So a picture is worth 1,000 words!

Around 1903, Hugh Starnes proposed a method of identifying Fig Varieties by their general leaf shape.  These are some photos I took in October that include most of the varieties in my collection but many of them are still too young to develop a dominant leaf form.

In my opinion, Starnes' idea has a great deal of merit and should be refined as a tool to assist in Varietal identification.

Worth noting in the above photos are the similarity of the leaves I chose for California Brown Turkey & Black Jack!  They add credence to FigLink1110, the genetic fingerprinting of the UC Davis collection in which Malli identified the two as synonymous.  Also worth noting is the Adriatic leaf which clearly resembles one on the F4F Varieties page for Adriatic but doesn't resemble Grasa's "Adriatic" leaves at all.  I believe her "Adriatic" is really a mislabeled Desert King!

Happy Growing,   kiwibob, Seattle

Visit my primary website:  http://sites.google.com/site/kiwifruitsalad2

No doubt that Grasa's fig is not Adriatic,but Desert King.
Now this person distributed it to many ,many people and it will create even more confusion.

Kiwibob,
Excellent piece of work and useful reference!

Bob, this is a great thread and thanks for posting it.
Great work and is very well executed.

I had started that too just to find out that one needs to strip entire branch and get collection of leaves from one tree in order to do the identification process a justice.
One leaf does not give enough info since very rarely one variety has only one constant shape of leaf.
So I came to conclusion that it had to be done in this manner.
If we can make this idea better for documentation purposes it would be a great addition to the Name & Synonym chart I have been working on for a while now.
I believe, collectively, we can achieve this very important task.
Just like Herman recognized with his expertise, we can collectively correct simple mistakes like dear Adriatic Grasa that so many people like and recognize it as a great tasting fig.

     

Aaron,

Too many folks look at the differences in leaves on an individual tree, and they will find that each leaf is unique!  We need to concentrate instead on the similarities to find the dominant leaf pattern on a given variety for this to become a useful tool for Fig ID.

How is your synonym project coming and do you have it posted online or can you send me a PDF?

Thanks,   kiwibob, Seattle

We are never going to solve this problem.  Nurseries sell mislabeled figs all the time.  The best way to minimize the impact is to keep the name of the person who distributed the cuttings with the varietal name the way Jon does.  For those who care they can look up the name and learn the history.  Grasa's supervisor bought it as "Adriatic"  There's no way she could have called it anything else.  My understanding is that Adriatic requires more heat then Seattle can provide to produce a good fig so I kept it labeled as 'Adriatic Grasa'.  I never felt it was a true Adriatic.  It's similar to the situation with JH's Adriatic.  Many people (including JH) feel it's not a true Adriatic but as long as we keep the title JH with it we all know which it is.  I feel we don't need the cumbersome names that have been adopted recently.

Good luck, my head is spinning and getting very dizzy!, and very confused and speechless!

What Kiwibob has offered is invaluable.

Herman, I never intended to add to the confusion!  I never asserted it is not not what the name is. I passed on wonderful cuttings from  a marvelous tree that produces delicious figs and grows well in this soggy city.  i think this reference beats any 'golden name' anyone can put on it.  I am happy with a green fig with red interior that does well in the NW.    I am not a biologist nor a figgist... I just like figs.

not the first or the last to put the wrong possible name. 

Bob,
this is (potentially) a very important issue that has not been standardized yet.
Although what you say does make sense, it also , in my mind, is an unsettled solution.
Which leaf shape to be the dominant and which fine detail NOT to be ignored...? It's a very delicate matter. After-all, it's the details that make the difference in important things in life :)
I firmly believe that not only leaves but also the fruit should be catalogued as in all possible shapes that the tree may produce. Only then , sometimes, one might see exact resemblance with what he/she has in hand to Identify.
I'm not saying it's going to be easy but for sure is going to be the best archival information we as a society can put together, together.

*Each picture I posted in your thread is of one specific fig variety , so, 4 pictures/4 varieties.
I also have pictures of fig fruit that have different shapes , although, from a same tree...interesting yes? 

**I could send you a copy of prelim  and non-complete list of "Names & Synonyms" project, which is slowly taking shape finally.
I am thankful to many, many generous and knowledgable forum members who contacted me through either the thread, PM or eMail, whose without I couldn't collect such massive amount of information. This tells me there are many fig enthusiasts who are looking forward seeing this project succeed.

These are all same variety from the same tree.
Alma from FMD, thank you Frank.

 

Aaron,

We need to get past the differences and look at the similarities!  Juvenile trees are not the right place to look.

Can you send me a copy of or link to your Synonym database?

Happy Growing,   kiwibob, Seattle