There was much discussion about this fig last year. Mine came from JR and it is a 4th year tree. Very hardy and productive. It did drop a few early on but they are ripening now. There are some three lobe and five lobe leaves on this four year old tree. This fig was moderately sweet, with a hint of melon and or peach. The flavors were not really strong. I like this fig and give it an 8. It currently resides in a 15 gal pot and will go in ground next spring.

That looks great.  How does it compare to Celeste for you?
Brian

Brian, I had a seven year old in ground Celeste. The old variety not the "Improved Celeste." This spring I gave it away to a friend. This
will be my replacement for it. This fig is a good bit larger and I like the taste better. The Celeste I had was much sweeter when left to
fully ripen which I do on all my figs. As for hardiness I don't know yet. The Celeste was killed back to the ground but came back. We did
have a very cold winter for the deep south with several mornings in the single digits.

So the O'rouke is less sweet and larger, just wondering if there are other qualities that cause you to like it above Celeste.  You always do such a good job of rating plants and due to our close proximity I base a lot of my purchases on your ratings however I already have an O'rouke and am hoping for my first figs this year?

As always thanks so much for all you do and for sharing with all of us.

Hey Goss, sometimes its not easy to figure me out, kinda like some figs. LOL

No, thats about all I am going on and I didn't like the looks of my Celeste either. Wish I could tell you there is more but not this time.

Maybe one of the Improved Celeste varieties would be different for me, I don't know.

Mike,

That fig and leaf do not look like O'Rourke. Maybe it's LSU Tiger. Check out this document, which I believe is an official info release from the LSU fig program, though I don't see that info in the document after a cursory glance. The leaf pictures of O'Rourke, Tiger and Champagne are on page 9 and the fig pics are on page 10.

My O'rouke has the leaf in Mike's picture and the one in the document shown by Neil plus a round leaf with saw tooth patterns.  Mine also came from a reliable source.  So I think at differnt ages,stages,locations there may be different leaf patterns.

Neil, thank you for your input and link. However, I would do more research before I would make your statement that it does not look like O'Rourke, especially
since this is one of the most debated fig varieties in existence. For starters this one     http://figs4funforum.websitetoolbox.com/post/where-to-find-a-true-orourke-6357661?highlight=o%27rourke&pid=1278135985#post1278135985

Hey Mike, I've got no skin in the game here. I don't have O'Rourke and am not looking for it - I do have two Improved Celeste trees that don't look much like the 1 and 3 lobed leaf IC that appears to be the preferred IC. I'm afraid they will join the four other Celestes that I've managed to trade for as unknowns and one Blue Celeste (is it really different than Celeste?) I got from the repository at Davis and the one I bought from a nursery as Brown Turkey back in the dark days of my early fig collecting. At least one seems to be superior to the other five known Celestes in my collection (neither supposed IC has fruited yet, though one will this year), so at least I have that going for me.

Back to O'Rourke; I'm not trying to be difficult or argumentative, I just thought I was helping out. I should know better when it comes to the whole IC/O'Rourke/unreleased LSU figs in general morass. I'm afraid your link doesn't really provide much clarity for me. JR claims a direct link to the LSU program for his O'Rourke, yet the leaves on his O'Rourke don't look much like the leaves on the LSU release (do any of your leaves look like that?) and neither does the fruit. Gene speculates that there may be more than one O'Rourke. Oy vey! I think I'll just back away from this one and pretend I didn't add my initial post in this thread.

Neil, all I meant was that to make a statement that my fruit or leaf does not look like "O'Rourke" when the "true" O'Rourke can't even
be identified, is not one that should be made at this point and time. I understand that my link does not provide any clarity. It simply
shows how much confusion still remains about this variety even with your LSU Docutment. Besides, it really doesnt matter what it
is called in the long run to me. It is taking the place of the Celetste I had regardless because it is better in my opinion. I have had
a LSU Tiger and I don't believe it to be the same as "my" O'Rourke.  You may have already read these links below to many other
conversations about it. If not, here is more confusion. Thanks again for your input. I only meant what I said in my post above,
nothing more.

http://figs4funforum.websitetoolbox.com/search?searchid=33552936&trail=25

Thanks, Mike. I wasn't bothered by your post, I just wanted you to know I wasn't the O'Rourke gestapo trying to stamp out false O'Rourke information on the internet. I was under the impression that the document I linked put the whole O'Rourke controversy to rest. I came by the bit I know (or thought I knew) about O'Rourke by way of trying to figure out the Improved Celeste side of things, as I've been interested in IC for two or three years now and never really been interested in acquiring O'Rourke.

I have to admit that your O'Rourke fruit looks a lot more tempting than that pictured in the LSU document. Perhaps I'll have to reconsider. Does it, in your opinion, taste and perform definitively better than Celeste? Do you find it better than IC too?

Mike just one more thought to add to the humor/confusion of this whole debate that continually comes up.  

Isn't O'rouke actually an improved Celeste itself.   I mean to the best of my understanding it has the same basic breeding as all the Improved Celestes and for that matter as most of the LSU varieties.

I'm not Mike, but I did sleep at a Holiday...wait, I slept at home last night.

As has been written in the past by those with far more knowledge than I in this area, O'Rourke is an improved Celeste, but not all improved Celestes are O'Rourke. The improved Celeste I believe most collectors refer to as The Improved Celeste is the version with one and three lobed leaves. It's not an official LSU fig release.

I guess the controversy of the LSU improved Celeste will rage on for some time. I have a tree that came directly from the tree at LSU and not through a third party. I also have a tree from JR which I picked up in person. It had the label as follows "Improved Celeste (O'Rourke) and came with the verbal comment from JR that the Improved Celeste and O'Rourke is the same. (In a way he is correct as the only named improved Celeste from LSU is the O'Rourke) I also have an improved Celeste that I obtained from Dr. Mayer whom I believe was associated with the horticulture dept of ULL or La. Tech, someone will have to correct me on that one. The tree I got from him which was started from cutting of his own trees was tagged Improved Celeste. Talking to his son, he told me that this improved Celeste and the O'Rourke were the same. Here are some pictures of all three of the leaves off my trees, plus LSU Tiger.

Improved Celeste (O'Rourke) from JR





Improved Celeste from Dr. Mayers





O'Rourke from LSU





When we went to the LSU fig day last year I asked Dr. Johnson about the shape of the leaves. I told him that I didn't think the picture of the leaf published in the LSU document resembled the leaves on the tree we were were looking at. He then pointed to one leaf on the very bottom of the tree that had the exact look of the leaf as published. To me that leaf is not typical, but it does present itself on occasion. I see it on my tree at times but not today as I took these pictures.

LSU Tiger





I know that none of this proves or disproves anything but rather I just thought I'd post the three different leaf patterns of my three different trees from three different sources.
"gene"

Great post, Gene. Have you had ripe figs from all three yet? If so, do you have a preference?

Neil, I can only tell you that the O'Rourke that I have is a better tasting fig to me than the Celeste (not improved, O'Rourke  or anything else) that I had.
It is also a much larger fig that the Celeste I had. I can't tell you about the hardiness yet because it is still in a 15 gal pot but will go in the ground
next spring. Thus far I have not had the issue of the leaves turning yellow and falling off for not reason like the Celeste did constantly.

Gene, thank you so much for your contribution to this subject again. As in the past I don't think it really, completely, without a doubt clears up the
Celeste/O'Rourke debate because there appears to be so many different varieties of Celeste and the O'Rourke name. I was aware that the O'Rourke
is actually a Celeste fig. My O'Rourke tree produces figs that are substantially larger than the Celeste tree I did have, although not as sweet to me.
My LSU Tiger that I had was similar in taste to the O'Rourke but with a different leaf pattern as you have shown. The fig on the Tiger was not the same
shape as the O'Rourke. They were more rounded and larger. The leaves on my O'Rourke are a mix of the three lobe leaf as you and I have posted in this
thread, along with three lobes and two thumbs on some. I assume yours is the same since it came from JR.

Gene, can you describe the difference (if any) between the fruit from the JR tree and the tree you labeled as O'Rourke from LSU?

Thanks

Mike: Very tasty fig and nice photos. Thanks for sharing.

Gene: Thanks for sharing very nice photos. Can you please let me know if your LSU O'Rourke have any single-lobed leaves? Have you tasted the figs from your LSU O'Rourke? Also, can you please post a full view of the tree below when you have time. Thanks for sharing. 

Best,
Tam

 

Another good LSU Improved Celeste-O'Rourke thread. Educational.

I have eaten fruit from all three. The two improved Celeste are in 3 gallon pots and the figs will get better I'm sure. The taste was very much like a regular Celeste and the figs look like and were about the size of Celeste. I'm expecting them to be larger when I put them in the ground. The O'Rourke is completely different. The fig is elongated somewhat and is very sweet but a different flavor than Celeste. I really like them.

I didn't take pictures of the two improved Celeste as I thought they weren't good examples of the fruit.

On a side note, my Father in Law had two trees given to him by a friend who told him these were Celeste that make larger figs. I firmly believe that these two trees were improved Celeste. I have picked many gallons off these trees and they were very good. They did not ripen to the over ripe stage like Celeste where they get real dark and taste like candy, but then I wasn't into figs then except for eating all I could. The trees are now history as they were taken out by a hurricane around 10 years ago.

"gene"

I will try to get a picture of my O'Rourke tree tomorrow if the rains let up. 

O'Rourke

Would anyone care to comment on if an Improved Celeste can only be a hybrid from the LSU breeding program or can a regular Celeste be called an Improved Celeste.

Mike,
Thanks for sharing pictures and info of your O'Rourke JR.


Gene,
Thanks for posting your pictures of the improved Celeste, O'Rourke and Tiger. I'm currently growing a very young LSU tiger and will not get any figs this year, but have tasted the improved Celeste and O'Rourke last year. Two of my Celeste were purchased as "improved Celeste" due to their reputed 30% larger size, but they look and taste like Celeste, sugary sweet.
IMO, the improved Celeste PP has a light brown sugar flavor and the O'Rourke has a maple syrup taste which gives it a more complex flavor neither is as sweet as the Celeste.
        .
  

Gene: Thanks for posting very tasty figs. I have been looking for this cultivar for awhile. Would you mind if I ask you to sell me the cuttings or starter tree of your LSU O'Rourke? Please let me know. Thank you. 

Best,
Tam

Chapman I don't think you could call a native Celeste that has not been hybridized and Improved Celeste. Now I don't know if anyone else besides the LSU programs has put out hybrid Celeste and another "if" is in California there could be some Celeste that were hybridized naturally by the fig wasp.

Pete, I'm not very good at deciphering different taste of figs but I do know that the O'Rourke is different from a Celeste or Improved Celeste. Perhaps you are right about the maple like flavor, and I'm talking about true maple not that artificial flavored stuff that most buy. What ever the flavor is I know that I like it very much. I wish the tree was a heavy producer but is seems not to be as productive as the Improved Celeste.

Tam, I'll keep you in mind for cuttings this winter. I should be able to get a few off of it. As it is, I'm air layering the top of the tree. It has become loose in the ground caused by strong winds. Hopefully it survives at least long enough for me to get my air layer and maybe a few more cuttings this winter.

''gene"

Gene,
Yes, I'm comparing the flavor to real Maple Syrup, which was my pleasant surprise when I tasted them last year. I always have it on hand because there are several local farmers that harvest and sell Maple Syrup locally and I had a few older trees that were tapped in the past but had to be removed due to old age.

The flavor is definitely unique and worth trying. Yes, the O'Rourke may not be as productive or as early as the improved Celeste, but I would just double up on the number of O'Rourke trees : )

Pete, my O'Rourke grown in a large container produces real good -- almost/every node has a main crop fig. It is amongst the best brebas we are enjoying. My wife just had a few and after eating fhe RdB's & O'Rourkes, she doesn't care for the Atreano's, Latarrula's etc. Becos it is darn good, I am thinking of building a greenhouse & have it put into ground.