This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
The subject of Pluot is very well covered with one obvious exception--there is no guide to pronouncing the name.
I work at the local supermarket (delaware, eastern united states) and I've always pronounced it like the plu with plural or pluto, and the ot from dot. --Sharth 19:48, Aug 25, 2004 (UTC)
I planted a pluot about 5 years ago and another one since, they are great ! Delicious ! We say it ploo' - ought which is (probably) exactly what you have said. The article could be structured much like Apple and could have a lot more information about the genius of its developer, heh. Terryeo15:28, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have been noticing this year that more plouts are being called plumcots, and also plumcot has an article that is seperate but its about "pluot". Should they be merged, and if so which name should be used? Quazywabbit03:47, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The WordSpy ref I found [1] suggests that a "plumcot" is half-and-half, and the 1/4 3/4 hybrids are 'pluots' and 'apriums'. If this is correct and they're different, they shouldn't be merged. --Sgorton18:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Foodorone of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 19:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've added more varieties from the CDC website. I'm unsure of how to add a citation to the list, so I've done it inline. Could someone please help me correct this?
Note: Some varieties now are included in both the Plumcot Variety list and Pluot Variety list. For example Dapple Dandy and Flavorosa. This is confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.7.130.136 (talk) 18:47, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Pluot and the other names listed on this page are used for marketing fruit derived from trees that are various hybrids between edible plums and apricots; as such it should not have a taxobox. Prunus persicaxPrunus americana has a wild plum and a peach as parents, and should have a taxobox. The fruit from these hybrids are not marketed as pluots, apriums, apriplums, or plumcots. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 13:16, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The other article is a stub, if the merge fails, can anyone familiar with these tree articles help expand and/or improve it, then? Or is there a better article for it to be proposed to be merged into? (WikiProject Montana is lost on this topic, none of us experts...) Montanabw(talk)04:24, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As a botanist who works on that plant family, I'd say that it is a legitimate subject for a page, and I've rearranged it for what I consider to be more appropriate emphasis. Since the tree in Montana is much less notable in that context than the page originally stated, I'd suggest that WikiProject Montana could ignore the page if they wish to do so. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 18:40, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
LOL. Basically I was curious if we had a candidate for a prod tag, but anyone who wants to boldly go over there will no doubt work undisturbed! Thanks! Montanabw(talk)03:30, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I've removed the merger tags. Some other people have recently been improving coverage of Prunus species, so perhaps they'll be inspired by this hybrid. :) Sminthopsis84 (talk) 18:57, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I inadvertently edited without logging in and did not provide a summary of edits - sorry. The edits were to add a citation regarding the genetic make-up of apriums, and then I edited the pluot section to match the aprium information. Is the Andy Rooney 60 Minutes section salient to this article?Horst59 (talk) 15:27, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am not an expert on any particular distinction between "plumcot" and "apriplum", but I made a correction to the misinformed statement about a difference in their reproduction. Their propagation is the same as any cultivar of apricots, plums, or other tree fruits. Therefore, I'm not sure if even the corrected statement has any relevance to the article. But at least it is no longer misleading, and can be moved or removed completely if desired. jtp174 (talk) 04:14, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
