|Strawberry has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Science. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as B-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|To-do list for Strawberry:|
- 1 2005
- 2 As Food
- 3 so many pics
- 4 Page move, merge
- 5 History Section Full of Speculation
- 6 Absurd statement
- 7 See Also
- 8 Unique seeds
- 9 Merger proposal for Chili manzanar alto
- 10 Request for Collaboration on Major Re-Write
- 11 Big piece of missing info
- 12 Fruit or not fruit, that is the question
- 13 Nutrition table
- 14 Strawberries developing fungus
- 15 Absurd picture
- 16 Quantity of fruit production
- 17 What’s in a name?
- 18 No place for general Strawberry info
- 19 Potential references
- 20 "... In both culinary and botanical terms, the entire structure is considered a fruit..."
- 21 Requested move
- 22 sberries as nuts?
- 23 Strawberry
- 24 China's Strawberry Production
- 25 Semi-protected edit request on 10 June 2014
- 26 Genetics blunder
- 27 Semi-protected edit request on 7 July 2014
- 28 Semi-protected edit request on 9 July 2014
- 29 Gee, that strawberry needs a shave...
I can not see that there is any info anywhere if this image really depictures a strawberry of the ananassa species/variety, so I removed the pic. / Habj 08:43, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
This article is really in need of some major updates, as the bulk of the information about cultivation and pests was incredibly out of date. I've made a quick attempt to fix the cultivation part, but this could be done much more artfully if some one had the time. Also, because the regions in which strawberries are cultivated have changed in the last several decades, the diseases and pests of commerical importance have as well, and this information should probably be updated if some one gets the chance (I may later if I have time.) I've left the previous information on seed propagation, but it's not really terribly relevant, as it is done rather rarely (some one may be interested, however).
I also fixed a few other things: Fragaria chiloensis did NOT come from the island of Chiloe. Frezier, who does not mention collecting it on Chiloe, refers to it as Fragaria chiliensis, and it is only Linnaeus who changes this to chiloensis (Darrow suggests that Linnaeus may have been confused as to its origin). Similarly, the statement that ananassa resulted from a cross with F. virginiana from Virginia is again reading too much into the name. No one knows for sure where and how virginiana made its way to Europe, and it likely did so at several times, from several places, before the accidental hybridization or hybridizations between chiloensis and virginiana occurred. The species has a range covering most of North America east of the Rockies, so it's impossible to say for sure that the plants involved came from Virginia. Also, no one knows for sure if this hybridization occurred in France or elsewhere in Europe, and there is some thought that it might have been in the Netherlands. Some at the time believed ananassa to be from Suriname, although that's rather unlikely. It's quite possible that it occurred multiple times in different places in Europe.
Also: 'Chandler' is not everbearing, 'Gariguette' is not Fragaria vesca. Elakazal 05:38, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
This article is missing info about Strawberries as Food, from the point of view of the user/eater. Why are big agribusiness strawberries so tasteless? Why are small wild ones so flavorful?
What are the best storage conditions for ripe fruit, to keep as long as possible? In the refrigerator? 18.104.22.168 00:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Are commercial strawberries much larger than 20 years ago? 22.214.171.124 19:39, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Most other fruits and vegetables have their content in nutrition as a percentage of a DRI scale but strawberries simply provide the amount of grams per cup. I don't think this is very helpful in comparison to other pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 07:25, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
so many pics
- I've removed one, feel free to be bold and remove more if you'd like. WLU (talk) 21:24, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Page move, merge
I 'moved' the page (there was a redirect, so I had to cut and paste move. The reason was MOS:CAPS - I couldn't see a reason to capitalize 'Strawberry'.
- i agree that it's a bit confusing to have the two articles and there is a lot of redundancy. most people who speak of strawberries probably mean the modern cultivated form that is treated in this article. i support the merger.Truetom (talk) 17:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
History Section Full of Speculation
Much of this section is inaccurate and or speculation.
1)Though originally from the New World, strawberries were considered poisonous in Argentina until the mid-nineteenth century.
2)Popular etymology has it that the name "straw" berry comes from gardeners' practice of mulching strawberries with straw to protect the fruits from rot (a pseudoetymology that can be found in non-linguistic sources such as the Old Farmer's Almanac 2005).
&2)There is an alternative, albeit equally implausible, theory that the name derives from the Anglo-Saxon verb for "strew" (meaning to spread around) which was streabergen (Strea means "strew" and Bergen means "berry" or "fruit") and thence to streberie, straiberie, strauberie, straubery, strauberry, and finally, "strawberry", the word which we use today. The name might have come from the fact that the fruit and various runners appear "strewn" along the ground. However, there is no evidence that the Anglo-Saxons ever grew strawberries, and even less that they knew of this practice, as strawberries are originally from the Americas.
3)Most likely, strawberries received their name from the long-time practice of packing the delicate fruit in straw.
1)Strawberries are native to most of the northern hemisphere, including Europe & Britain. The garden strawberry is simply a hybrid of North and South American varieties. Were the native strawberries of Argentina considered poisonous or the garden hybrids,specifically grown for food in Europe? The later would seem unlikely. Is there a source for that statement?
2)What is "implausible" about this etymology? It is supported by the Oxford English Dictionary. Particularly in the lineage of the word from streberi(g)e (1000) to strauberiis (1328-29) to streberie (1340-1450) to streberes (1541) to strawberyes (1542)to strawberies (1620).
3)Clearly, from the above, the word has been in use for wild strawberries, including the "wild" strawberries which were cultivated*, since long before the hybrid that created the modern "garden" version and modern agriculture necesitated their packing in straw - this seems purely conjecture. Were they packed in straw in the year 1000?
The World Book Encyclopedia indicates that strawberries were cultivated by the ancient Romans. *The Oxford English Dictionary sites a source from 1620 that states: "The wilde or voluntary strawberies..are not so good as those that are manured in gardens." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drayke (talk • contribs) 02:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
1) I deleted the "though originally from the New World" statement. They're not native to Argentina, so it's not really relevant anyway. I too doubt the veracity of the claim. 2) I removed the "implausible" bit. This seems to me to be the closest thing to an accepted etymology, though there doesn't seem to be a consensus. The bit about Anglo-Saxons not knowing about them because they were from the Americas has been removed, since that's nonsense. Although evidence is pretty limited, the name appears on lists of plant names as early as the 10th century, so it seems likely the Anglo-Saxons were aware of it, and probably collecting it from the wild, if not cultivating it. 3) The evidence for the "packing in straw" idea has always seemed very thin to me. I changed this to represent it as one explanation, not the preferred one.
I disagree with the World Book's claim that strawberries were cultivated by the ancient Romans--although referenced (very occasionally) by the Romans, it is always (to my knowledge) referenced as a wild plant or medicinal herb, not as a cultivated crop.Elakazal (talk) 06:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
The article says: The Garden Strawberry was first bred in Europe in the early 14th century, and represents the accidental cross of Fragaria virginiana from eastern North America, which was noted for its flavor, and Fragaria chiloensis from Chile, which was noted for its large size.
Absurd since Europe did not discover America for such purposes until the late 15th century.
I added a "See Also" section. Since this article is about the garden strawberry, I think it's a good idea to include only the two other species that are of some agricultural use (Fragaria vesca and Fragaria moschata), rather than all 20 or so Fragaria species. AdRem (talk) 13:56, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Strawberry seeds are not the small seed on the outside of the fruit. The seed looking things on the outside are really the fruit. The seeds are inside the seed like things on the outside. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 03:04, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Merger proposal for Chili manzanar alto
I am recommending a merger between the gist of Chili manzanar alto, which appears to be a cultivar of white strawberry. The original author appeared to have been attempting to discuss the potential for less allergin response in white strawberry cultivars through this article. I was able to turn up some background information to help in this discussion. See: http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/medicine_health/report-45626.html and http://strawberriesweb.com/strawberries/Strawberry+Allergy/ Jo7hs2 (talk) 18:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
- I'd say go for it. This is a pretty uncontroversial merger and should fit nicely in the cultivation section. Let me know when you're done so I can delete the talk page of that article. Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 23:59, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Request for Collaboration on Major Re-Write
I'm curious... Would anybody be interested in collaborating w/me on a major re-write of this article? There really are a great deal of issues with this article, and they need to be solved. I think that the best way to carry this out would be a complete re-write. Jo7hs2 (talk) 18:37, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Big piece of missing info
Do strawberries grow on a vine or on a bush? I've heard people say different things, and can't find a consensus online. There's no basic description of a strawberry (e.g. "heart-shaped, red when ripe, seeds on the outside, grows on vince/bush"). Is there an expert who can cite an impeccable flora reference? --184.108.40.206 (talk) 21:49, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, this should be described. I don't know where to get actual sources, but the answer is neither. Strawberries are herbaceous perennials. The plants are low-lying and spread via runners which don't climb. I would call them groundcover. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 18:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Fruit or not fruit, that is the question
Someone sometime added the sentence
- Accessory fruits are also termed, rather inaptly, false or spurious fruits"<ref name=Esau/>, but a strawberry is a true fruit.
I deleted the words "rather inaptly" since they reflect a biased point-of-view (POV): if some botanists define "fruit" that way, we should only record the fact without passing judgement.
The second part of the sentence, "but a strawberry is a true fruit" is also POV: those who call it "false fruit" presumably would not agree that it is a "true fruit", so that phrase is essentially sayng that the opinion of those people is irrelevant. Since there is a reference for the first part, but not for the second, I have deleted the latter.
Instead, I have emphasized that the word "fruit" has a common meaning and a technical mening, and the latter may or may not include the strawberry. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 03:46, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
- That sentence was a quote from Esau, one of the quintessential botanists. She was recording the inapt usage, not condoning it. "rather inaptly" is part of the quote, so shouldn't be removed. I'm removing the statement that botanists call them false fruit. Nadiatalent (talk) 21:18, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
The nutrition table is messing up the formatting of the article and it seems like excessive information. At most, it should be a small table like in orange (fruit). Comments? 18.104.22.168 (talk) 22:16, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Strawberries developing fungus
- Yes, this backwards timelapse of rotting strawberries is cool, but seems both gratuitous and bizarre for this article. --Ericjs (talk) 06:07, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, they probably are. If you want to remove it that would be fine with me. I didn't because it seems likely to spark an edit war with whoever put it there and like-minded persons. Nadiatalent (talk) 17:08, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Quantity of fruit production
I started adding 2008 figures to the table, but last years Italy figures from the same source don't match the article, I haven't got time to check them all - Anyone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 19:55, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
What’s in a name?
What is a “garden strawberry”? I’ve never heard this term. A strawberry is a strawberry, unless referring to the wild variety, so I assume the name implies a cultivated strawberry. I propose we change the name of the article to just “Strawberry” and keep the disambiguation link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 09:00, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
I agree. Whether or not a strawberry is commonly cultivated, it could still grown in a garden. I think that it would not be unreasonable to change the wording. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Falterdg (talk • contribs) 20:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
"Strawberry" already redirects here; I don't see a problem. If the article is renamed to "Strawberry" then the introductory paragraphs would have to be changed so that "garden strawberry" becomes "strawberry" and that would lead to false statements such as "The strawberry was first bred in Brittany, France" (strawberries were found in the wild by early humans thousands of years earlier). "Garden strawberry" is the name that is used by agricultural professionals for this plant. Nadiatalent (talk) 13:24, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
"Garden strawberry" has for a long time meant ananassa, but there's now also vescana (see http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-94-011-0467-8_38#page-1). Not sure how this should be worked in, but I think it needs including. Dismalscholar (talk) 04:03, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
No place for general Strawberry info
Regarding the removal of information in the history section - I agree with why it was done. There is a difference between the modern strawberry and earlier versions. But that also means a lot of information is left on the wayside. I have checked and there appears to be no place to add information preceding the garden strawberry. Should there be a new page dedicates to the Strawberry as a general description (and how most readers would understand it)? Or should there be a new section in this article, perhaps called 'Early Strawberries' or 'Before The Garden Strawberry'? Gabbahead (talk) 12:45, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
- I would support making a separate page. Perhaps it could be called strawberry, along the lines of raspberry, which notably does not have a taxobox, or perhaps "uses of strawberries". I'd like to see the current Garden strawberry page renamed to Fragaria × ananassa. There is already The breeding of strawberries, which could cover some of the material, but not the historic uses, or etymology. I don't think that material belongs on the Fragaria page because there are Fragaria species that are not used for their fruit. Nadiatalent (talk) 15:02, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
- Paredes-López, O. et al. ”Berries: improving human health and healthy aging, and promoting quality life – a review”, Plant Foods for Human Nutrition (2010),65(3):299-308.
- Seeram, Navindra P. ”Strawberry Phytochemicals and Human Health: A Review”, Proceedings of the VI North American Strawberry Symposium (2007).
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) 23:00, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
"... In both culinary and botanical terms, the entire structure is considered a fruit..."
sberries as nuts?
Why does the main strawberry article cover a particular cultivar that is grown commercially and not the Fragaria article that covers the subject more broadly? I think this should be fixed. Candleabracadabra (talk) 15:30, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
- I completely agree, but there is a strong force in wikipedia that argues that article names must use the name most commonly used by "most" wikipedia readers. You could try asking for further opinions at WT:PLANTS. In this case, it seems to be an argument about just how ignorant we should assume that wikipedia readers are. I'd argue that for gardeners, Fragaria vesca is at least as important, and that wild species are what people often encounter and want to know about in large parts of the world. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 15:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
China's Strawberry Production
I can't find good references. For now I use some document from United States Department of State. The Chinese production is more than that of U.S., so that not mentioning China but ranking U.S. production as "No. 1" is misleading. --Ahyangyi (talk) 20:31, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 10 June 2014
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
Hello. Could you consider adding a timelapse video of strawberry growth to appropriate section? It should nicely demonstrate the growth and formation of the fruit. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Strawberry_growth_(Video).webm Frooxius (talk) 13:11, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done by Sam Sailor in this edit. Thanks for uploading!···Vanischenu (mc/talk) 08:40, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
This page is semi-protected at present so I can't change anything as a new user, but a very obvious mistake is made in the genetics section: octoploid means the cultivated strawberry has eight sets of chromosomes, not eight chromosomes total. Strawberries are octoploid with seven chromosomes for a total of 56 chromosomes. This information is visible in the academic article cited at the sentence making this error. Someone without a biological/genetic background was out of their realm of knowledge when they wrote this, but it's a quick fix! Would fix if I could. Biologist, great sage, eminent junkie (talk) 15:23, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 7 July 2014
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
The "Genetics" section of the Strawberry article is rife with error. Octoploid means there are 8 sets of chromosomes, not that there are 8 total! Someone with a background in genetics needs to get their hands on this. Biologist, great sage, eminent junkie (talk) 20:46, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
- Done Good catch. talk 06:35, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 9 July 2014
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
A link to the National Agricultural Library site is broken. Please update the link for Reference item 4:
Darrow, George M. "The Strawberry: History, Breeding and Physiology". to go to this page: http://specialcollections.nal.usda.gov/speccoll/collectionsguide/darrow/Darrow_TheStrawberry.pdf
Delete this broken link: http://www.nal.usda.gov/pgdic/Strawberry/darpubs.htm