additional in the countries in which mangosteen trees are growth, there are monetary and research based limitations. No improved mangosteen traits by conventional breeding weren’t reported. Perhaps the little breeding progress is also connected to the breeding constraints like small amount of seeds, long gestation period, slow growth and apomixes. Nevertheless there are a hand of breeding objectives which could enhance the mangosteen production:

- Drought tolerance: sensitive to drought in the first 5 years after germination

- Tree architecture: crown which is regular and pyramid-shaped

- Fruit quality:

i) bitter taste caused by changes of pulp, pericarp and aril

ii) fruit cracking as reason after a short excessive water uptake

- Rootstock: for a better adaption to drought and good development in the early stages

Lukamuel (talk) 13:43, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Fuhrerd (talk) 18:50, 26 November 2014 (UTC) I would like to add some information about yield and cultivars of the mangosteen

Yield

The yield of the mangosteen is very variable and depends on the environmental conditions and the age of the tree. If the tree is at the age of 5 the first yield is expected, the young tree is carrying between 10 and 20 fruits [1]. The amount of fruits per tree increases with the age of the tree. Until the age of approximately 45 the yield increases with the aging of the tree [1]. The yield per tree reaches on average 1’000 to 1’500 fruits, under optimal conditions a maximum of 3’000 fruits per tree is possible [1].

Planted area and yield development

Main part of the worldwide mangosteen production is taking place in Southeast Asia. Thailand is the producer with the most area planted with mangosteen, estimated 11’000 ha in 2000 [1]. The total yield in 2000 was 46’000 tons, this leads to an average yield of 4.18 t/ha [1]. In Indonesia the planted are increased from 4’100 ha in 1999 to 9’300 ha in 2003 [1]. With this expansion the average yield increased, from 4.65 t/ha (1999) to 8.45 t/ha (2003) [1]. In Malaysia the area planted with mangosteen is even smaller than in Indonesia and contains between 7’000 and 8’000 ha (1998)[1]. The big mangosteen producing countries in Southeast Asia include also the Philippines with an area of 1’200 ha and an average yield of 4.36 t/ha (1998) [1]. In other tropical countries mangosteen is cultivated too, but only on small sized areas. In a global comparison the cultivation of mangosteen is marginal. The total production area in Southeast Asia (Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines) contains about 24’000 ha. The area planted with bananas only in Indonesia is almost four times bigger [1]. So the cultivation of mangosteen is in comparison with the global leading fruits only a niche production.

Cultivars

The cultivated mangosteens seemed to belong to the same variety [1]. But recent research points out that some variation exists[1]. Future research on genetic description can lead to breeding programs for different cultivars [1].

References [1] Osman, M. b., Milan, A. R., and Williams, J. T. 2006. Mangosteen. Garcinia mangostana L. Fruits for the future 9. Southampton Centre for Underutilised Crops, Southampton, UK. Fuhrerd (talk) 18:50, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

The information provided above by User:Lukamuel is almost certainly plagiarized from book publications. Contributors to Wikipedia should spend the time reading and understanding relevant content, then write new content into an Article using their own words. I don't feel we should be copying whole sections from Talk to be added into an Article without some effort by the user who brought the information to the Talk page. That causes an unfair burden on other editors who want to produce a better Article. Let's apply some editing and writing skills to actually contribute to the encyclopedia. --Zefr (talk) 19:03, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Lukamuel (talk) 12:55, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Hy User:Zefr, thank you for your comment. I would like too improve the mangosteen entry with some information about the diseases and the pests. I really tried to write down the information with my own words and gave the citation. Perhaps it wasn't very skilled to cite only one literature but there isn't that much about this topic. Because i like to get some comments, i put my text first on the talk site. I am really looking forward for comments from the community, espacially from you - Zefr - that you give me some constructive feedbacks. Zefr, tell me where there is a plagiarism in my text (I hope there is no) and how i could improve it, also with other literature. Lukamuel (talk) 12:55, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Lukamuel -- my suggestion would be that you read available information first on mangosteen from the online comprehensive resources used in the Article, such as Morton and Crown, to be sure the content you wish to add is not already contained in those resources. Rather than only a hard copy reference you have sourced (Osman which is not easily obtained online), the excellent online resources (Morton, Crown as examples) can be checked quickly by typical users of Wikipedia. Also keep in mind that Wikipedia intends content to be of general information value to common users, so is not a scientific journal where all details about a topic need to go into the Article; see WP:NOTJOURNAL. I found the Pests and Diseases content you posted to be far too specific and scientific, unlikely to be of interest to the general user, so inconsistent with WP:NOTJOURNAL. Because English appears not to be your first language, I do agree that you should post your content here on the Talk page first, then I or other editors can help finalize content before entering it into the Article. --Zefr (talk) 16:28, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Zefr - thank for suggestion and help. I will reduce the part 'Diseases and Pests' and try to make it easier for the typical user. For Osman et al. i could give the link to the pdf-file.

Nina.elle (talk) 08:58, 2 December 2014 (UTC)== Harvest ==

Maturation of mangosteen fruits takes 5 – 6 months. Harvesting takes place when the fruits are purplish violet. The fruits don’t ripen uniformly. For this reason the harvesting process takes 6 – 12 weeks. Harvest has to be done by hand in order to protect the fruits from damages. For high trees also long poles with a hook and a basket at the end are used.Nina.elle (talk) 08:58, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Reflur (talk) 16:49, 27 November 2014 (UTC) I'd like to add some information about thre required envrionmental conditions.

required envrionmental conditions

The growth of the trees is retarded if the temperature is below 20°C. The ideal temperature range for growing and producing fruits is between 25°C and 35°C [1] with a relative humidity over 80% [3]. The maximal temperature is between 38–40°C, with both leaves and fruit being susceptible to scorching and sunburn [1], [3]. The minimum temperature is between 3°C and 5°C [1]. Young seedlings prefer a high level of shade and mature trees are shade-tolerant [1]. For the young trees shade protects the delicate growing points from scorching effects of the sun which are irreversible [3]. Mangosteen trees have a weak root system and prefer therefore deep, well drained soils with high moisture content. Heavy soils are reported to be tolerant. The mangosteen is not adapted to limestone soils; sandy, alluvial soils or sandy soils with low soil organic matter content [1],[2]). Often it grows on river banks [3]. The trees can grow on soils with a pH range of 5 to 7 [2] and there should be a high amount of organic matter (1.5% to 7.9% [1]) They need a well distributed rainfall over the year and a 3-5 week dry season (< 40mm/month) is tolerated [1]. If the annual rainfall is less than 1270 mm irrigation is needed during the dry season to ensure a favoured production of fruits and a continuous growth of the tree. [1], [3]. The tree can withstand some water logging, and has a preference for a high water table of 1.2–1.5 m below the surface. Strong wind can cause serious injuries on the leaves and branches. In an area with regularly strong wind there should be windbreakers [3].

[1]: [2]: [3]: Reflur (talk) 16:49, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

References

Mangosteen.com reliable?

It looks self-published. Anyone object to its removal? --Ronz (talk) 20:12, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Ronz -- I may be responsible for having first used this reference and populating its citation in the article because it impresses as a resource with a "farmer's insight". The author of mangosteen.com, Ian Crown, has been sought by other media for expert op-eds like this.[20] Although I won't dispute it if you feel it should be removed, I go to the site for useful pictures and expert background, and regard it as WP:RS. --Zefr (talk) 21:13, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! How about we remove it where it is redundant, then see if we can find better sources where it is the lone reference? --Ronz (talk) 17:23, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Sounds fine. I'll follow your lead and help with research where you feel it's needed. --Zefr (talk) 20:01, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 20 December 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 06:28, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

---

Purple mangosteen → Mangosteen – In Indonesian and Malay, where this plant originated, the plant is known simply as Manggis, direct translation of Mangosteen. This page is the only page with the name "mangosteen" at Category:Garcinia. Hddty. (talk) 05:23, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

• Comment: The article says the term "mangosteen" can refer to the entire genus, which contains a large number of species. Are we sure that this one is what practically everyone is referring to when they say "mangosteen"? —BarrelProof (talk) 06:28, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Probably. At its Wikidata item, majority of the pages doesn't use "purple" in the name. Based on the logs this page was originally titled "Mangosteen" (logs: Purple mangosteen Mangosteen). When you typed "Mangosteen" on Google Images only purple mangosteen showed up. --Hddty. (talk) 07:27, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

• Comment: Page was unilaterally moved in 2008 by Dysmorodrepanis~enwiki, who appears to be no longer active. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:22, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
• Support per its being the overwhelmingly WP:COMMONNAME and the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. (Just check the major dictionaries.[21][22][23][24][25]) Mangosteen redirects here, so there is nothing currently gained from the extra precision. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:22, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
• Support. While other species in the genus are sometimes called "mangosteens", a qualifying term is always appended (e.g. "button mangosteen"). This species is rarely referred to as "purple mangosteen", and is overwhelmingly the subject referred to by the unqualified term "mangosteen" (not the genus as a whole, or other species in the genus). Plantdrew (talk) 05:07, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
• Support per Plantdrew and the fact that mangosteen redirects here. Guettarda (talk) 15:19, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Who's that Pokémon? Iiiiiit's Bounsweet!

Should a mention of Bounsweet from Pokémon be on here? She's based on the mangosteen and looks just like one. I would think not many people would know what a mangosteen is and Nintendo probably chose that because of that reason but also because, y'know, Alola. Like, I didn't know what a mangosteen was until I saw that's what Bounsweet was based on.

Lucy LostWord (ILike Leavanny) 04:09, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

If anything, the mention should be the other way round. If it's reliably sourced, I don't see why the fact shouldn't be noted at the list article where Bounsweet is covered. --Paul_012 (talk) 03:56, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

True Lucy LostWord (ILike Leavanny) 03:53, 25 October 2024 (UTC)