Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Truth-or-Peace t1_j6k35ed wrote

We do, in fact, have some varieties of seedless apples. They just aren't very popular. There are two main problems:

First, even if the apple is seedless, it's still going to have a core, and people still aren't going to want to eat the core. So making it seedless isn't super profitable. (This problem is even more pronounced in cherries: it's not the seed that people object to, but rather the stone around the seed.)

Second, apples are notoriously hard to breed. The children are nothing like their parents. Basically each tree we plant is a new roll of the dice. The odds that a mutant seedless apple will also have other desirable properties like "has at least a hint of sweetness" and "is not a crabapple" are low.

I think the Romans might have had a decent seedless apple at one point, but, if so, it went the way of the silphium.

86

AshFraxinusEps t1_j6kyrq0 wrote

> it went the way of the
>
>silphium

I've been thinking about this recently. I doubt it is fully extinct? Surely we could excavate and try to find a seed? This was a common plant all over the med, so why would it be completely gone without a single surviving seed?

3

ShalmaneserIII t1_j6l1u86 wrote

Even if that seed exists, how will you know what it is?

"Needle in a haystack" is nothing compared to "small seed somewhere in North Africa"

20

AshFraxinusEps t1_j6mlnfx wrote

Don't we know some major islands which were giant farms for the stuff? And maybe the plant is valuable enough to fund the digs to find the seeds

2

Redshift2k5 t1_j6l4wu3 wrote

we don't know for sure the identity of the plant. good luck planting every seed from every archeological site in the Roman empire to see which is silphium

9

AshFraxinusEps t1_j6moq6m wrote

> good luck planting every seed from every archeological site in the Roman empire to see which is silphium

This is more the problem. But could be worth it, bearing in mind how historically important it was. We may have modern equivalents, but I bet that the medicinal value in modern times would be quite high too tbh

2

Redshift2k5 t1_j6n11p0 wrote

Just planting seeds isn't enough. If it was a hybrid they often don't have viable offspring or the offspring are different from parent hybrid plants.

The last stalk of silphium was given to empower Nero. They knew exactly what the plant was and they knew when it was no longer being cultivated.

5

johnn48 t1_j6lghf1 wrote

I ran across an interesting article which addressed just that point. A number of hypotheses were presented: 1) that the plant reproduced asexually by spreading its roots, 2) that the climate contributed to its demise, 3) that it grew in a narrow geographical area and was harvested to extinction. These are my narrow take of the article but it’s a definite must read.

7

AshFraxinusEps t1_j6mznsg wrote

Interesting, and cheers. I did think we'd eventually rediscover it, as it was too widespread to be completely gone (although those are famous last words of conservationists throughout history)

From your points, while the link says it is slow growing, only .1 really would excuse it going completely extinct, as if it reproduced by asexual budding then any buds in the soil would have long-since died. But from the link, it does seem seed-based and therefore it'd be odd to be completely extinct

1

DjShoryukenZ t1_j6l2mcz wrote

> I think the Romans might have had a decent seedless apple at one point

I doubt there are seeds of a seedless apple.

3

AshFraxinusEps t1_j6movii wrote

Not sure who you were replying to, but I never mentioned apples :-P

1

United-Ad5268 t1_j6lksac wrote

Because that’s the case with the majority of plant and animal life that has existed. Extinct. No trace.

1

[deleted] t1_j6mk905 wrote

[deleted]

1

AshFraxinusEps t1_j6mm18r wrote

Doubt that. Most/all natural plants have seeds and to my knowledge this one was just a default herb-like plant, so should have some seeds

Also the fact that it was cultivated suggests that it had a normal plant lifecycle. We can make seedless fruits but not so much for herbs and such

1

PoopLogg t1_j6lhhjg wrote

> (This problem is even more pronounced in cherries: it's not the seed that people object to, but rather the stone around the seed.) >

🤣 Yeah because that's definitely not what op was talking about 🙄🤣

1

Truth-or-Peace t1_j6ltl5b wrote

Well, the distinction is important here. In the fruits we've got seedless varieties of, the fruit forms first and then the seeds form within it; all that has to happen is for that process to be interrupted. But in stone fruits like cherries, the stone forms first and then the fruit forms around it; creating a stoneless stone fruit would require somehow dissolving the stone after it was no longer needed.

4

andrea_ci t1_j6mbkal wrote

> it's still going to have a core

a fruit

1

Any-Growth8158 t1_j6keodz wrote

Definitely don't want to get rid of the "stone" around the seed in the cherry. It'd only take about three cherries to kill you via cyanide poisoning if it weren't for that "stone's" protection.

−1

Jaimzell t1_j6kgoc5 wrote

If you’re just ironically repeating the common myth, my apologies for missing it. But 3 cherries are not enough to kill you via cyanide poisoning.

24

C4-BlueCat t1_j6kib73 wrote

3-4 of Morello(?) cherries, 7-9 of normal ones according to healthline

1

KermitingMurder t1_j6kjcfv wrote

3-4 yew berries (which are similar looking to cherries and also have a stone in the centre) is enough to kill you if you eat the stone in the centre. They taste great but if you swallow even one of those stones you should take a trip to the hospital and I wouldn't eat too many just in case, even if you are careful about the stones the rest of the tree is also toxic so probably best not to eat too many.

14

CutAtBris t1_j6kt7jq wrote

I'll keep that in mind next time I'm out Yew berry scavenging!

10