Discussion Forum (Archived)
Guest
So, I was working today (I work in a kitchen), juicing key limes. As I juiced, I realized something: isn't 'Seedless Fruit' an oxymoron? By definition, fruit is the seed-bearing structure on a plant, so they can't be fruit (botanically speaking, at least). If they're not fruit, though, what are they? Vegetables? Vestigial Structures?
I think, at least in terms of casual taxonomy, "fruit" is still the appropriate name for "seedless fruit." Sure, "seedless fruits" are mutant "fruits," but they are probably "fruits" nonetheless (parthenocarpy is the name for the mutation resulting in seedless fruit, by the way.) "Seedless fruits" must be artificially encouraged since those plants cannot propagate themselves, but, all in all, it is just genetic manipulation of a mutation to make a more commercially attractive product. I'd say that such things are still called "fruit." Or you could call them "mutant seed-bearing plant structures," but I have my doubts that that will catch on. And, if you work in a kitchen, it's probably a little wordy.
Hi, TL!
Since, botanically speaking, a fruit is a ripened ovary, the seeds don't matter. A navel orange is still a fruit.
Seedless fruit cannot be considered vegetables, since in order to qualify as a vegetable, the plant part must be a root, a shoot, or a leaf.
Hope this answers your question!
Cheddar
Yeah, I'd say calling a seedless fruit a vegetable not only misses the definition of a fruit but doesn't help you anyway, since vegetables as well as fruits, and all other plants too, need some kind of seed to reproduce. A seedless fruit is just a fruit mutation, but basically its DNA is unchanged.
Might as well say that a mule is not a mammal because it's sterile, or that a chicken that can't lay is therefore not a bird.
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Grant Barrett
1 Guest(s)