Talk:Oxalis tuberosa

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

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
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.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Plants Mid‑importance

	Plants portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classed as an invasive weed?

I removed this statement:

In North America the oca has been classed, unfairly, as an invasive weed.

because I couldn't find any evidence for it. The USDA doesn't believe the plant occurs in the United States [1]. — Pekinensis 06:36, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Second most important

Both the descriptions of the oca and ulloco state that they are "second only to the potato" in importance in the Andes. So, which is correct?--12.154.39.254 22:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to [2], ulluco has twice as many consumers as oca. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.118.113.13 (talk) 02:27, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong photo

The photo purporting to be oca is in fact ulluco. Oca is longer, more the proportion of carrot (though not tapering), and has ridges. Perumanta (talk) 03:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one 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 careful 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) 22:13, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of New Zealand oca available

apologies, am new to wikipedia. I have an authentic picture of New Zealand sourced oca (grown on in the UK) available if required.

locates it. The oca pictured was bought from Waitrose (UK supermarket chain) and grown on in my garden.

Catofstripes (talk) 15:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay whomever edited my contribution on oca doesn't know what they are going on about. I have oca from Eucador. As anyone knows eucador on the equator as no day lenght variable. I even asked when i was there if there was a season for oca. There is not. It is unforunate that people whom have not been to the places and seen the situations they are grown in bother to contribute and edit. oca tubers are not day lenght variable however they take a longish season to produce tubers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Todare (talk • contribs) 01:24, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Provided that you can find suitable and authoritative references to support your assertion, then it can be added. Unfortunately, the use of common names means that often the same name is used for different plants and the plant you saw in Ecuador (?) may have been a different species and not Oxalis tuberosa Velella ^{Velella Talk} 19:07, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Todare is correct that oca does not require a reduction in day length in order to form tubers. Oca forms tubers at day lengths of 13 hours or less (depending on variety) and will form tubers under artificial light with an unchanging day length of 12 hours. I believe that the reference to Lost Crops of the Incas was misconstrued, as it actually says the following:

"Daylength requirements may slow up the crop's acceptance in new areas. Most Andean oca varieties have specific photoperiod responses that limit their culture to equatorial latitudes. If grown elsewhere, they form no tubers. Before oca's potential can be achieved worldwide, varieties that are either daylength neutral or adapted to long days must be located.2 The plants of New Zealand, the southern end of the Andes, and perhaps Mexico seem likely sources for these."--Gdasein (talk) 06:36, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand Yam

The article says they're known in New Zealand as "New Zealand Yams". However, we just call them yams. In fact, I only recently found out people in other countries are referring to kumara when they say "yams"! Should this be corrected, or would it just be too confusing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MotleyPhule (talk • contribs) 07:29, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Spot on. Now changed Velella ^{Velella Talk} 16:49, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah New Zealand yam is a bit of a weird name since the plant isn't native here nor first commercialised here so it would generally make sense to just call it something else. But interesting enough, it does seem the name 'New Zealand yam' is sometimes used in Australia I assume because it isn't very popular there and so interest in it has most spread from NZ. Nil Einne (talk) 14:39, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed edits to oca page

The oca page looks good and has a lot of great information, but I am interested in adding to it. I'm planning to add a number of new sections: cultural significance, diversity, and use-categories. Also, I would like to make some edits and additions to the text already present. I think the overall organization could also be improved. I know that people have already put a lot of hard work into this, and I don't want to step on anyone's toes, so I'd love input from anybody about my proposed edits. Please respond to this post if you'd like me to send you a draft. Laurenjm (talk) 18:03, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anything that improves or expands an article is always welcome - sometimes it is also necessary to tread on some toes (but not too often!). If you are thinking of making major changes, why not create your new version in your user space (i.e. User:Laurenjm/Oxalis tuberosa ) and leave a note here seeking editors views on your new version ? If there is support from the Wikipedia community, it is easy to copy across the new version wholesale. This method makes your developing new version visible to any editor who is interested. Regards. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 19:16, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion. This is my first time working on Wikipedia, so any advice is very much welcomed. I have a draft going at User:Laurenjm/oca draft. Obviously I need to fix a lot with formatting and references, but the content is pretty much there. Feel free to take a look and share your suggestions with me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurenjm (talk • contribs) 23:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That looks pretty good, (especially for a new editor!). Lets wait for a few more opinions before moving anything over. It would be useful if you could get your image file included as well. The easiest place to upload it is at Wikimedia Commons. I have made a minor edit to your comments just to shorten the link to your version of the page - Wikipedia etiquette deprecates editors changing the comments of others - but in this case it makes navigation a little easier. I apologise for that in advance. Regards Velella ^{Velella Talk} 23:53, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I think it's ready to be published! Now, how can I copy this new version to the current Oxalis tuberosa page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurenjm (talk • contribs) 20:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Updated version of Oxalis tuberosa

An updated and re-written version of the article is available at User:Laurenjm/oca draft. It is proposed to upload this version to replace the existing version. Please comment below either in favour or citing reasons why it shouldn't be changed. In the absence of any adverse comments by 4th March, the new version will be copied over. The new version has my Support Velella ^{Velella Talk} 21:33, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help. Now, what should I do to get the new version copied over? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.87.115.37 (talk) 15:13, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming that you are Laurenjm having omitted to log-in, please log in first - if you don't all the vandal watchers may start to get interested - especially for a significant change to an article! I am in some difficulty giving advice without knowing your level of competence with a computer, so please forgive instructions that may seem like teaching your grandmother to suck eggs. The very simple answer is to open both versions in edit mode and copy your version and paste it over the old version and save it with an edit summary of something like "updated version as agreed on talk page". That way preserves all the history and provides the justification. If you are unfamiliar with copy and paste operations , open both versions in edit mode in separate tabs. In your new version select the text (Ctrl A) and copy it (Ctrl C) ; move to the old version and select the text (Ctrl A) and paste your version in (Ctrl V) and save with an appropriate edit summary as above. If that isn't clear please drop a note here and I will try to assist. Regards Velella ^{Velella Talk} 20:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Thank you, Velella for your patient help. I look forward to seeing further improvements to the new edited page made by other users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurenjm (talk • contribs) 02:36, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Like a baked potato with sour cream

The book "Future Stuff" by Malcolm Abrams and Harriet Bernstein claims that oca tastes like a baked potato with sour cream. Is this true? Why isn't this characteristic listed in the main article?74.100.47.237 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:27, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly because it is just an opinion. I am sure that it is possible to find a wide range of opinions about how things taste, but as taste is a subjective experience, it rarely adds much to a Wikipedia article. If adding it as in " xxxx claims that Oca tastes like....." with an in-line citation, you would also need to establish that the source quoted was indeed a reliable source. From the title of the source my guess is that it would not be considered reliable. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 09:02, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retraction of article claiming harmaline secretion from roots

The article claims harmaline has been detected in root secretions, citing a 2002 study by Bais et al. However, its authors retracted the article in 2010 ^[1], claiming that although they had observed a fluorescent exudate, they had no chemical evidence identifying it as harmaline.

I can find no other study that would help to determine whether oca root secretions contain harmaline. I see two paths forward. We can either delete the harmaline reference, or we can add in a note about the retraction. The possible presence of harmaline is more of a horticultural curiosity than a matter of general interest about oca, and there is no citable consensus position on it, so I favor deleting it.

Does anyone object? Acone (talk) 18:04, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Bais, Harsh Pal; Park, Sang-Wook (2010). "Retraction notice to: Exudation of fluorescent beta-carbolines from Oxalis tuberosa L. roots". Phytochemistry. 71 (1). doi:10.1016/j.phytochem.2009.09.013.

Size of tubers

The one thing that the article seems to be missing is how big the tubers typically are. I know that tubers can vary significantly, but some general average size description would help those readers who might be unfamiliar with the vegetable. oknazevad (talk) 22:03, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Bais, Harsh Pal; Park, Sang-Wook (2010). "Retraction notice to: Exudation of fluorescent beta-carbolines from Oxalis tuberosa L. roots". Phytochemistry. 71 (1). doi:10.1016/j.phytochem.2009.09.013.

[1]