hybrid CGN 22184 ‘Peach Frutescens’

thoroughburro

thoroughburro

I’m sowing seeds of this unusual variety today. It seems to have picked up the common name ‘Peach Frutescens’, but my research indicates that it is more likely intermediate between chinense and frutescens. I’m curious if anyone knows more. Maybe frutescens-lover @Pr0digal_son could help?

I’ll share what little I found. First, when I have an accession number, I always start there. The information is usually vague and terse, sometimes rendered inaccurate by time, but it represents our primary source for varieties whose original populations are lost or unknown; any additional information will have been added by the community to this foundation.

From CGN:

Classification: Capsicum chinense
Origin: Exp. North-eastern Brazil by B. Pickersgill of Reading Un. UK, Jan-May 1972
Botanic name given by institute: frutescens
Additional passport information: chinense with some frutescens characteristics
Photos:

image.png
image.png
image.png
image.png


I’m not sure why “botanic name given by institute” contradicts the classification. Maybe one came first and the other is a correction?

It’s interesting that one of their photos is from Christopher Phillips! His photo identifies it as frutescens, but he seems to have doubted it himself, for instance in this post here at THP:

I tasted it tonight. I'm shocked how good it was. Major heat and good flavor. It's a huge producer too. The best part is there are very few seeds in the pods so they'd make a pretty pure powder w/o extracting them. I question the Frutescens designation, but whatever it is, I like it.
Click to expand...

The post is dated just two days after the photo! This is wild speculation, but I wonder if Chris grows out CGN varieties and, as thanks for access to the seeds, contributes back up-to-date photos and information. It would make sense to use their own classification for the photo, even if he had doubts. Thus, maybe the original classification was frutescens and was changed to “chinense with some frutescens characteristics” in 2010, in reaction to Chris’ grow.

An additional source of photos is this glog of @CaneDog’s, which has several photos at different stages of growth scattered throughout.

That’s all I have. I couldn’t find any seed venders selling this, at the moment. I got my seeds via @TexasHotPeppers and the Seed Train, but it’s not listed on his site. If my grow turns out well, I will add detailed photos as I go along to help pin down this intriguing variety.
 
Last edited:
thoroughburro said:
I’m sowing seeds of this unusual variety today. It seems to have picked up the common name ‘Peach Frutescens’, but my research indicates that it is more likely intermediate between chinense and frutescens. I’m curious if anyone knows more. Maybe frutescens-lover @Pr0digal_son could help?

I’ll share what little I found. First, when I have an accession number, I always start there. The information is usually vague and terse, sometimes rendered inaccurate by time, but it represents our primary source for varieties whose original populations are lost or unknown; any additional information will have been added by the community to this foundation.

From CGN:

Classification: Capsicum chinense
Origin: Exp. North-eastern Brazil by B. Pickersgill of Reading Un. UK, Jan-May 1972
Botanic name given by institute: frutescens
Additional passport information: chinense with some frutescens characteristics
Photos:

image.png
image.png
image.png
image.png


I’m not sure why “botanic name given by institute” contradicts the classification. Maybe one came first and the other is a correction?

It’s interesting that one of their photos is from Christopher Phillips! His photo identifies it as frutescens, but he seems to have doubted it himself, for instance in this post here at THP:



The post is dated just two days after the photo! This is wild speculation, but I wonder if Chris grows out CGN varieties and, as thanks for access to the seeds, contributes back up-to-date photos and information. It would make sense to use their own classification for the photo, even if he had doubts. Thus, maybe the original classification was frutescens and was changed to “chinense with some frutescens characteristics” in 2010, in reaction to Chris’ grow.

An additional source of photos is this glog of @CaneDog’s, which has several photos at different stages of growth scattered throughout.

That’s all I have. I couldn’t find any seed venders selling this, at the moment. I got my seeds via @TexasHotPeppers and the Seed Train, but it’s not listed on his site. If my grow turns out well, I will add detailed photos as I go along to help pin down this intriguing variety.
Click to expand...

Maybe @cmpman1974 could give you more details?
 
thoroughburro said:
This is wild speculation
Click to expand...
Yes,it is. Haha. But I am sure they would like to flip through Chris' catalogue.

I cannot comment from personal experience but this seems to be frut x chin. It's interesting that Barbara Pickersgill did not notice this as C.chinense is the species that gained her botanical fame. In her defense-whether true for her or not-a lot of the I.D.'s of these plants are from dried,pressed specimens.
 
I have two containers of CGN 22184 on the grow, of which the further along already has some pods and flowers. I only spotted the pods in the background when editing these photos, actually!

1654875102370.jpeg

1654875128053.jpeg


Forgive the awkward angles… the plant is tied to the fence it’s set against and can’t be easily moved. I’ll continue to post photos as better opportunities come along, but I wanted to share as it grows.

To my eyes, it’s exhibiting a typically frutescens corolla and anthers, but a typically chinense pedicle and calyx.
 
The second container of this I’m growing has two individuals, both with these features:

1657840094164.jpeg

1657840108156.jpeg

1657840129768.jpeg


I’m sorry for the poor quality photos… I’ve been sporadically trying to get decent photos of this for a week, and figured it was better to get the information out. I’ll keep trying, of course.

To my eye, these pods more closely resemble the sources. Interestingly though, the other container also has two individuals and they also match each other… sort of a coincidence if a cross, but not huge I suppose. I assume the original CGN photos include the acceptable range of variation, so for now I’ll be treating this second phenotype as more “true” for seed saving purposes.

The larger examples have, unsurprisingly if indeed a cross, been generally more vigorous and productive. I’m looking forward to tasting them nonetheless!
 
Last edited:
All right, first little harvest from the two seemingly true CGN 22184.

1659114747613.jpeg

1659114783435.jpeg

1659114805201.jpeg

1659114839544.jpeg

1659114860847.jpeg


I forgot to put a ruler in the shot, but the smallest pod is about the size of a larger chiltepin. The flowers are tiny; about the same size as my Hermosillo Chiltepin Dwarf, and similarly difficult to photograph.

I was disappointed by the full length placenta and seeds throughout, but after trimming it’s more obvious that there aren’t actually many seeds, and the placenta came out easily.

They released a really lovely, beguiling fragrance immediately when sliced… I’ll say floral, but lilac on the breeze floral, not obnoxious in the elevator floral. The smell included a distinct chinense note, but not, to my nose, a musky one. The smell really makes one hungry to try it!

The pods (which are not deciduous) are crunchy but not dry. The walls are thick for their size and about as juicy as a ripe bell pepper. Lovely burst of flavor right away and throughout chewing, fruitier notes joining the floral aroma… sour, but not aggressively so and not citrusy. It’s dry like Champagne is: maybe a hint of sweetness, but nothing you’d actually call sweet.

Heat is substantial… “very hot” to “extra hot” to an average palate, but snackable to an experienced. About 50 kSHU, probably. It kicks in after the flavor does, and is on the rounder, glowier chinense side than the aggressive, spiky frutescens side. It also lingers like a chinense.

I ate ‘em all up. Really a special pepper!

The pods are smaller than I’d like, and maybe half the size on average of those in the reference photos, is the only negative. I suspect a lot of that is on me or the climate rather than the genetics. If I can coax larger pods next year, this could be a yearly grow.

Not a ton of frutescens characteristics, maybe? I lack experience to make a call on that aspect. I’ll keep trying to get better flower photos. Not sure what to make of the (pretty) ashen-white anthers, above.
 
Last edited:
+1. Great write-up @thoroughburro. I have the same deep annual (whoops, "annular") constriction on the peach frutescens amazonian, though the anthers and filaments show purple. Also small pods. This (and the amazonian designation) led me to wonder if it might be a frutescens/chinense hybrid with something along the lines of pérola laranja. The pods became decidedly deciduous at the very end of the season when the weather had gotten chilly.

Good new look @Bou! Almost didn't recognize you.
 
Last edited:
CaneDog said:
+1. Great write-up @thoroughburro. I have the same deep annual constriction on the peach frutescens amazonian, though the anthers and filaments show purple. Also small pods. This (and the amazonian designation) led me to wonder if it might be a frutescens/chinense hybrid with something along the lines of pérola laranja. The pods became decidedly deciduous at the very end of the season when the weather had gotten chilly.

Good new look @Bou! Almost didn't recognize you.
Click to expand...
Hahaha thanks @CaneDog! My new avatar is the name & logo of my annual walleye fishing trip, our 15th edition this year (a long-awaited return after a 2-year Covid break)!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top