In 1887 Gilbert Onderdonk,[185] a special agent of the United States
Department of Agriculture, published a natural classification of
peaches.[186] He put varieties of peaches into five groups which
he called races and to which he gave the names: Persian, Northern
Chinese, Spanish, Southern Chinese and Peento. He bounded peach-culture
in America on the north by the Great Lakes and on the south by the
Gulf and divided this great region into five zones to each of which
he assigned one of his races. Onderdonk studied peaches in Texas and
found there remarkable distinguishing characters; as, in adaptations
to southern climates, in length of the rest-period, in differences in
leafing, blooming and fruiting-time, and in the organs of the plants.
Professor R. H. Price, working with a large number of varieties at the
Texas Agricultural College, verified and greatly extended Onderdonk's
observations.[187] Eventually, Price became the pontifical authority
in this country on the classification of peaches and in numerous
articles and addresses set forth the Onderdonk grouping of varieties
so convincingly that it was adopted by practically all American
pomologists and at present is in use, to some degree at least, in
nearly all of our horticultural literature. It becomes necessary,
therefore, to scrutinize closely this natural classification of
Onderdonk and Price.
The end to be attained in a classification of peaches, as in
classifying natural objects of any kind, is to provide an epitome of
the knowledge of the fruits classified. Incidentally, a classification
helps in the identification of varieties of peaches. Does the Onderdonk
classification serve these purposes? We have not found that it does. In
most arduous attempts to arrange the sorts of peaches growing on the
Station grounds according to the Onderdonk plan, we have wholly failed.
Even the varieties named as types do not fit, as they grow in the
north, in the places provided for them by these southern classifiers.
Indeed, we have wasted so much time and patience in attempting to
group varieties according to Onderdonk and Price, and with so little
success, that the Onderdonk classification seems to us to be cursed
with the confusion of Babel. Since pomologists so generally accept
this classification, these words demand that it be shown wherein this
attempt at a natural arrangement of varieties fails.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account