were below 10°C for 4 months in Gainesville. Temperatures 7. Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. Cash receipts from in Gainesville are lower than in Homestead, Florida earlier farming. Oct. 14, 1982. in the fall; hence acclimation to cold probably starts earlier. 8. Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. Tropical fruit. Oct. 22,1982. Mango freezing tests. Seedling turpentine mango in pots 9. Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. Avocados. April 20 growing in Gainesville were killed at less than -3°C on 1983. February 9 and August 10, 1983, -4.5°C on April 29, 1983, 10. Halma, F. F. 1942. Leaf sap concentration and cold resistance in the and -5.0°C on May 16, 1983 (Fig. 5). The response of seed avocado. Calif. Avocado Soc. Yearbook 48-53. 11. Harris, J. A. and W. Popenoe. 1916. Freezing-point lowering of the ling mango trees is more difficult to explain. Freezing at leaf sap of the horticultural types of Persea americana. T. Agr. Res temperatures above — 3.0°C occurred on 2 occassions as re 7:261-268. J 5 ported previously (3); however, in 2 other tests the leaves 12. Hodgson, R. W. 1933. Resistance to low winter temperature of sub were not damaged above —4.5°C. Results do not con tropical fruit plants. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 30:349-354. 13. Hodgson, R. W. 1934. Further observations on frost injury to sub clusively indicate whether turpentine mangos acclimate to tropical fruit plants. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 32:227-229. cold but suggest that they do not. 14. Krezdorn, A. H. 1970. Evaluation ofcold hardy avocados inFlorida. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 83:382-386. 15. Krezdorn, A. H. 1973. Influence of rootstock on cold hardiness of Literature Cited avocados. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 86:346-348. 16. Krome, W. K. 1958. Observations on cold damage to avocado in 1. Camp, A. F. 1930. Variety, propagation and planting tests of pear, Dade County. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 71:338-341. avocado, Japanese persimmon, fig, and other fruits. Florida Agr. 17. Manis, W. E. and R. J. Knight, Jr. 1967. Avocadogermplasm evalu Expt. Sta. Annu. Rpt. 81. ation: technique used in screening for cold tolerance. Proc Fla 2. Camp, A. F. and H. S. Wolfe. 1934. Variety tests of minor fruits State Hort. Soc. 80:387-391. and ornamentals. Florida Agr. Expt. Sta. Annu. Rpt. 65-66. 18. Scholander, P. F., H. T. Hammel, E. D. Bradstreet, and E. A. 3. Carmichael, W. W. 1958. Observations ofcold damage to mangos Hemraingsen. 1965. Sap pressure in vascular plants. Science 148: in Dade County and the Lower West Coast. Proc. Fla. State Hort. 339-345. Soc. 71:333-335. 19. Wilcox, D. A., F. S. Davies, and D. W. Buchanan. 1983. Root tem 4. Chen, P. M., P. H. Li, and M. J. Burke. 1977. Induction of frost peratures, water relations, and cold hardiness in two citrus root- hardiness in stem cortial tissues of Cornus stolonifer. Michx. by stocks. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 108:318-321. water stress. Plant Physiol. 59:236-239. 20. Weiser, C. J. 1970. Cold resistance and injury in woody plants. 5. Dexter, S. T., W. E. Tottingham, and L. F. Graber. 1932. Investi Science 169:1252-1278. gations of the hardiness of plants by measurements of electrical 21. Yelenosky, G. 1979. Water-stress-induced cold hardening of young conductivity. Plant Physiol. 7:63-79. citrus trees. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 104:270-273. 6. Fling, H. L., B. R. Boyce, and D. J. Beattie. 1967. Index of injury- 22. Young, R. H. 1961. Influence of day length, light intensity, and a useful expression of freezing injury to plant tissues as determined temperature on growth, dormancy, and cold-hardiness of Red by the electrolytic method. Can. J. Plant Sci. 17:229-230. Blush grapefruit trees. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 78:174-179.

Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 96: 215-219. 1983.

THE EMERGING FLORIDA INDUSTRY1 R. P. Bates 1970's, one winery based on grape and several fruit (pri Food Science and Human Nutrition Department, marily citrus) wineries existed on a small scale. In 1981, 3 University of Florida, grape wineries were established and 2 more commenced Gainesville, FL 32611 operation in 1983 (Table 1) (1). The current annual crush capacity of Florida wineries is about 240,000 gal, supported Additional index words. bunch grapes, muscadine by bearing and planted vines of about 150 and 200 acres, grapes. respectively. These wine plantings, distributed roughly 40% bunch grapes and 60% muscadines are estimated to Abstract. Since 1980 Florida has gone from 1 to 5 com represent about 50 % of grape acreage in Florida—the total mercial wineries. The current combined capacity of over of which has increased 300 % in the last 7 yr. 200,000 gal has stimulated wine grape plantings; now Florida is an excellent wine market, in fact, third largest around 350 acres and projected to reach 2,000 by 1990. in the U.S. with wine consumption of over 26 million gal Factors responsible are favorable Florida farm winery legisla in 1982 (3). This figure is somewhat higher than Illinois tion, enthusiasticFlorida Grape Growers Association support, with 25 million gal but considerably below the top 2 states- better wine grape cultivars and cultivation practices, im California and New York at 109 and 52 million gal, respec proved grape handling and wine making procedures, high tively. A large proportion of wine is consumed by tourists; wine quality standards, increased interest in local by however, and even then Florida ranks only 16th in per Floridians and tourists as well as dedicated researchers and capita wine consumption at 2.56 gal. This is higher than winemakers. Constraints to continual growth are high grape the U.S. average of 2.21 gal., appreciably above any other production and harvesting costs, undeveloped marketing Southern state, but far from the California figure of 4.45 strategies, lack of consumer familiarity with local wine types gal. and current national/international wine surpluses. These posi Despite this comparatively large and expanding Florida tive and negative factors are discussed from the standpoint market, by far the majority of wine consumed in the U.S. is of industry capabilities and supporting research efforts. produced in California (69%) or imported (26%), mostly from Europe. Only 5% is produced in other states. Florida's present contribution is insignificant and only New York, There are few Florida agroindustries which have de Washington, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio and a few other veloped as rapidly as commercial wine making. In the mid states warrant recognition in the reporting table (3); yet, statistics concerning number of wineries and initial growth iFlorida Agricultural Experiment Stations Journal Series No. 5151. in Florida are impressive.

Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 96: 1983. 215 Table 1. Commercial wineries of Florida.

Capacity Grape (gal) First plantings35 Current Label vintage Locationy Wine types (acres) (planned)

Midulla's Vineyards 1981* 513 S. Florida Ave. Dry, white, rose & 60 100,000 Tampa, FL 33602 red (bunch) (mostly (200,000) (813) 223-1222 Citrus bunch)

Alaqua Vineyards 1981 Rt. 1, Box 97-C4 Dry, semi-dry sweet 10 8,000 Freeport, FL 32439 white & red Muscadines (25,000) (904) 835-2566 (Muscadines)

Florida Heritage 1981 P.O.Box 116 Dry, semi-dry & 6 20,000 Anthony, FL 32617 sweet white dry Mostly (40,000) (904) 732-3427 red (Muscadines) Muscadines Dry white (bunch)

Lafayette Vineyards 1983 Rt. 7, Box 481 Bunch white 50 10,000 Tallahassee, FL 32308 Muscadine Red & Bunch & (50,000) (904) 878-9041 white Muscadines

Wines of 1983 1205 8th Ave. Bunch white None 100,000 St. Augustine Tampa, FL 33605 Muscadine Red & (120,000) (813) 875-0629 white

^Produced citrus based table and dessert wines and cordials under Fruit Wines of Florida label since 1973. yAll wineries have visitor tours and tastings; check for details. XA11 wineries purchase additional grapes from Florida Grape Growers Association members.

The Grapes serious long-term limitation. Existing cultivars and new breeding lines, in combination with the accumulating ex Grape production is primarily in Central, North and perience and enology backgrounds of Florida winemakers, West Florida with little commercial development in the will make it possible to vary the final wine character sub lower third of the peninsula (Fig. 1). At this time there stantially by proper attention to cultivation, handling, wine are no vineyards of Vitis vinifera L. or vinifera hybrids be making and cellar practices and judicious blending (8). cause these species are not adapted to Florida conditions Native species combined with high quality cultivars through based on 400 yr of poor results. With present cultivars and careful selective breeding have been essential in grape de cultivation practices it is impractical, if not impossible, to velopment and represent a challenging opportunity. Breed grow vinifera or hybrids commercially in Florida (2), al ing emphasis has been on Euvitis (bunch grape) and Vitis though in the Florida Keys and near the barrier islands rotundifolia Michx. (muscadine) species (12, 13, 16). Over lacking the Pierce's disease insect vector, vinifera and the last decade a number of cultivars and breeding lines susceptible species can survive. have been developed or discovered which are suitable for Lack of dominant vinifera germplasm is probably not a wine. Florida has relied mostly on native species for bunch grape cultivars and has drawn heavily upon cooperative

JACKSONVILLE breeding efforts in other southern states in muscadine de velopment (Table 2) (10, 16, 18). Both sources will continue to make vital contributions in the constant search for better wine cultivars.

The Wineries

The oldest existing Florida winery, Midulla's vineyards, DISTRIBUTION IN FLORIDA OF! founded in 1973, has promoted a successful line of fruit and dessert wines, cordials and specialty alcoholic beverages • VINEYARDS TAM based on citrus wine or beverage alcohol (Table 2). Other * WINERIES wise, all wine is derived from grapes and the emphasis is on © CITIES table wines (those of 7 to 14% alcohol). Of the 3 original grape wineries which commenced op erations in 1981, 2 produced only muscadine and the other primarily bunch grape wine during their first 2 seasons. 'Carlos', 'Welder' and 'Dixie' were the white and 'Noble' the red muscadine wine grape. 'Stover' and 'Lake' Emerald' were used for white bunch grape wine. Initially a breeding line El2-59 was used for bunch grape red wine but was soon replaced by 'Conquistador', a purple bunch grape with im proved cultivation characteristics and pigment stability (17). However, reflected in the plantings of the 4th winery (cur rently making their first crush in 1983) and the statement of the 5th winery, bunch, muscadine and appropriate Fig. 1. Distribution of vineyards and wineries in Florida. blended wines are planned. In addition, the 2 wineries which

216 Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 96: 1983. Table 2. Grape cultivars and promising breeding lines recommended for wine in Florida.

Cultivar or Approx. acreage breeding line Origin (year) Bearing Planted Remarks

Bunch Grapes

Green

'Stover' Leeburg (1968) 30 30 Reliable, good quality, white wine 'Lake Emerald' Leesburg (1954) 15 5 High yield, sugar, acid 'Suwannee' Leesburg (1983) < 1 <10 Similar to 'Stover', higher yield H 18-37 Leesburg < 1 < 1 Unique "spicey" character L9-10 Leesburg < 1 < 1 Similar to 'Lake Emerald'

Purple

E 12-59 Leesburg < 5 0 Supplanted by 'Conquistador' 'Conquistador' Leesburg (1983) 5 25 Acceptable red wine

Muscadine Grapes

Bronze

'Welder' Leesburg (1977) 30 20 Reliable white wine 'Dixie' Leesburg & N.C. State* 40 20 Similar to 'Welder' (lyvo)/1Q'7fi\ 'Doreen' Ms. States & N.C. State < 1 < 1 Similar to 'Dixie' (iy»4)/lQQOX GA 18-7-3 Georgia^ < 1 < 1 Unique fruity wine character GA 23-45 Georgia < 1 < 1 Unique fruity wine character

Black

'Noble' N.C. State (1974) 40 30 Acceptable red wine 'Regale' N.C. State (1982) < 1 < 1 Similar to Noble

.C. State = North Carolina State Univ.; Ms. State = Mississippi State Univ.; Georgia = Univ. Georgia. were strictly muscadine producers have crushed commercial and dissemination of grape cultivation techniques, research quantities of 'Stover' and experimental batches of bunch forums and workshops. grape breeding lines in 1983. Four of the 5 wineries have The Florida Grape Marketing Association (FGMA), their own vineyard as a source of commercial wines and also founded in 1923 and reestablished in 1980, consists of experimental grapes. Wineries work closely with fellow the largest commercial growers. They have organized an members of the Florida Grape Growers Association and effective fresh grape promotion and distribution system IFAS in determining planting practices, cultivation practices which annually moves 500 tons of Florida grapes into whole and establishing maturity and quality standards for the wine sale outlets. This coordination function of the FGMA has grapes. At present all wineries bottle wines in 750 ml corked been used by some wineries and its potential for efficiently containers without wood cooperage and market them after marketing wine grapes has been recognized by all wineries. 8 to 18 months of combined bulk and bottle aging. The wines range from dry to sweet at 11 to 12.5% alcohol and The Legislative Climate are in limited distribution throughout Florida. They are well received by the local community and tourists with en As a result of the educational and promotional efforts couraging numbers of repeat sales. of the FGGA, in 1979 the Florida Legislature enacted 3 There are at least 2 additional grape growers who are bills which provided a highly favorable environment for the seriously considering starting wineries within the next 24 wine industry: 1) the annual commercial wine making months and several more actively acquiring the viticulture licensing tax was reduced from $1,000 to $50; 2) the state and enology background for possible winery commitments. tax on table wines produced exclusively from Florida agri By 1990 there may be 10 Florida wineries with a combined cultural products was eliminated. This very appreciable capacity of 750,000 gal. Of course, participation of estab cost advantage over finished wine or raw material (grapes, lished out-of-state firms could rapidly and dramatically in juice or must) entering Florida from other states or nations crease the number of wineries or production capacity. became even more valuable September 1, 1983 when the tax went from $1.75 to $2.25/wine gallon-highest in the U.S.; 3) the state permit requirement on home wine making was Incentives for the Wine Industry waived and the federal regulation adopted. While home Along with the pioneering efforts of the entrepreneurs winemaking does not directly affect commercial production who have made the financial and professional commitment since this wine cannot be sold, such hobby activities greatly in the 5 Florida wineries, the prime mover in grape and popularize Florida wines and provide a favorable atmos wine developments has been the Florida Grape Growers phere for wine grape growing and hobby winemaking (6). Association (FGGA). Founded in 1923, the FGGA repre Indeed, much of the enthusiastic support for commercial sents the grass-roots support for grape production and wines came from amateur winemakers, a few of whom are utilization in state. The roughly 300 members and their now commercial winemakers, growing grapes for the win elected officers interface with the general public, the news eries or moving in one or both of those directions. media, the agricultural research community and government officials at the county and state level (14, 15). In coopera Grape Research tion with the Florida Cooperative Extension Service and State Agricultural Experiment Station the FGGA has been Florida is fortunate to have grape-related research under active in testing breeding lines and cultivars, acquisition way at a number of institutions. Within the University of

Proc.Fla. State Hort.Soc. 96: 1983. 217 Florida's Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) growing. Pierce's disease has been mentioned as the major the Leesburg Agricultural Research Center (ARC, formerly factor limiting the cultivation of classic, traditional wine the Watermelon and Grape Investigations Laboratory) has grapes. In addition, uneven rainfall, infertile, droughty been the site of grape breeding and related cultivation re soils and insects, weeds, and plant diseases present a very search since its inception in 1931. Field trials coordinated hostile environment which only the hardiest introductions by Leesburg scientists have been conducted at other IFAS can overcome. ARC's in order to determine adaptability of key cultivars/ In addition, our hot humid climate dictates an aggressive, breeding lines under test (14, 15). Of the 9 cultivars cur thorough spray program for even the most rugged recom rently in use or recommended for wine in Florida and the 4 mended cultivars. This input, although costly for musca highly promising breeding lines, 9 were developed at Lees dines, is required more frequently for bunch grapes. Another burg or through cooperative efforts of IFAS scientists (Table above average expense is manual harvesting. Thus, efficient 2). In addition, essential contributions toward understand machine-harvestable cultivars and compatible cultivation ing and overcoming disease, insect, and cultivation con practices will be a necessity (4). straints originated at Leesburg (2). Although most viticulturists and enologists in traditional Much of the initial wine grape evaluation, develop wine regions of the world may disagree, it is probably more ment of winemaking techniques, and programs in support of a challenge and long-term advantage than an impediment of home winemaking and the FGGA originated in the IFAS, that classic vinifera and hybrids do not grow in Florida. Food Science and Human Nutrition Department, Gaines Cultivation calamaties over 4 centuries have forced FJoridi- ville. These efforts cover all aspects of grape processing and ans to pay particular attention to native species and hybrids utilization (5, 7, 9) with about 60% of activities devoted to adaptable to the region. Pierce's disease severely restricts winemaking. Current plans call for an enology program use of the most promising hybrids as well as some native with a new teaching component at the undergraduate and species. Consequently, growers and winemakers have been graduate level, thereby complementing the expanding re forced to develop non-traditional practices for dealing with search and extension activities in enology. these non-traditional grapes, usually with acceptable and The USD A through the Citrus and Subtropical Products occasionally with gratifyingly surprising results. Laboratory in Winter Haven and the Horticultural Re search Lab in Orlando have contributed significantly. The The Danger Winter Haven lab in cooperation with Florida A & M Uni versity (FAMU) has developed a grape deseeding device No matter how high quality the grapes, efficient the which promises to increase the utilization potential of mus vine-to-wine operations, talented the enologist or palatable cadines (11). Also, their simple density flotation system for the wines, unless a strong consumer demand is generated, separation of muscadines by maturity (11) should be valu met and maintained, the industry cannot be able for fresh market and wine grapes. The Orlando USDA successful. lab, also in cooperation with FAMU, has addressed post- This is an unusually difficult period to enter the wine harvest and storage problems of muscadines (19). industry. Due to increased grape plantings and winery ex Through the Cooperative State Research Service, Florida pansions in many parts of the world in response to the wine is a member of a 10-southern state Viticulture and Enology boom of the 1970's, there is currently around a billion gal Work Group contributing to Regional Project S-142, "Grape lons of wine in storage in the wine regions of the U.S., Germ Plasm Evaluation for Enological Utilization." Coop Europe and Latin America and a productive 1983 crop erative efforts of this project, initiated in 1977 have resulted now mature. in standardized techniques for evaluating wine grapes and This billion gallons is roughly twice the annual U.S. microvinification procedures. An important regional activity consumption. Of course, all the world's surplus wine is not is the exchange of germplasm and cultivation information. destined for the U.S. However, we are the major focus of Several of the more promising muscadine breeding lines increasingly aggressive sales efforts—assisted appreciably by obtained from Georgia now hold great promise for Florida the monetary strength of the dollar, the urgency to reduce wine (Table 2). S-142 participating states have increased global inventories and the potential for growth in wine con commercial wineries 200% since 1977—23 to 69 in this 6-yr sumption which is currently one tenth the per capita figure period (1) (Table 3). of major wine consuming nations—France, Italy and Spain. Within the last few months there has been a noticeable Constraints softening of domestic and imported retail wine prices in Gainesville. This turn of events is cyclic with most agricul Florida is plagued by serious impediments to grape tural products and, within limits, self-correcting. Neverthe Table 3. Southern wineries 1977 to 1983. less, it does pose a serious problem for small local wineries with their comparatively unrecognized new brands, high start-up and market entry costs and lack of established State 1977* 1983y marketing/distribution systems. However, in view of the technical competence and personal commitment of winery Alabama 0 1 Arkansas 8 9 proprietors and winemakers, the FGGA and their sup Florida 1 5 porters in state, the 5 wineries now in operation and the Georgia 1 5 several soon to follow should weather the storm and emerge Mississippi 1 4 as strong regional competitors. The principal beneficiaries North Carolina 1 4 of the dedicated effort will be the wine consuming public in South Carolina 1 3 Tennessee 0 3 Florida. Texas 3 13 Virginia 7 22 The Future Total 23 69 Florida wineries will probably follow the pattern com zDatafrom (3) mon to successful wine developments in other regions of the yData from (1) U.S. First, a fairly local market based on regional interest,

218 Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 96: 1983. state loyalty and tourists' curiosity with winery tours and on- Sheet FS-3, Fla. Coop. Exten. Ser. premises sales being very important. Then due to experi 7. Bates, R. P., D. Mills, J. A. Mortensen, and J. A. Cornell. 1980. mentation, high quality and winemaking innovations, cer Prefermentation treatments affecting the quality of Muscadine grape wine. Amer. J. Enol. & Vitic. 31:136-143. tain wines will acquire a better than average appeal. If this 8. Bates, R. P., J. A. Mortensen, and T. E. Crocker. 1980. Florida popularity is capitalized on, it can lead to expanded de grapes: The next decade. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 93:120-124. mand, more fine tuning and a reputation for consistency, 9. Bates, R. P., R. L. Coleman, and C. J. Wagner, Jr. 1981. Grape quality and value within that particular grape/wine type. processing and utilization in Florida. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc 94* 343-347. It is remarkable what different winemaking techniques can 10. Carroll, D. E., Jr., W. B. Nesbitt, and M. W. Hoover. 1975. Charac accomplish with a single grape cultivar to come up with teristics of red wine of six cultivars of Michx T. palatable wines of vastly different character (5, 7, 10). Given Food Sci. 40:919-921. the present and potential diversity in Florida grape species, 11. Coleman, R. L., C. J. Wagner, Jr., M. S. Saunders, and R. E. Berry. 1982. Processing Muscadine grapes. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 95: innovation in enology practices and rapid progress up the 101-103. learning curve, some pleasant wine surprises are in store for 12. Crocker, T. E. and J. A. Mortensen. 1983. The muscadine grape. wine enthusiasts fortunate enough to have access to Florida Fruit Crops Fact Sheet FC 16. Fla. Coop. Exten. Ser. wines. 13. Crocker, T. E. and J. A. Mortensen. 1983. The bunch grape. Fruit Crops Fact Sheet FC 17A. Fla. Coop. Exten. Ser. 14. Inst. Food Agr. Sci. 1983. Grape committee report. In Florida Agri Literature Cited culture in the 80's. Univ. Florida. 15. Mortensen, J. A. 1978. Grapes in Florida: Past, present and future. 1. Adams, L. D. 1984. The Wines of America. 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill Fruit South, p. 86-89. March, 1978. Book Co., New York, NY. 16. Mortensen, J. A. and C. P. Andrews. 1981. Grape cultivar trials and 2. Adlerz, W. C. and D. L. Hopkins. 1981. Grape insects and diseases recommended cultivars for Florida viticulture. Proc. Fla. State Hort in Florida. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 94:331-336. Soc. 94:328-331. 3. Anonymous. 1983. Statistical issue. Wines & Vines, July, 1983. 17. Mortensen, J. A. 1983. Conquistador: A purple bunch grape for 4. Balerdi, C. F. and J. A. Mortensen. 1973. Suitability for mechanical Florida. Cir. S-300. Inst. Food Agr. Sci., Univ. Florida. harvest in cultivars of muscadine grapes (Vitis rotundifolia Michx.). 18. Nesbitt, W. B., E. P. Maness, W. E. Ballinger, and D. E. Carrol, Jr. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 86:342-344. 1974. Relationship of anthocyanins of black muscadine grapes (Vitis 5. Bates, R. P., M. Sinisterra, and J. A. Mortensen. 1977. A comparison rotundifolia Michx.) to wine color. Amer. J. Enol. Vitic. 25:30-32. of home, laboratory and quasi-industrial wine making procedures 19. Saunders, M. S., F. Takeda, and T. T. Hatton. 1981. Postharvest with Stover grapes. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 90:195-199. physiology and senescence in muscadines. Proc. Fla. State Hort Soc 6. Bates, R. P. 1978. Home wine making in Florida. Food Sci. Fact 94:340-343.

Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 96: 219-220. 1983.

THE BACURIPARI: A SHADE-TOLERANT TROPICAL FRUIT TREE FOR SOUTHERN FLORIDA1 Carl W. Campbell ficient room for many specimen trees to grow in full sun. IFAS, University of Florida, Gardeners and landscape designers therefore prize species Agricultural Research and Education Center, which can develop normally and bear fruit in the shade. 18905 SW 280 St., The bacuripari or charichuela has proved to be adapted to Homestead, FL 33031 these conditions.

Additional index words, charichuela, Rheedia macrophylla. Experimental Plantings

Abstract. Rheedia macrophylla (Mart.) Planch, et Triana The bacuripari is native to the forests of the Amazon basin in South America, where it grows in the understory in is native to the forests of the Amazon region of South Amer the shade of larger trees. The first recorded introduction to ica. Its common names are bacuripari and charichuela. This Florida was in 1962 when Dr. and Mrs. Otto Churney medium-sized tree has an attractive, pyramidal canopy and brought seeds from Trinidad. They planted some seeds and large, leathery, opposite leaves which are dark red at first, distributed others to members of the Rare Fruit Council, becoming dark green as they mature. There are usually 2 Miami, and to the University of Florida Agricultural Re periods of flowering during the year, and fruit matures from search and Education Center, Homestead (AREC). Trees May to August and October to November. The fruit is globose were set in the field at AREC in 1965. Dr. and Mrs. Churney to ovoid and dark yellow to orange. The edible pulp is white reported the first fruiting of their trees in 1970. The largest and has a pleasant, subacid flavor. A useful characteristic of tree at AREC bore fruit first in 1972 and it has been fruiting the bacuripari is its shade tolerance. It will grow and fruit regularly since that time. There are now 4 trees in the AREC well under the shade of larger trees. It has cold tolerance planting. Additional trees are being grown at various loca similar to that of the Tahiti' lime. The bacuripari has value as tions in southern Florida. an ornamental and as a source of edible fruit in southern Florida. Description

Tropical fruit trees are widely used in landscaping in The bacuripari tree (1, 2) forms a pyramidal canopy southern Florida, where they contribute the beauty and with a single trunk. The tree is reported to reach a height utility to the home garden. Trees of most species require of 24-36 ft (2). Trees growing at AREC have heights of conditions of full sun to develop an attractive canopy and approximately 18 ft at 15 yr of age and 28.5 ft at 20 yr of to flower and fruit successfully. Few properties have suf- age. The branches are opposite and form broadly obtuse angles with the trunk. iFlorida Agr. Exp. Stations Journal Series No. 5099. The large leaves are simple, elliptic, entire and opposite.

Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 96: 1983. 219