Taxon ID:
Usage Facet: class=edible; edible_score=1.0; ornamental_score=0.0; inferred_from_taxon=no
Relationships: 0 | Linked Entities (visible): 0 | Evidence claims: 15 | History events: 0 | Catalog issue offerings: 0
Open profile JSON | Open lineage explorer | Open lineage JSON
Evidence Badge: emerging | claims=15 | sources=1 | contradictions=0
Claim Types: description_snippet:3, flavor_profile:2, fruit_size:2, recommendation_context:2, anecdote_snippet:1, breeder_reference:1, growth_habit:1, productivity:1, selection_origin_reference:1 | Open evidence summary JSON | Open citation drawer JSON
Connected Views: lineage table | lineage graph | history charts | trait matrix | search
Link Filter: showing signal links (candidate hidden); hidden candidate links=0. Show candidate links
Jri9-6 appears in the University of Saskatchewan haskap program as selection JR19-6. It was an advanced haskap selection of Lonicera caerulea. In 2010, it was evaluated against Borealis and other breeding selections. The report calls JR19-6 very promising. It had one of the largest bushes in Block 6 and was among the most productive plants there. [S1]
JR19-6 was also used as a female parent for open-pollinated seed collected in 2010. The seed came from advanced selections and was kept for possible experiments, grower distribution, or new plantings. [S1]
JR19-6 had large fruit in the trial. Table 23 lists berry dimensions of 24.8 mm long, 15.4 mm wide, and 12.2 mm deep, with a berry weight of 2.5 g. The report also says JR19-6 had the heaviest berry weight among the selections discussed on the previous narrative page. [S1]
Fruit quality was favorable. On a 1 to 5 scale, where 5 was best and a bitterness score of 5 meant no bitterness, JR19-6 scored 3 for texture, 3.5 for bloom, 4.5 for sweetness, 3 for sourness, 5 for bitterness, 4 for aroma, and 3.8 overall. Its soluble solids were 14.7 brix, with pH 3.38 and total acidity of 1.58% citric acid. The report says JR19-6 had one of the best sensory evaluations. Its sugar content was only average, but still higher than Borealis. [S1]
Winter survival was the main weakness. When pollen was collected in spring 2011, JR19-6 had winter killed very badly. The report says wet conditions may have contributed. Because few plants in the field showed winter damage in 2011, JR19-6 was not considered worth releasing as a new variety. It was used further in breeding instead. [S1]
The available source does not give direct parentage. It places JR19-6 in the University of Saskatchewan haskap breeding program and in advanced selection work involving Russian, Japanese, and Kurile germplasm. The packet does not establish its exact cross or species ancestry beyond haskap, Lonicera caerulea. [S1]
Summary source basis
This summary currently draws chiefly from Haskap Breeding & Production - Final Report, January 2012.
Selected source quotations
“‘JR19-6’ is highlighted in the tables as a very promising selection. In the ‘Block 6’ field that selection had one of the largest bushes and was among the most productive.”
— Haskap Breeding & Production - Final Report, January 2012, p61
“JR19-6 24.8 15.4 12.2 2.5”
— Haskap Breeding & Production - Final Report, January 2012, p62
“JR19-6 3 3.5 4.5 3 5 4 3.8”
— Haskap Breeding & Production - Final Report, January 2012, p63
Direct parent cultivars
Parentage claim text
Derived or downstream cultivar links
Source-story quotations
Taxonomy context: No family-tree context surfaced yet.
Related cultivars mentioned in source context
Zone assertions are structured rows. Hardiness claim text appears in evidence claims and page-linked citations.
| Zone Min | Zone Max | Zone Text | Assertion Type | Outcome | Location | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No explicit zone assertion rows yet. | ||||||
No linked media assets.
| Document | Title/URL | Rights | Claims | Relationships | History Events | Pages | Snippets |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 102 | Haskap Breeding & Production - Final Report, January 2012 | unknown | 15 | 0 | 0 | p47 p61 p62 p63 p64 | Table 25 lists JR19-6 with soluble solids of 14.7 brix, pH 3.38, and total acidity of 1.58% citric acid.; Fruit quality ratings: texture 3, bloom 3.5, sweetness 4.5, sour 3, bitterness 5, aroma 4, average 3.8.; Neighbori |
| Document | Page | Claim Type | Claim | Quote | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 102 | p64 | description_snippet | Table 25 lists JR19-6 with soluble solids of 14.7 brix, pH 3.38, and total acidity of 1.58% citric acid. | JR19-6 14.7 3.38 1.58 | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p63 | flavor_profile | Fruit quality ratings: texture 3, bloom 3.5, sweetness 4.5, sour 3, bitterness 5, aroma 4, average 3.8. | JR19-6 3 3.5 4.5 3 5 4 3.8 | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p62 | recommendation_context | Neighboring page context identifies JR19-6 as a very promising selection in the associated lab analysis tables. | JR19-6 24.8 15.4 12.2 2.5 | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p62 | description_snippet | The JR19-6 row is visually shaded in the table, marking it for emphasis. | JR19-6 24.8 15.4 12.2 2.5 | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p62 | fruit_size | Table 23 reports JR19-6 berry dimensions as 24.8 mm length, 15.4 mm width, and 12.2 mm depth, with berry weight 2.5 grams. | JR19-6 24.8 15.4 12.2 2.5 | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p61 | breeder_reference | JR19-6 was used further in breeding rather than being released as a new variety. | ‘JR19-6’ is highlighted in the tables as a very promising selection. In the ‘Block 6’ field that selection had one of the largest bushes and was among the most productive. | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p61 | anecdote_snippet | The winter injury was thought to have been partly due to the wet conditions of 2012, but because few plants in that field showed winter damage in 2011, the selection was not consid | ‘JR19-6’ is highlighted in the tables as a very promising selection. In the ‘Block 6’ field that selection had one of the largest bushes and was among the most productive. | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p61 | entry_hardiness_observation | When pollen was collected in spring 2011, JR19-6 was found to have winter killed very badly. | ‘JR19-6’ is highlighted in the tables as a very promising selection. In the ‘Block 6’ field that selection had one of the largest bushes and was among the most productive. | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p61 | description_snippet | JR19-6 was only average for sugar content but was higher than Borealis. | ‘JR19-6’ is highlighted in the tables as a very promising selection. In the ‘Block 6’ field that selection had one of the largest bushes and was among the most productive. | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p61 | flavor_profile | JR19-6 had one of the best sensory evaluations. | ‘JR19-6’ is highlighted in the tables as a very promising selection. In the ‘Block 6’ field that selection had one of the largest bushes and was among the most productive. | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p61 | fruit_size | The tables below note that JR19-6 had the heaviest berry weight. | ‘JR19-6’ is highlighted in the tables as a very promising selection. In the ‘Block 6’ field that selection had one of the largest bushes and was among the most productive. | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p61 | productivity | JR19-6 was among the most productive selections in Block 6. | ‘JR19-6’ is highlighted in the tables as a very promising selection. In the ‘Block 6’ field that selection had one of the largest bushes and was among the most productive. | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p61 | growth_habit | In Block 6, JR19-6 had one of the largest bushes. | ‘JR19-6’ is highlighted in the tables as a very promising selection. In the ‘Block 6’ field that selection had one of the largest bushes and was among the most productive. | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p61 | recommendation_context | JR19-6 is highlighted in the tables as a very promising selection. | ‘JR19-6’ is highlighted in the tables as a very promising selection. In the ‘Block 6’ field that selection had one of the largest bushes and was among the most productive. | page_block:0.90 |
| 102 | p47 | selection_origin_reference | Listed as a female parent from which open-pollinated seed was gathered in 2010. | JR op JR19-6 | page_block:0.90 |
| Year | Nursery | Catalog Issue | Relation |
|---|---|---|---|
| No catalog issue offerings linked. | |||
| Relation | Type | ID | Label |
|---|---|---|---|
| No linked entities at this filter level. | |||
| Type | Claim | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| description_snippet | Table 25 lists JR19-6 with soluble solids of 14.7 brix, pH 3.38, and total acidity of 1.58% citric acid. | 0.99 |
| flavor_profile | Fruit quality ratings: texture 3, bloom 3.5, sweetness 4.5, sour 3, bitterness 5, aroma 4, average 3.8. | 0.99 |
| recommendation_context | Neighboring page context identifies JR19-6 as a very promising selection in the associated lab analysis tables. | 0.77 |
| description_snippet | The JR19-6 row is visually shaded in the table, marking it for emphasis. | 0.95 |
| fruit_size | Table 23 reports JR19-6 berry dimensions as 24.8 mm length, 15.4 mm width, and 12.2 mm depth, with berry weight 2.5 grams. | 0.99 |
| breeder_reference | JR19-6 was used further in breeding rather than being released as a new variety. | 0.95 |
| anecdote_snippet | The winter injury was thought to have been partly due to the wet conditions of 2012, but because few plants in that field showed winter damage in 2011, the selection was not considered worthwhile to release as a new vari | 0.78 |
| entry_hardiness_observation | When pollen was collected in spring 2011, JR19-6 was found to have winter killed very badly. | 0.98 |
| description_snippet | JR19-6 was only average for sugar content but was higher than Borealis. | 0.92 |
| flavor_profile | JR19-6 had one of the best sensory evaluations. | 0.94 |
| fruit_size | The tables below note that JR19-6 had the heaviest berry weight. | 0.95 |
| productivity | JR19-6 was among the most productive selections in Block 6. | 0.97 |
| growth_habit | In Block 6, JR19-6 had one of the largest bushes. | 0.97 |
| recommendation_context | JR19-6 is highlighted in the tables as a very promising selection. | 0.99 |
| selection_origin_reference | Listed as a female parent from which open-pollinated seed was gathered in 2010. | 0.98 |
| ID | Type | Year | Label |
|---|---|---|---|
| No history events. | |||