If we can have seedless grapes, why not pitless cherries?

Title says it all. It seems like a pitless Bing would be the Holy Grail of cherry growing. Is it just genetic accident that the trait appeared in grapes but never has in cherries? Does the cherry industry have top men working on this question? Top men?

A big problem is the stone around the seed. You can learn a lot here: http://www.goodfruit.com/Good-Fruit-Grower/July-2008/Pitless-stone-fruit/

Grapes can be seedless, but it’s only the seed you need to eliminate. Stones, such as found in peaches and cherries, surround the seed… making it more complicated.

Reported for forum change to the pit.

You should be stoned!

Everybody must get stoned!

My ornamental dwarf cherries produce pits without cherries so the top men seem to be working on it in the other direction. :slight_smile:

(And yes, I wrote that right. The “cherries” they produce are small because they’re nothing but a red skin over a normal-sized pit.)

A favourite snack of Men without Hats, particularly when singing Peter Gabriel covers.

I was under the impression that a lot of varietals were spontaneous mutations and not the work of geneticists or breeders. For example, the Naval orange. The Thompson seedless apparently originates from the Ottoman Empire. Removing the stone from a cherry is apparently quite difficult from a genetic perspective.

I think it’s difficult from a mechanical/developmental perspective. Berries such as grapes are developed from the whole ovary of the flowering parts; the seeds develop inside - so all that’s necessary to get seedless berries is to get the ovary to develop as normal, but forget to produce seeds.

Drupes (stone fruits) are different - the ovary wall becomes the shell of the stone, and the fleshy parts grow on the outside of it. If you don’t have the stone, you don’t have a fruit at all.

Ah, OK. That makes sense. I’ll just have to content myself with a tangelo and a square watermelon.