UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



BULLETIN No. 993 I 



of "s 



jaigr Contribution from the Bureau of Chemistry 



lS\&r&Slm W. G. CAMPBELL, Acting Chief 



Washington, D. C. 



October 15, 1921 



THE COMPOSITION OF CALIFORNIA LEMONS. 



By E. M. Chace, Chemist in charge, and C. P. Wilson and C. G. Church, Assistant 

 Chemists, Laboratory of Fruit and Vegetable Chemistry. 1 



CONTENTS. 



The California lemon industry 1 



Purpose of investigation 2 



Investigational work 2 



Method of sampling 2 



Methods o f analysis 3 



Results of investigation 3 



Discussion of results 12 



Differences in varieties 12 



Seasonal differences 14 



Color and thickness of peel 17 



Effect of location 17 



Conclusions 18 



Bibliography 18 



THE CALIFORNIA LEMON INDUSTRY. 



Beginning in 1887 with the shipment of 12 cars of fruit, the Cali- 

 fornia lemon industry has increased a thousandfold, the 1919-20 

 shipment being approximately 12,000 cars. The California growers 

 have generally settled upon the Eureka and Lisbon varieties as the 

 most satisfactory in that State, and, although there are scattered or- 

 chards of other varieties, the new plantings are confined to these two. 



According to A. D. Shamel (l), 2 the Eureka variety originated in 

 1858 in Los Angeles, through the planting of seeds obtained from 

 Sicilian lemons. These seedlings bore about 12 years later, at which 

 time several were selected as worthy of propagation. Buds from 

 these trees are responsible for the present Eureka variety of lemon. 

 The Lisbon variety was imported directly from Australia in 1874 (2). 

 While some plantings now in existence can be traced to the original 

 shipment, later importations are also responsible for the Lisbon, the 

 most widely planted variety in California to-day. The Villa Franca 

 lemon has been planted to some extent, but has generally been 

 abandoned in favor of the Eureka and Lisbon varieties. 



1 The writers are greatly indebted to F. E. Denny for help with the calculations and for criticism of the 

 manuscript, as well as to C. 0. Young and R. H". Kellner for collaboration in the analytical work. 



2 Figures in parenthesis refer to Bibliography at end of bulletin. 



56403°— 21— Bull. 993 1 



