People & organizations
Recorded contributions to citrus breeding, introduction, and history.
Loading people & organizations…
World of CitrusWorld of CitrusRecorded contributions to citrus breeding, introduction, and history.
40 credits across 6 varieties · Mel (kumin)
Initiated and directed the open-pollinated C-35 citrange breeding and selection project.
Kumin reports that the trial seeds germinated in April 2018; a later post gives April 12 as the planting date and says seedlings were field-transplanted in early June. He identifies the seed parent as F1 C-35 citrange but says the pollen parent was not confirmed. These details describe the trial seed lot, not an individual selection date for Conestoga 067.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Initiated and directed the open-pollinated C-35 citrange seedling breeding and selection project.
Seeds from C-35 citrange were sown on April 12th, 2018, for the breeder’s southeastern Pennsylvania cold-hardiness trial. Conestoga 006 belongs to its surviving selections. The pollen parent of the seed lot was not confirmed.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Initiated and directed the open-pollinated C-35 citrange breeding and selection project.
Seeds from C-35 citrange were sown on April 12th, 2018, for the breeder’s southeastern Pennsylvania cold-hardiness trial. Conestoga 010 belongs to the surviving selections. The pollen parent of the seed lot was not confirmed.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Initiated and directed the open-pollinated C-35 citrange breeding and selection project.
Seeds from C-35 citrange were sown on April 12th, 2018, for the breeder’s southeastern Pennsylvania cold-hardiness trial. Conestoga 011 belongs to the surviving selections. The pollen parent of the seed lot was not confirmed.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Initiated and directed the open-pollinated C-35 citrange breeding and selection project.
Seeds from C-35 citrange were sown on April 12th, 2018, for the breeder’s southeastern Pennsylvania cold-hardiness trial. Conestoga 026 belongs to the surviving selections. The pollen parent of the seed lot was not confirmed.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Initiated and directed the open-pollinated C-35 citrange breeding and selection project.
Kumin reported planting seed for the Conestoga F2 cohort on April 12, 2018. He later identified Conestoga 058 as one of two monofoliate original survivors before numbers were assigned. Kumin said the seed parent was F1 C-35 and the pollen parent was unconfirmed; this is population-level origin context, not a determination of 058’s individual embryo origin.
Established and managed the outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
In June 2018 Kumin field-transplanted the Conestoga F2 cohort outdoors without cold protection. A later post identifies Conestoga 058 as one of the original monofoliate survivors before numbers were assigned. These reports document cohort exposure, not an individually controlled cold-survival result for 058.
Established and managed the outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
Kumin reports that the trial seedlings were field-transplanted outdoors in early June 2018 without winter protection. This describes the population, not the exact handling of an individual Conestoga 067 plant.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Established and managed the outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
The trial seedlings were field-planted on June 12th, 2018. The breeder reported that the original planting had no winter protection during its first cold trial.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Established and managed the outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
The trial seedlings were field-planted on June 12th, 2018. The breeder reported no winter protection for the original planting; later surviving plants could be protected or propagated as backups.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Established and managed the outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
The trial seedlings were field-planted on June 12th, 2018. The breeder reported no winter protection for the original planting; later surviving plants could be protected or propagated as backups.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Established and managed the outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
The trial seedlings were field-planted on June 12th, 2018. The breeder reported no winter protection for the original planting; later surviving plants could be protected or propagated as backups.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Retained Conestoga 006 following the severe 2018-2019 outdoor survival trial.
Conestoga 006 belongs to the surviving selections from the 2018–2019 C-35 seedling trial. The breeder reported a trial low of −11.8°F (−24.3°C); that reading was taken about 30 inches above the snow. Most seedlings died, and 69 survivors were retained by June 2019. This does not establish an individual injury-free temperature limit for 006.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Retained Conestoga 010 following the severe 2018-2019 outdoor survival trial.
Conestoga 010 belongs to the surviving selections from the 2018–2019 C-35 seedling trial. The reported −11.8°F (−24.3°C) low was measured about 30 inches above snow, not in the plant’s tissues. Most seedlings died and 69 survivors were retained by June 2019. This does not establish an individual injury-free limit for this selection.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Retained Conestoga 011 Citrange following the severe 2018-2019 trial.
Conestoga 011 belongs to the surviving selections from the 2018–2019 C-35 seedling trial. The reported −11.8°F (−24.3°C) low was measured about 30 inches above snow, not in the plant’s tissues. Most seedlings died and 69 survivors were retained by June 2019. This does not establish an individual injury-free limit for this selection.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Retained Conestoga 026 following the severe 2018-2019 outdoor survival trial.
Conestoga 026 belongs to the surviving selections from the 2018–2019 C-35 seedling trial. The reported −11.8°F (−24.3°C) low was measured about 30 inches above snow, not in the plant’s tissues. Most seedlings died and 69 survivors were retained by June 2019. This does not establish an individual injury-free limit for this selection.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Evaluated and documented this Conestoga selection within the multi-year outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
In a November 5, 2021 post, Kumin reported a branch of Conestoga 058 turning red during a leaf-color change and described this clone as having his thinnest, longest spines. He said he did not know whether Ruby Blood Orange ancestry contributed to the coloration.
Sources: [32]
Evaluated and documented the selection's transition to reproductive maturity.
On December 8th, 2021, the breeder documented A-26 at about 44 months from seed with two small immature fruit and buds for the following spring. He attributed the fruit to very late flowers. A later recollection of second-summer flowering leaves the exact earliest age unresolved.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [12]
Produced and evaluated Conestoga 026 fruit and documented its potential for diluted beverage use.
On November 12th, 2022, the breeder described diluted and sweetened Conestoga 026 juice as lemonade-like. Two tasters mentioned grapefruit notes. This was a prepared beverage, not an undiluted-juice measurement.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [23]
Evaluated and documented this Conestoga selection within the multi-year outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
Kumin later reported that Conestoga 067 survived a 2°F low with high winds in the preceding December. This is a single grower account; the post gives no exposure duration or instrument record.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [6]
Evaluated reproductive maturity, flowering, fruit development, and seed characteristics.
On September 25th, 2023, the breeder reported an outdoor 010 graft on Poncirus entering reproduction too late for fruit to ripen that season. Separate fruit was maturing in the tunnel for later tasting and embryo-origin assessment.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [15]
Evaluated and documented this Conestoga selection within the multi-year outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
In a January 28, 2024 post, Kumin reported that Conestoga 058 was largely monofoliate, had not fruited, developed reddish-purple winter coloration, and was a bit less hardy than Bishop citrandarin. This is a qualitative grower comparison, not a measured cold limit.
Sources: [31]
Evaluated and documented this Conestoga selection within the multi-year outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
In February 2024 the breeder reported that tetraploid Conestoga 011 had not yet fruited and remained among the hardiest selections at that point. Later seasons provided different hardiness and fruiting observations.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [19]
Evaluated and documented this Conestoga selection within the multi-year outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
On February 23, 2024, Kumin described Conestoga 067 as having hardiness very similar to Bishop Citrandarin and mixed leaf types, including monofoliate leaves. This is his qualitative comparison; the post gives no measured exposure or comparison protocol.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [8]
Conducted the multi-year outdoor cold-hardiness evaluation.
Following the January 2025 low of −8°F (−22.2°C), the breeder reported very minor damage to the latest growth of Conestoga 006, 010 and 026. This was a grower’s trial observation, not a universal survival threshold.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [1]
Conducted the multi-year outdoor cold-hardiness evaluation.
Following January 2025’s reported −8°F (−22.2°C) low, the March assessment reported only very minor injury to the latest growth of Conestoga 010. This is a grower’s trial report, not a universal survival threshold.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [1]
Evaluated and documented this Conestoga selection within the multi-year outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
Following January 2025’s reported −8°F (−22.2°C) low, the March assessment placed 011 among selections with moderate to severe damage, unlike the much less injured 006, 010 and 026. This is a grower’s trial report, not a universal survival threshold.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [1]
Conducted the multi-year outdoor cold-hardiness evaluation.
Following January 2025’s reported −8°F (−22.2°C) low, the March assessment reported only very minor injury to the latest growth of Conestoga 026. This is a grower’s trial report, not a universal survival threshold.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [1]
Evaluated and documented this Conestoga selection within the multi-year outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
By January 31st, 2025, the breeder included 011 among the selections that had fruited. Immature 011 fruit had already been tasted in September 2024. The later March assessment found more cold injury than on 006, 010 and 026.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [20]
Evaluated and documented fruit maturity, productivity, flavor, acidity, and cold hardiness.
On October 8th, 2025, the breeder tasted 006 alongside four other selections that had survived the previous winter’s −8°F low. He described 006 as very productive and earliest to ripen, with highly acidic fruit, some bitterness and an earthy flavor. It was his least-favored sample; 010 and 026 were not yet fully ripe.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [15]
Evaluated and documented fruit maturity, productivity, flavor, acidity, seediness, and cold hardiness.
On October 8th, 2025, the breeder placed 010 second in flavor preference among five samples. He described it as very productive and second to ripen, though the fruit tasted was not quite ripe. The comparison was informal and maturity differed among selections.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [9]
Evaluated and documented fruit maturity, flavor, sweetness, acidity, beverage potential, and cold hardiness.
On October 8th, 2025, the breeder preferred 026 among five fruit samples despite incomplete ripeness. He detected slight sweetness and a tart-grapefruit flavor. Different maturity among samples limits the comparison.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [9]
Established the Conestoga series name and assigned selection number 006.
The breeder named the group of surviving selections Conestoga after the river near his property. The exact date when selection number 006 was assigned is not established.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [10]
Established the Conestoga series name and assigned selection number 010.
The breeder named the group of surviving selections Conestoga after the nearby river. The date when selection 010 received its number is not established.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [27]
Established the Conestoga series and assigned selection number 011.
The breeder named the group of surviving selections Conestoga after the nearby river. The date when selection 011 received its number is not established.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [18]
Established the Conestoga series and assigned selection number 026.
The breeder named the group of surviving selections Conestoga after the nearby river. The date when selection 026 (also A-026) received its number is not established.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [26]
Evaluated and documented this Conestoga selection within the multi-year outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
By a January 31, 2025 post, Kumin reported that Conestoga 058 was no longer present outdoors because of cold sensitivity. The post does not state when the change occurred, give a temperature, or describe injury.
Sources: [21]
Kumin’s May 3, 2020 post identifies Conestoga 058 as one of two monofoliate original survivors in a photo taken before survivor numbers were assigned. The post does not identify who selected 058 or when.
In a May 3, 2020 post, Kumin tentatively identifies the plant in the back as Conestoga 058 and describes it as one of two monofoliate original survivors. The post says the photo predates assignment of survivor numbers; it does not establish who selected 058, an individual survival date, or an exposure temperature.
Sources: [29]
Evaluated and documented this Conestoga selection within the multi-year outdoor cold-hardiness trial.
Kumin’s January 31, 2025 post reports that Conestoga 067 had recurring dieback and survived by virtue of being grafted onto Poncirus rootstock. This is the grower’s interpretation of the observed plants, not a controlled comparison. The post does not date the dieback or give an exposure temperature.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [7]
Kumin’s May 3, 2020 post identifies the plant in front as Conestoga 067 in a photo taken before survivor numbers were assigned and describes the plants as original survivors. The post does not identify who selected 067 or when.
In a May 3, 2020 post, Kumin identifies the plant in front as Conestoga 067 in a photo taken before survivor numbers were assigned. He describes the plants shown as original survivors. The post does not establish an individual selection date, winter-survival date, or exposure temperature.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States
Sources: [15]