Benny: Finally found what W stands for in W. Murcott. Had to admit that I forgot about this problem and only came across something accidentally and remembered your question from years back.

Actually the Delite mandarin is the Afourer mandarin, also known as W. Murcott mandarin, but is sold under the trade name Delite mandarin. Afourer mandarin is also one of the leading cultivars that have been planted in California in recent years.

You can call it W. Murcott, or White Murcott, or Afourer, or you can call it Delite®. They are all different names for the same variety that was introduced to Florida as W. Murcott and released by the Bureau of Citrus Budwood Registration in 1999. This new variety arrived here after a long journey from its place of origin, Morocco, to Florida via California. In Morocco, it is a major commercial variety known as Afourer and is only grown on the property of the King of Morocco. The variety is also being grown in California and interest is increasing. Some of the California fruit is marketed under the trademark name Delite®.

The discovery of the Delite was first made in Morocco where it originally developed as a hybrid from an existing mandarin tree. It was officially released to growers in the United States in 1992 and released by the CCPP to the public in 1999.

If you don't have any other citrus cultivars within 2 miles of your grove of Delite, then you will have mostly seedless fruits, with a few fruits containing 4 seeds maximum. But planted next to any clementine or satsuma, you will have 25 to 30 seeds per fruit! Just imagine yourself in my yard where not only the satsumas are nearby, but multiple types of satsumas and clementines are literally rubbing blooms with my W.Murcott on the same tree. Perhaps I'll get 50 seeds per fruit on my first time fruits of W.Murcott from Benny.

http://fshs.org/CRECHOME/publicationsaf.htm

Actually the" W" in W. Murcott really does not stand for anything. The "W" is just a letter in the coordinates (INRA W) of an experimental plot, and Afourer is the name of a nearby town to the experiment station.

" The mandarin variety "W. Murcott Afourer" (also called
Afourer) was first noticed by W.W. Bitters during his visit to the
Kenistra Research Station hosted by El Bachir Nador in May of
1982. The friendship that developed on this trip and subsequent
meetings led to the importation of several citrus varieties including this
one. In July of 1985, the variety "W. Murcott, Afourer," PI 539533, was received for quarantine in Glenn Dale, Maryland, then was subsequently forwarded to the Citrus Clonal Protection Program. The name "W. Murcott, Afourer,"came from Dr. Nador's INCORRECT ASSUMPTION that this variety arose as an open pollinated seed of Murcott (Florida "Honey"), the coordinates for this experimental plot, "INRA W" and "Afourer" which was the name of the town nearby the station. "Afourer" also became the
local name for this variety. AH original experimental plots of INRA W
were pulled out due to excessive seed numbers in adjacent
Clementines and "Ortanique" orchards. In California, the CCPP first
released "W. Murcott, Afourer" from quarantine which allowed
nurseries to buy bud-wood of this variety in January 1993.
It is known now based on the use of DNA markers in Mikeal
Roose's lab-orabory at UC Riverside, that "W Murcott, Afourer"
("Afourer") is not the same as the variety "Murcott" which is sold as
"Honey" in Florida." I wish the "W" had a more romantic history, but life is not always in the movies. - Millet

Thanks to both of you Joe and Millet for scouring the history of one of my favorite mandarins. Now I learned something here.
Benny

Millet, thanks for your input.

I came across my reference post while searching for something else. I had a hard time finding the meaning of W in the W Murcott name and your version of it makes more sense.

Obviously, there are grave discrepancies and my reference post (link) is quite as credible as University publications.

Am I correct to assume that based on your post that the W.Murcott has nothing to do at all with Morocco, as nowhere in it you have mentioned nor referenced. Nor is this the name Delite have any credit at all, as you have not mentioned it also. Are we talking about the same cultivar here? How is this different than the one from Morocco and the legend about the King of Morocco's Orchard, no truth in this at all?

My reference for the name White Murcott is Citrus Research & Education Center of University of Florida. Do you think it would be best to tell them that they made some mistakes? See the link in the first thread and the info about Murcott is somewhere in the middle.

Simply search for the following:

"The following article is being submitted to the Publications Committee for submission to Citrus Industry Magazine:

W. Murcott, a New Scion Variety on the Scene. Bill Castle, Tom Hammond, and Mike Kesinger"

Here's the link again: http://fshs.org/CRECHOME/publicationsaf.htm
Simply search for the word Delite in the web page.

They are about to embark on a disinformation campaign perhaps? If you can connect these two seemingly different references or disconnect them, I would be enlightened.

With respect to the dates when they were released, that is also another point of discrepancy, and here's my other reference for that, although they are not as credible as the university publications:
http://westernfarmpress.com/mag/farming_pollination_evaluated_mandarin/index.html
http://www.delite.com/delite_history.html
http://www.macks-groves.com/index.cfm?method=shopping_Detail&productID=91

just search again for the word Delite in the web pages.

Hi Joe, I'm sorry that I did not make my post as indepth as I should have, I apologize. My post was only intended to state why and where the "W" in W Murcott came from and what it ment. You are correct that Delite is just a made up name for W. Murcott Afourer for marketing reasons, and your correct in stating that W Murcott originally came from Morocco. Kenistra is both the name of the Research Station and the name of a large city in Morocco. Actually, the link that explains the what and why "W" is in the name and its meaning, also explains why Afourer is in the name. The link comes from the University of California at Riverside's Citrus Variety Collection itself. Below is the web address to the article. After you open the article scroll down about 3/4 of the way through the article to the paragraph heading titled
"W MURCOTT AFOURER OR AFOURER MANDARIN IMPORTED FROM MOROCCO." There you can read the information. Thanks for all your posts on this form. I find them very interesting indeed. Take Care. - Millet

http://www.citrusvariety.ucr.edu/citrus_segments.html#mysteries_mandarins

Thanks for clarifications Millet!

Perhaps we can notify Bill Castle, Tom Hammond, and Mike Kesinger about this issue. They have a publication already in review and implied that the W in W.Murcott stands for white.

A couple more points.
'INRA' are the initials (in French) of the National Agricultural Research Institutes. These were founded in Morocco when it was still a French colony.
There is still an INRA at Kenitra, Morocco.
The French Corsican INRA - mainly citrus research - says this variety was first discovered by someone called Nador on land belonging to the King of Morocco. Another name is therefore Nadorcott. See http://www.corse.inra.fr/sra/30100741.htm
One final twist. Click on www.nadorcott.com and you will find a Spanish site, with a picture of a Nadorcott tree, which appears to be their registered name for this variety.

Citrange, thanks for making this information available to us. I enjoy the history of citrus names. This is some what simular to the history of the Clementine. Mr. Nador was the man that had to OK the inmortation of the variety into the United States by Mr. W.W. Bitters. This variety claims more names than any other citrus variety that I'm familar with. Leave it to the French to make it complecated - Millet

Jim says both Millet and Joe are correct. It comes down
to how we want to spell the name such as W. Murcott and
W Murcott. They were indeed different from trials both
conducted on them in Florida and in California. Jim says
he will go no further on this issue until he can see a
representative example of each plant and then tell which
one he knows it to be but he did tell us that one is more of
a willowleaf than the other one. One has pretty much erect
leaves whereas the other has tips of the leaves that will nod.
Pretty much how the W Murcott and the Honey are different
from each other as well just by viewing the plants sans any
fruit on them.

Most of the California nurseries sold the Honey as either
Honey or Florida Honey and some have sold the Murcott
as W Murcott. The "white" form as Joe mentions does exist.

We have a problem to some degree with dates as Jim has had
a Honey (Florida Honey) and a Murcott (sold to him as Murcott)
since 1980. The reason we bought the W Murcott Afourer for
SusieQ last year was because Jim felt it was different again than
the Florida Honey and the Murcott clone Jim already had.

There is a third Honey that among very close quarters was called
the California Honey, a willowleaf form, that was not ever officially
released to the nursery trade, much like how the W. Murcott was not
released either out here as well.

Snickles

I do not recall ever seeing the W. Murcott but I had heard about
the "white" form. Do I know for sure based on seeing them or
growing them if the white form and the W Murcott Afourer are
the same plant or are they different plants? No, I cannot say for
sure at this time.

Look on page 4 under Seedy Tangerines to see a reference
to W. Murcott Afourer (Delite).

http://entomology.ucdavis.edu/faculty/mussen/MarApr2005.pdf

There is no sense anyone getting upset about this entire issue as
I've had my doubts about these names also. We need to go back
to the original plants to verify the spellings and the names of the
plants as they were when they came in and were called during
and after they were monitored in Florida and elsewhere.

I can say that the Honey, the Murcott and the California Honey
are not the same by leaf characteristics as well as fruit character.
I have grown all three of the above Mandarins first as container
plants and then later planted them into the ground. I felt that
the W. Murcott Afourer that came from Four Winds was not the
same plant as the above three Mandarins which is why we felt
we needed to get one for the misses and grow it on and along
as a container plant at her residence for me to monitor.

The reason why I mentioned to Snickles to come in and make
a comment in this thread was due to the fact that sometimes
what a Mandarin came into California as for a name may not
be the same name that the plant was sold to nurseries or the
fruit was marketed and sold as being. Technically, I am not
a member of this forum so poor Snickles has to take the brunt
of my indiscretions with what some plants were called at one
time or were marketed as out here and in some cases marketed
and sold as nursery plants elsewhere that I know of, been around,
worked with and/or have grown.

Jim

Jim, what is one to do? When fruits with names as similar, if not "identical," such as W.Murcott and W Murcott are in reality two separate different fruits? Also, as pointed out above, there are fruits sold/marketed/identified within the boundaries of a single country (USA) under many different titles. Has it come to the point that the citrus industry is in need of an official/governmental board, bound by a set of rules/guidlines in the naming of citrus varieties, so that the public (if not the citrus industry itself) can have a modicum of assurance which citrus variety one is referring to? - Millet

I just seen a web site listing "Murcott Honey" now under the present confusion, how could one be SURE what exact tree the web site is referring to? - Millet

I just seen a web site listing "Murcott Honey" now under the present
confusion, how could one be SURE what exact tree the web site is
referring to?

The only way to know for sure is when we try to track down
who is selling the Murcott Honey and then learn their sourcing
of it as to who they got their plant from and who did their
source get their plant from until we find the original sourcing
of it . If we do not succeed in finding out where and who the
Murcott Honey came about from then we may need to get one
and grow it and compare it to the known forms that we have
already.

Sometimes it does not matter the name of the plant that we have
but we do need to know who our clones came from. This is rather
important in that if we can say for sure that our plant came from
Four Winds and we have a good idea of the names of the Citrus
they have been putting together and offering over the years then
we have a starting point to track down the name of the clone.
Then, if need be, we can go talk with Mr. Dillon and ask him
where his clone came from and if we learn he got his clone from
Lindcove then we can go to Lindcove and ask them what their
Honey was when it was being sold in some nurseries back in
let's say 1988. If we know when the plant was issued to growers
and grower/nurseries then we can better pinpoint which name it
had then. Not an easy task but the name of the clone should
be traceable back to what it was when it came into Lindcove.
From there then we can go back to Florida and say hey guys
the clone we want some answers for is the one you released
back in 1978 to Lindcove, can you tell us more about it and
where did you get your plant from? "Oh, it came out of an
experimental station" for example. Okay, what was the name
of it then and are any of the original plants still alive for us to
look at?

If all of the above does not work then we may have to have the
plant and compare it to what we have already. The problem with
that is we have to verify what we have. Okay, for me I can document
who I got my Honey, Murcott and the California Honey (technically
was not ever officially named but those that had it called it the
California Honey). If I want to know for sure if the Murcott Honey
is any one of the three that I have, then I'll have to have it, evaluate
it and see for myself. There was a time that I'd have done precisely
that as I've done it with other plants but today I am not so sure as
even the ones that I have may have different names now and if that
is the case I'd get frustrated now about it all.

Most collectors with specialty plants in the past generally start out
being "lumpers" in that if we have one plant already and when we
see a new name we do not go out and buy one the instant we see
one available as it has to impress us in a way to show us it is
different that what we have or are accustomed to seeing and as a
result may not be that much better or different than what we already
have. As we learn more about what we are seeing from our plants
through observations we start to "see" areas in their physical
characteristics that to us make the plants seem a little different
from one another and then we are more likely to become "separators".

When we start to get fully aware of these plants that the Mandarin in
the nursery for sale is different than what we have at home then that
Mandarin will interest me enough to buy it, when years before I might
have and probably would have said no to it. The serious collectors go
through this stage as years ago we might have passed on it but now we
want to know is it different and how is it different than the ones we have,
have had or know of. It becomes a real pain for some plants once we have
been smitten by the collective bug. The nice thing about it is, if we sense
the new plant we are looking at is different, it probably is and it is this
notion that makes us feel better about securing the new plant, so we can
compare it to what we already have. If the plant ends up being the same
as what we have already, we are not pleased as then we realize we either
got faked out or we did not study our plants well enough to see the "ringer"
and we bought it not knowing it was the same as what we had. It is not
a good feeling when this happens to us but we tell ourselves we now know
or have a better idea of this plant when before we would not have known
had we not had the plant, grown it on and evaluated it. The collectors
dilemma.

It is one of those things that people need to have been around these
trees. I read an article recently in the Western Farm Press that talks
about the W. Murcott Afourer being widely planted as production
acreage here in California.. In the article the Murcott is referenced
as being the old Florida Honey. Well, at one time that is how we
learned the Murcott to be until the Honey Mandarin came in. Then
when we compared the fruit on the trees from the Murcott and the
Honey to the fruit that was coming in from Florida into the stores,
we saw a closer resemblance of the fruit from Florida with the Honey
Mandarin that also came in from Florida. Okay, if the Honey Mandarin
produces the same fruit as the Honey Mandarins coming into the stores
then where does the Murcott fit in, in all of this?

What we need is for everyone to be on the same page, in that a Honey
in Florida is the same plant as the ones we have in Texas, Arizona,
California and elsewhere. Sometimes research centers outlet budwood
for nurseries to graft and the nurseries got the names or the spellings
of them mixed up so then we had to go back to the parent plants where
they were grown and check to see what names were on the labels of the
trees that had labels. Some did not have labels but had variety number
or ascension or catalog numbers instead. There are some nursery people
that did not double-check what they had for many plants that came into
them and thus a problem with a name or how it is spelled can start right
here.

Now for some controversy, it is not our intent for this to be thought
of in this manner. We are not singling anyone out and are not stating
anyone or anything is at fault here with the below. This is an issue
that we went back and forth on in determining what we had that we
were growing both in a nursery for resale and growing in a landscape.

I've seen other plants that have been around for a few years that were
grown and sold only to select nurseries and then someone would get
their hands on one, grew it and then applied to get patent for that plant
later under a different name than what it was when it came into their
nursery. I am not saying this has happened to Citrus as I do not know
of specific examples offhand to fall back on but I do have some prior
knowledge of some Dogwoods, Maples and some other plants but then
a nursery that holds the patent can say that name is what we chose to
market that plant as being. We assume that the plant that was patented
by a nursery originated from them. That is not true for a few plants but
even if we look at the patents we can see a common name as the tree
was called in the nursery as well as a patented name in some instances.
For years Eddie's White Wonder Dogwood was considered to be
Cornus controversa in the nursery trade but on the patent for the plant
we can see that the Dogwood came about as a seedling selection from
a breeding attempt from Cornus florida and Cornus nuttallii. The problem
that I have is that the pollen parent really is not mentioned to provide
some evidence of being an actual hybrid. We assume the Dogwood
is a nuttallii hybrid when by the facts we do not know that at all. It
could just have been a variant seedling of which can and has happened
with native forms as I have one that is an unnamed white with a pink
border that came about, not through actual breeding but as a seedling
selection. We germinated the seed, waited for about 10 years to see it
bloom and lo and behold the flowers were different than the parent plant.
There is also the more plausible possibility that the Eddie's White Wonder
came about from a branch sport that had 6 petals that was spotted and
later that sport was allowed to go to seed, germinated the seed and the
seed held true to the sport. This is the same process how the white with
a pink border form came about that I have.

Sure, we could have had the plant patented but why do it when others
before us may have had the same plant as well at one time or another.
Some people register the plant in order to sell and/or market it under
that name. We have Peaches now that are really not much different
than their parent plants but some grower nurseries will have the name
registered so that other nurseries that want to sell that plant for commercial
plantings have to give a royalty back to the host nursery for each tree sold
that selected it out, grew it on, tested it and had the name of the Peach
registered. I have no problems with that. It used to be a nursery could
sell the plant as a name and that name carried through to other nurseries
for years. Now, we can have duplicate names for the same plant such
as we've seen in Japanese Maples and people think they are different
plants which is the antithesis of what we all really want here. If a
Delite, the registered name, is a former Mandarin then we did not
help ourselves by letting that Mandarin name become registered.
But the nursery that is selling these plants as Delite have the right
to determine what happens with that Mandarin from now on. Could
the Delite have been a Kinnow Mandarin? Perhaps but the host
nursery can better answer that and say that the old Kinnow that they
had come in was grafted or budded onto their home grown rootstocks
and that the finished plant was different enough to justify the name
when we compare the two plants. One that came into them and the
newer finished and perhaps improved version. I am not going to say
they cannot call their Mandarin a Delite if that is the case. The area
of concern is when another Mandarin is also called a Delite such as
W. Murcott Afourer in some cases. Now, we have to backtrack and
learn which is the right plant for the name Delite and is the name
registered for one Mandarin and the name Delite used to market
another Mandarin? Then could a nursery that was not involved in
the registration process be calling their Mandarin for sale to commercial
growers and grower/nurseries a Delite. Just brought the above up as a
hypothetical, I am not pointing fingers or stating the above is fact.

As long as the old plant is not the same as the new plant is, is my criterion
to satisfy me. If so, then I may have both of them and grow them on to see
for myself if they are different or not. My view is rather basic as if I
feel they are the same plant then I'd feel there should not be two names
but if they are different then I can live with having both plants and enjoy
what I have. When we read about Kincys and that one plant might
be a King x Dancy and another might be Dancy x King, do we really
expect much of a difference in the physical characteristics in these
two hybrids? Perhaps not but if we cite other plants that have this same
type breeding scenario such as Deciduous Magnolias we can see
definite differences in the two plants, especially in the color of the
flowers.

Just some food for thought.

Jim

That's a big chunk of food Jim! Truly appreciate your thoughts.

As for me, I tend to get budwoods from known germplasms and reliable colleagues, those whom you can trust to keep good documentations of their trees.

I find it hard to trust the big box retail stores even our local nurseries, unless the plant's characteristics are very obvious, then I purchase them.

Joe, it is fairly obvious you've been around the block a few
times with these plants. You are far more up to date than I
am with Citrus. Anyone that applies their collection will
strive to have a pretty good idea as what they have. I
have no doubts in my mind that you have made sure that
the plants you have and the wood you have had come in
have been pretty well screened to be true to name to the
best of the sources knowledge. I don't get envious of
someone often but I really do like what you are doing up
there in Davis with your Citrus and what you've done as
well in this forum.

Millet has let me know in a nice way I have been out of
touch too long with Citrus just with all of the verifiable
names of Citrus he has. All we (I) can do is give some
idea of the some of the old viewpoints that some people
had that may not be nearly as applicable now as they once
were.

The Cornus controversa is known as the Giant Dogwood.
Cornus nuttallii usually have petals in fives with an
occasional six petals to a flower. The Eddie's White
Wonder is not classified now or sold as a controversa.
We did not agree with it being sold as controversa at
all but several old nursery catalogs in the past did list
it as being that.

It does make an excellent landscape plant, one of the
best and universally adaptable Dogwoods for that
purpose. We can grow it here on the Valley floor
when we would have some trouble growing the native
nuttallii here. Which led some people think it had to have
Cornus florida in its background to be able to grow and
adapt for us here. It could be that it does have the Eastern
Dogwood as a parent but the number of petals we can
see from this Dogwood made us feel differently, right
or wrong. We felt it was an improved form of nuttallii
instead of being an Eastern/Pacific native hybrid.

Jim