Isn’t c-35 highly incompatible with any type of eureka?

[Desertcitrus]

Isn’t c-35 rootstock highly incompatible with any type of eureka? If so why am I finding all these trees here at big box stores with them grafted together?  Am I wrong or do they not care and are just trying to make money? How long does it take to show incompatibility? Their grafts look really good so I’m just wondering.

[kulasa]

I think it is the trifoliate orange that is surely incompatible with Eureka. 

[sc4001992]

[Desertcitrus]

I was wondering if Millet would have time to respond.

[Millet]

C-35 is STRONGLY incompatible with Eureka Lemon.

[Desertcitrus]

Eureka lemon is STRONGLY incompatible with Eureka Lemon.

That’s what I had read in some places and others didn’t say. Which makes me wonder why all the big box stores have them on C-35. I was so tempted to buy a pink eureka because it was so pretty.

[Millet]

I noticed that I made a typing mistake in my last post.   I have changed it to correctly read C35 is STRONGLY incompatible with Eureka lemon.

[FruitGrower]

Isn’t c-35 rootstock highly incompatible with any type of eureka? If so why am I finding all these trees here at big box stores with them grafted together?  Am I wrong or do they not care and are just trying to make money? How long does it take to show incompatibility? Their grafts look really good so I’m just wondering.

I’m pretty sure I’m having this problem now so thanks for posting this. In my case it took about 3 years to start showing incompatibility, manifesting as just refusing to grown any leaves above the graft and constantly pushing out suckers. Very frustrating that a big nursery would do this.

[Desertcitrus]

Isn’t c-35 rootstock highly incompatible with any type of eureka? If so why am I finding all these trees here at big box stores with them grafted together?  Am I wrong or do they not care and are just trying to make money? How long does it take to show incompatibility? Their grafts look really good so I’m just wondering.

I’m pretty sure I’m having this problem now so thanks for posting this. In my case it took about 3 years to start showing incompatibility, manifesting as just refusing to grown any leaves above the graft and constantly pushing out suckers. Very frustrating that a big nursery would do this.

Thank you for sharing how long it took for this to happen. it is frustrating.

[kulasa]

I take it this supersedes the other chart?

[drymifolia]

If this is the "other" chart, you mean, I think neither really supersedes the other. One is based on tests in CA and the other based on tests in Australia, using different grafting techniques and potentially different rootstock sources that may not be genetically identical even if they are allegedly from the same nucellar seed line. Any discrepancies are probably down to those kind of differences.

[kulasa]

Yes, that chart. Thank you.

I think it kinda does. That US' chart's info on eureka's compatibility with c-35 is "no information", probably due to lack of testing/trials. I do not think the type of graft nor the budding would matter when it comes to determining compatibility.  I guess the Australian chart made it clear that trifoliate and its hybrids are incompatible with Eureka?

[drymifolia]

I meant the ones that are actually inconsistent, like "rough lemon" and "sour orange," which are both listed as compatible with Eureka on the Australian sheet but incompatible on the CA sheet. There are a few other contradictions like that, which could be a result of grafting techniques or genetic differences in rootstocks that are the same "type" but maybe not exact clones of what were used in CA.

Different grafting techniques might make a big difference with initial failure rates, but shouldn't impact delayed incompatibility. Neither chart makes clear what percentage had initial failure vs delayed failure, so that's why I mentioned techniques as a potential explanation.

I think the takeaway should be that Eureka has graft compatibility problems with lots of different things, so generally be on the lookout for compatibility problems even if you're using a type of rootstock that has worked for some people, unless you're sure you have an exact clone of a rootstock that's definitely compatible.

[Adrian57]

That is odd because my neighbor bought a Eureka lemon tree and I noticed the root stock started to grow from below the graft and it was Trifoliata which confused me a bit because I read some where online that Eureka was not compatible with Trifoliata.

From a website:

Eureka lemon is incompatible with Poncirus trifoliata and Troyer and Carrizo citranges. Trees on these rootstocks produce a characteristic ‘yellow ring’ at the bud union and usually decline at 6-10 years after planting.

[bussone]

I meant the ones that are actually inconsistent, like "rough lemon" and "sour orange," which are both listed as compatible with Eureka on the Australian sheet but incompatible on the CA sheet. There are a few other contradictions like that, which could be a result of grafting techniques or genetic differences in rootstocks that are the same "type" but maybe not exact clones of what were used in CA.

Different grafting techniques might make a big difference with initial failure rates, but shouldn't impact delayed incompatibility. Neither chart makes clear what percentage had initial failure vs delayed failure, so that's why I mentioned techniques as a potential explanation.

I think the takeaway should be that Eureka has graft compatibility problems with lots of different things, so generally be on the lookout for compatibility problems even if you're using a type of rootstock that has worked for some people, unless you're sure you have an exact clone of a rootstock that's definitely compatible.

It might also be effective by the time period at judgment. Australia has revised some prior grafting guidance after it started showing problems at 10-15 years that it hadn't at 5-10 years.