• Do you need help identifying a šŸŒ¶?
    Is your plant suffering from an unknown issue? šŸ¤§
    Then ask in Identification and Diagnosis.

chinense bhut jolokia / naga jolokia

I could be totally wrong.... But I thought the Naga/bhut Jolokia were the same pepper (ignoring variety) but the Naga Morich (serpent chili) was the close cousin of the aforementioned.
 
Yep you're wrong Raelacea. Pretty sure the Naga Jolokia got started by someone who wasn't quite sure what the heck they were talking about. Say something once on the internet and it doesn't take long for it to become gospel.
 
To sum it up:

Naga(land) is a place in India
Jolokia just mean chile, pepper etc.

Several peppers from Nagaland area are called naga jolokia, some good, some terrible.
Nagas(Morich) and bhuts are quite similar but not really the same although they likely were both selections from the same original genes many, many years ago
 
patrick said:
Yep you're wrong Raelacea. Pretty sure the Naga Jolokia got started by someone who wasn't quite sure what the heck they were talking about. Say something once on the internet and it doesn't take long for it to become gospel.
Click to expand...

Umm, so you're saying that it is just an incorrect name for the bhut? Then how am I wrong? If that's the case, then they are the same pepper, as I said.
 
Oops. My apologies Raelacea. It's just that there isn't a Naga Jolokia per se. Can't be the same pepper as it's only one pepper. Does that sound right? Something can't be the same as something else if there is only one thing. Now I'm confusing myself.
 
patrick said:
Oops. My apologies Raelacea. It's just that there isn't a Naga Jolokia per se. Can't be the same pepper as it's only one pepper. Does that sound right? Something can't be the same as something else if there is only one thing. Now I'm confusing myself.
Click to expand...
Hehe, yeah I got ya.
Sorry, it's been a long week!

What potawie clarified makes it more understandable.
 
I thought it was the same chili and the name difference came from which side of the river (or mountain, depending on source) that it was found on. To throw more confusion into it... what about Bih jolokia?
 
english version

http://fiery-foods.com/chile-pepper-gardening/127-other-stories-about-growing-chile-peppers/2363-saga-jolokia

Italian version

http://www.pepperfriends.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6:un-viaggio-nel-mondo-degli-ultra-hot
 
megamastger71 said:
english version

http://fiery-foods.c...63-saga-jolokia

Italian version

http://www.pepperfri...degli-ultra-hot
Click to expand...

The more I read on this, the more it sounds like what the French have successfully marketed in using their AOC designation. e.g. Piment D'Esplette, Champagne, blah, blah. So the common name was used for geographic specificity. Which, by the way, is a fine way to distinguish traits, flavors, or uses of the same organism if you don't have the use of instrumentation in order to distinguish genetically. It might be frowned upon by some sticklers here and in the scientific community, but folks often fail to see the genius of it prior to the availability of said tools.

And, of course, connoisseurs of any food product will swear by distinctive taste markers from products from certain soil profiles. e.g. Wine, chocolate, coffee, citrus, etc. Sometimes I think it's horse puckey. BUT...my palate may not be well-trained in many of these areas.

Thanks for sharing the article, MM!
 
From what I've read 'Bhut' and 'Naga' both refer to regions in India where the plants originated. However the original name was 'Bhut', which roughly translates to 'Ghost' or 'Spirit'. That's how we got the name 'Ghost Pepper' from. There's also people out there who say that the plants original name when brought to India was the 'Devil's Pepper' which was translated to 'Bhut'. 'Bhut Jolokia' is its true name. Bih Jolokia and Naga Morich are different varieties although they are both somewhat similar to the Bhut, particularly the Naga.
 
There are tonnes of other Indian names for very similar chiles but its just easier for the english speaking public to understand "ghost pepper" or "serpent pepper"
 
mrz1988 said:
From what I've read 'Bhut' and 'Naga' both refer to regions in India where the plants originated. However the original name was 'Bhut', which roughly translates to 'Ghost' or 'Spirit'. That's how we got the name 'Ghost Pepper' from. There's also people out there who say that the plants original name when brought to India was the 'Devil's Pepper' which was translated to 'Bhut'. 'Bhut Jolokia' is its true name. Bih Jolokia and Naga Morich are different varieties although they are both somewhat similar to the Bhut, particularly the Naga.
Click to expand...

Apparently frontal agritech said that they're the same pepper (all of them; bih, bhut, morich, mirch etc), named so in different places.
However, dna comparisons showed differences between at least the Bih and the Bhut.
They also noted in that comparison that the bhut had annuum gentics in part, and the bih frutescens. That conflicts with NMSU's findings does it not? I thought they found the opposite?
 
I heard the same thing you did, that the Bhut had some some frutescens genetics and the Bih had some annuum genetics. Perhaps they mixed up the samples or something? I can't say for sure or who's right but I tend to side with CPI since they've done multiple tests on the Bhut and have kind of made it their trademark strain.
 
Raelacea said:
Apparently frontal agritech said that they're the same pepper (all of them; bih, bhut, morich, mirch etc), named so in different places.
However, dna comparisons showed differences between at least the Bih and the Bhut.
They also noted in that comparison that the bhut had annuum gentics in part, and the bih frutescens. That conflicts with NMSU's findings does it not? I thought they found the opposite?
Click to expand...

Do you have a reference to the study?
 
harry said:
Do you have a reference to the study?
Click to expand...

Here's CPI's paper from '05 - http://www.chilepepp...aHortSciArt.pdf
Excerpt - "The presence of RAPD markers in ā€˜Bhut Jolokiaā€™ that are speciļ¬c to C. chinense and C. frutescens suggests an interspeciļ¬c origin for ā€˜Bhut Jolokiaā€™"

I can't find the original paper from the other study - http://www.thehotpep...gas-aint-nagas/
Excerpt - "...moreover the ā€Bih Jolokiaā€ is shown to be more closely related to the highly pungent C.chinense and C.frutescens varieties with the ā€œBhut Jolokiaā€ being more genetically comparable to the less intensely pungent C.annuum varieties."

I'm by no means a geneticist but that seems conflicting
 
Raelacea said:
Here's CPI's paper from '05 - http://www.chilepepp...aHortSciArt.pdf
Excerpt - "The presence of RAPD markers in ‘Bhut Jolokia’ that are speciļ¬c to C. chinense and C. frutescens suggests an interspeciļ¬c origin for ‘Bhut Jolokia’"

I can't find the original paper from the other study - http://www.thehotpep...gas-aint-nagas/
Excerpt - "...moreover the ”Bih Jolokia” is shown to be more closely related to the highly pungent C.chinense and C.frutescens varieties with the “Bhut Jolokia” being more genetically comparable to the less intensely pungent C.annuum varieties."

I'm by no means a geneticist but that seems conflicting
Click to expand...

I found the Naga's aint nagas thread and didn't read much into it. I can't find mention of how many seed sources were used. The paper isn't published anywhere I can find.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top