The 2025 review’s Table 2 lists Kunenbo-A with an unidentified female parent and Kishu male parent, summarizing Shimizu et al. 2016. The catalog’s Kunenbo-A alias is not proven to identify the sampled clone or UCR CRC 3346. This tree therefore leaves the seed parent unknown and retains Kishu Mandarin as a source-qualified pollen-parent hypothesis; the catalog accession match remains unresolved.
Source [9]: https://doi.org/10.1270/jsbbs.24047
Revision: The prior Sweet Orange seed-parent group was inferred from separate ancestry data and is not supported as a specific parent by the reviewed Kunenbo-A source. Table 2 supports Kishu as the male parent only for its named Kunenbo-A model; exact identity with the catalog accession is unverified. Keep Kishu as a qualified hypothesis and replace the unsupported seed-group identity with unknown.
World of Citrus