Characterization of yellow-fruited and red- fruited strains of miracle fruit [Synsepalum dulcificum (Schum and Thonne) Daniell]

Five strains of miracle fruit consisting of the yellow strain and four red-fruited strains grown in Mabacan, Calauan, Laguna, Philippines were characterized. All strains showed similar growth patterns, flowering and fruiting periods, and stages of reaching maturity. The plant is evergreen, grows slowly, and reaches gestation period in 2.5 yr. It grows intermittently through a cyclical pattern of vegetative and reproductive periods. The yellow-fruited strain is unique, or one of its kind. Its flushes and fruit skin are light yellow. The leaves are acuminate with acute apex and acuminate base, glabrous, and cluster in the terminal of the shoots. The leaf margin is slightly undulating. Each leaf weighs from 0.13-0.17g, and measures4.9-7.0 cm long, 1.5-2.9 cm wide. The fruit is axillary, ellipsoid, weighs 0.9-1.8 g and measures 17.5-19.8 mm long, 8.1-10.2 mm wide, and forms clusters with other fruits in the shoot terminal. The seed weighs 0.3 g, and measures 13.1-15.1 mm long, 5.1-6.8 mm wide. The peel weighs 0.1-0.25 g, and the mucilage, 0.4-1.25 g. Of the total fruit weight, 14.8% is peel, 61.6% is mucilage, and 24.0% is seed. Among the red-fruited strains, strains 2 and 4 are highly promising because of their larger fruits and resistance to cracking. Their leaves are glabrous, obovate, and entire, with sub-obtuse apex and acuminate base. Their flushes are reddish. The fruit of strain 2 is red and weighs 1.95 g; strain 4 is red and larger at 2.21 g. Of the total fruit weight of strain 2, 20.51% is peel, 18.92% is seed and 62.58% is mucilage, whereas the percentages in strain 4 are 19.46% peel, 19.46% seed and 61.09% mucilage. Strains 1 and 3 produce smaller fruits and crack easily after heavy rainfall during their development during the dry season. Among the fruit features, fruit width is a strong determinant of fruit size (r=0.91) compared with length (r=0.71). Mucilage content is strongly correlated with fruit weight (r=0.96) but not seed weight (r=0.55).