Sandoricum koetjape
Description
Tree to 45(–50) m; bole to 1 m diam., fluted and sometimes with buttresses to 3 m tall.
Bark pale pinkish brown, smooth, lenticellate to peeling with round flakes; inner bark pink; sapwood pale yellow; heartwood pink or reddish.
Leaves 18–40 cm long; petiole 7.5–16 cm, flattened (or even wing- ed in sicco) adaxially towards the ± swollen base, subglabrous to fulvous pubescent.
Petals (4 or) 5,6–9 mm long, linear-lanceolate to oblanceolate, yellowish- green or pinkish, ± pubescent without, reflexed at anthesis, apices rounded to emargi- nate.
Staminal tube ± pubescent without, pilose within, pale yellow to orangeish, margin with 10 lobes acute to bifid, somewhat reflexed at anthesis; anthers (8 or) 10, 1–1.5 mm long, narrowly oblong, apiculate, ± in 2 ranks, weakly exserted.
Ovary and style glabrous; stigmatic lobes c. 1.5 mm long.
Seeds 20–35 by 12–21 mm, 9–16 mm thick, germinating in rotting fruit; co- tyledons pink inside.
Distribution
Asia-Tropical, Madang present
Planted widely in the Asiatic tropics but probably native only in Malesia, the wild form (see below) extending from the Malay Peninsula and Sumatra throughout the archipelago to New Guinea (Madang) The pubescent cultivated form with leaves withering red (Parkinson, l.c.) is that planted in India including the Anda- mans, Burma, Indochina, the Mascarenes and the New World as well as grown under glass (in Europe.
Morphology
Juliano (ll.cc.)0020has shown that the sequence of development of the floral parts is: sepals, petals, androecium, carpels and lastly disk. He also gives details of micro- and macrosporogenesis. Villegas (l.c.) reports that the mesocarp is derived from the inner pericarp walls and as outgrowths from the endocarp, and that the indu- mentum of the drupe develops after fertilization, the ovary being glabrous. Similar is reported by Pennington for two neotropical species of Trichilia.
Taxonomy
This species embraces the cultivated fruit trees known as sentul (and variants) and kechapi (and variants), grown throughout western Malesia, largely as vil- lage trees, for shade as well as fruit. The form known as kechapi in the narrow sense, i.e. that with robust pubescent twigs, a brown pubescent adaxial surface to the large leaves, and with many costae in the leaflets is that most frequently encountered in the Philippines and probably the only form cultivated outside Malesia, being early carried to Indochina, the Mascarenes and now increasingly in the New World, notably Costa Rica (Pennington, l.c.) and especially Florida (Whitman, l.c.), where a robust form of it is known as ‘Manila’ which may serve as a cultivar name. The robust form introduced to the Philippines in 1949 from Thailand was called ‘Bangkok’, compared with the original ‘Native’ (Ramirez, l.c.). This latter is probably the Red Sentol of Corner (1940) who notes that the tree has leaves which wither red, pale green petals and a sweet or sour fruit with a thick generally wrinkled or uneven pericarp and often rotting on the tree. It seems to be the form originally described by N. Burman and Cavanilles, though there is considerable variation in the cultivated trees in terms of pubescence and the form and taste of the fruit. A specimen from J. Burman’s herbarium and now preserved at L has much less pubescent leaflets, for example. Wild trees in the Malay Peninsula and eastwards to New Guinea, beyond the range of cultivation of the Red Sentol, have more delicate twigs, smaller subglabrous leaves, withering yellow, the leaflets with fewer costae and pinkish petals in rather shorter inflorescences, the fruits sweet-tasting with thinner smoother pericarp and falling when ripe. In the Philippines and from Celebes eastwards, the two forms seem perfectly distinct but in western Malesia it becomes impossible to draw a clear line between them. Indeed, it is tempting to speculate that it is here, where all the other species in the genus are also native, different forms have been selected from the variable wild populations. It is interesting to compare the origin of ‘Manila’ with the robust form of the Lansium domesticum aggregate known as ‘Kokossan’ (q.v.).
Cytology
The form known as 'Native' has 2n = 22, whereas the robust cultivated ‘Bangkok’ (= ‘Manila’) has 2n = 44 and is a tetraploid (Ramirez, l.c.) and 2n = 16, 28, 32 haVe also been recorded by Pennington . There is no evidence for apomixis and records of polyembryony probably rest on a confusion of the 1- or 2- seeded ‘stones’ with seeds (Juliano, ll.cc4). Juliano also recorded a case of one tree in Manila which never produced fruit. This was due to the failure of the corolla to open and no self-pollination took place even though mega- and microsporogenesis were normal.
Uses
The mesocarp is the part eaten. In some forms it is exceedingly sweet and the sour ones may be ‘excruciating’ (Corner 1940). Nevertheless, some trees have ex- cellent flavour and Popenoe (l.c., quoting Webster) remarks that should seedless or semi-seedless forms be found, the sentul could “become one of the most popular of the tropical fruits.” An excellent jam has been prepared from the fruits (Barrett, l.c.) which in some forms smell like ripe peaches. Rumpf notes that the fruit may be eaten raw or cooked, like lemons, with fish in Ambon. It may also be candied or fermented with rice in the production of an alcoholic drink. Although not particularly high in Vitamin C, it is a good source of Vitamin B . See also
The tree is fast growing when young, Roxburgh (l.c.) recording that a 24-year-old tree in the Calcutta Botanic Garden had a bole with a circumference of over 2 m. The tree has been widely planted for shade: it is recommended as an avenue species. The timber is red, moderately hard and takes a fine polish. Rumpf records that it was a dur- able timber for house construction in Ambon but Anon. (1972) reported that it perishes on exposure to water and borers. Nevertheless, it is in much demand in Burma for the manufacture of sandals and has been used in the construction of barrels, boats, carts and butchers' blocks. The bark has been used in tanning fishing nets. It, and also par- ticularly the roots, are claimed as efficacious in the treatment of a number of medical conditions (see Perry for digest), its value being known in the seventeenth century and recorded by Mercado . Stems yield the triterpen- oids 3-oxo-olean-12-en-29 oic acid, its 3-dihydroderivative katonic acid and an A-ring seco derivative of katonic acid called koetjapic acid, C30H46O4; the first-named two components have significant cancerostatic activities in cell cultures . Two new limonoids, sandoricin and 6-hydroxysandoricin, have been isolated from the seeds; both have been tested for insect-antifeedant activity with larvae of two lepidopteran species and found to be active .
The tree is fast growing when young, Roxburgh (l.c.) recording that a 24-year-old tree in the Calcutta Botanic Garden had a bole with a circumference of over 2 m. The tree has been widely planted for shade: it is recommended as an avenue species. The timber is red, moderately hard and takes a fine polish. Rumpf records that it was a dur- able timber for house construction in Ambon but Anon. (1972) reported that it perishes on exposure to water and borers. Nevertheless, it is in much demand in Burma for the manufacture of sandals and has been used in the construction of barrels, boats, carts and butchers' blocks. The bark has been used in tanning fishing nets. It, and also par- ticularly the roots, are claimed as efficacious in the treatment of a number of medical conditions (see Perry for digest), its value being known in the seventeenth century and recorded by Mercado . Stems yield the triterpen- oids 3-oxo-olean-12-en-29 oic acid, its 3-dihydroderivative katonic acid and an A-ring seco derivative of katonic acid called koetjapic acid, C30H46O4; the first-named two components have significant cancerostatic activities in cell cultures . Two new limonoids, sandoricin and 6-hydroxysandoricin, have been isolated from the seeds; both have been tested for insect-antifeedant activity with larvae of two lepidopteran species and found to be active .
Citation
Whitford 1911: p. 46. – In: For. Philipp.: t. 35
Bedd. 1872: Fl. Sylv.: iv,
Troup 1921: Silv. Ind. Trees: 204
Merr. 1906 – In: Philipp. J. Sc.: 71
Meijer 1967 – In: Bot. News Bull. Sabah: 81.
Perkins 1904: Fragm. Fl. Philipp.: 31
Hassk. 1858: Hort. Bogor. Descr.: 124
Pellegr. 1911: p. 732. – In: Fl. Indo-Chine: , cum tab., incl. var. cochinchinense
Hô& Duong 1960: Fl. Vietnam: 248: t. 90B.
Bedd. 1873: Fl. Sylv.: t. 319
C.E.Parkinson 1923: For. Fl. Andam.: 117
Nair 1958 – In: Phyton: 145
Koord. 1898: Minah.: 389
Merr. 1918: Sp. Blanc.: 209
Merr. 1917: Interpr. Rumph.: 308
Roxb. 1832 – In: Fl. Ind., ed. Carey: 392
Corner 1940 – In: Wayside Trees: t. 140, 141
Craib 1926 – In: Enum. pl. Slam.: 254
Blume 1825: Bijdr.: 164
Lam. 1789 – In: Encycl. Méth.: 69
Meijer 1967 – In: Bot. News Bull. Sabah: 81
Popenoe 1920: Man. Trop. Fr.: 426
C.DC. 1878: p. 461. – In: DC., Monogr. Phan. 1: f. 11
Koord. 1913 – In: Atlas: t. 182
Corner 1976 – In: Seeds Dicots: t. 375b
Ridley 1922 – In: Fl. Malay Penins.: 385
Ochse 1927: Ind. Vrucht: 125: t. 61
Miq. 1859 – In: Fl. Ind. Bat.: 541.
K. Heyne 1950: Nutt. Pl. Indon., ed. 3: 891
Barrett 1913: p. 498. – In: Philipp. Agr. Rev.: t. 3a
Koord. 1913: Atlas: t. 183
Backer 1911: Schoolfl. Java: 210
Hassk. 1858 – In: Hort. Bog. Descr.: 125
Intengan et al. 1955 – In: Philipp. J. Sc.: 361
DC. 1824 – In: Prodr.: 621
M.Roem. 1846 – In: Synops. Monogr.: 109.
Miq. 1859 – In: Fl. Ind. Bat.: 541
Worth. 1959: Ceyl. Trees: t. 129
Miq. 1861: Fl. Ind. Bat.: 196
Becc. 1902: For. Born.: 574
Koord. 1912 – In: Exk. Fl. Java: 440
Rodger 1936: Handb. For. Prod. Burma: 64
Merr. 1921 – In: Philipp. J. Sc.: 329
Webster 1920: p. 184. – In: Philipp. Agr. Rev.: t. 17b
Ridley 1902 – In: Agr. Bull. Str. Fed. Malay St: 429
Whitford 1911: p. 46. – In: For. Philipp.: t. 34
Hassk. 1858: Hort. Bot. Descr.: 125
Ridley 1902 – In: Agr. Bull. Str. Fed. Malay St.: 429.
Brandis 1906: Indian Trees: 137
Ramirez 1961 – In: Philipp. Agric.: 275
Backer & Bakh. f. 1965 – In: Fl. Java: 121
Ridley 1922 – In: Fl. Malay Penins.: 385
D. Dietr. 1847 – In: Syn.: 789.
Elmer 1937 – In: LeaFl. Philipp. Bot.: 3387.
Harms 1940 – In: Engl. & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam., ed. 2, 19bl: t. 35, f. A-E
Hassk. 1855 – In: Retzia: 146
Hiern 1875: p. 553. – In: Hook. f., Fl. Brit. India 1: incl. var. velutinum Hiern
Anon. 1972 – In: Wealth India: 200
Laness. 1886: Pl. Util. Colon. Fran.: 310
King 1895 – In: J. As. Soc. Beng.: 23
J.Graham 1839: Cat. Pl. Bom- bay: 31
Juliano 1934 – In: Philipp. Agr.: 11, 253
Gamble 1902: Man. Ind. Timb., ed. 2: 149
Basu 1918: Ind. Med. Pl: 313: t. 221
King 1895 – In: J. As. Soc. Beng.: 22
Vidal 1880: Cat. Pl. Prov. Man.: 22.
Fern.-Vill. 1880: Nov. App.: 42
Harms 1896 – In: Engl. & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. 3, 4: t. 161, f. A-E
Wight & Arn. 1834: Prodr.: 120
Guillaumin 1910: p. 468. – In: Rev. Gén. Bot.: f. 3
Phillips et al. 1985: Guide Market Fr. SE Asia: 66
Quisumb. 1951: Med. Pl. Philipp.: 486
Sm. 1815 – In: Rees, Cyclop. 31, 1: Sandoricum n. 1
Crev. & Lern. 1917 – In: Cat. Prod. Indoch.: 227
Burkill & Haniff 1930 – In: Gard. Bull. Str. Settl.: 183
Molesw. Allen 1967: Mal. Fr: 105: t. 38
Miq. 1868 – In: Ann. Mus. Bot. Lugd.-Bat.: 32
Corner 1940 – In: Wayside Trees: 466
Vidal 1886: Rev. Vasc. Pl. Fil.: 82
Hô 1992 – In: 111. Fl. Vietnam: 489.
Yiagan 1961 – In: Philipp. Agric.: 477
Mabb. 1985 – In: Blumea: 147
Chin & Yong 1981: Malays. Fr. Col: 29: cum tab.
Paxt. 1849: 111, 116. – In: Mag. Bot.: cum tab.
Ochse 1931: Fr. Cult. Dutch E Ind: 65: t. 26
Pierre 1897 – In: Fl. For. Cochinch.: t. 353A, incl. var. cochinchinense Pierre
Watt 1893 – In: Dict. Econ. Prod. Ind.: 457
Craib 1926 – In: Enum. Pl. Siam.: 353
Whitman 1974: p. 379. – In: Proc. Fla St. Hort. Soc.: t. 3, 4
Becc. 1902: For. Born.: 201, 599
M.Roem. 1846 – In: Synops. Monogr.: 108
Corner 1988: Wayside Trees, ed. 3: 504: t. 152, 153
Merr. 1923 – In: Enum. Philipp. Flow. Pl.: 361
Chittenden 1951 – In: Dict. Gard.: 1863
King & Morgan 1960: J. Chem. Soc.: 4738
Lam. 1793: Ill.: t. 350
Roxb. 1820: p. 58. – In: Pl. Coast Corom.: t. 261
Koord. 1912 – In: Exk. Fl. Java: 440
G. Don 1831 – In: Gen. Syst.: 680
Merr. 1921 – In: J. Str. Br. Roy. As. Soc: 319
G.Don 1831 – In: Gen. Syst.: 682.
Blanco 1878: Fl. Filip., ed. 3: 85: t. 127
Ridley 1922 – In: Fl. Malay Penins.: 385
M.Roem. 1846 – In: Synops. Monogr.: 109
Backer 1911: Schoolfl. Java: 210
Steenis 1949: Fl. Scholen Indon.: 233
Harms 1942 – In: Bot. Jahrb.: 204.
Pellegr. 1946: Fl. Indo-Chine: 687
C.DC. 1878: p. 462. – In: DC., Monogr. Phan. 1: incl. var. quadripetalum C.DC.
Koord. & Valeton 1896 – In: Bijdr. Booms. Java: 30
Bisschop Grev. 1883: Pl. Ned. Ind.: 494
T.D.Penn 1981 – In: Fl. Neotrop.: 359
Kurz 1877 – In: For. Fl. Burma: 217
Miq. 1868 – In: Ann. Mus. Bot. Lugd.-Bat.: 32
Burkill 1935: Dict. Econ. Prod. Malay Penins.: 1948.
Backer 1907: Fl. Batavia: 274
Drury 1864 – In: Handb. Ind. Fl.: 165
Tix. 1950 – In: J. Agr. Trop. Bot. Appl.: 596
Burkill 1935: Dict. Econ. Prod. Malay Penins.: 1946
Willd. 1799 – In: Sp. Pl.: 556
Guzman et al. 1986: p. 342. – In: Guide Philipp. Fl. Fauna: t. 261
Adelb. 1948 – In: Blumea: 316
Blanco 1845: Fl. Filip., ed. 2: 242
Koord. & Valeton 1896 – In: Bijdr. Booms. Java: 27
Brown 1920: p. 86. – In: Bull. Philipp. Dept. Agr. Bur. For.: t. 41
Ridley 1898 – In: Agr. Bull. Malay Penins.: 228
A. Juss. 1832: p. 232. – In: Mém. Mus. Nat. Hist. Nat. Paris: f. 15
D.Dietr. 1847 – In: Syn.: 789
Merr. 1912: Fl. Manila: 274
Merr. 1921: p. 319. – In: J. Str. Br. Roy. As. Soc: incl. var. quadripeta- lum
Corner 1976 – In: Seeds Dicots: 191
Elmer 1937 – In: Leafl. Philipp. Bot.: 3386
Pratt et al. 1913: p. 80. – In: Philipp. J. Sc. Chem. Geol.: f. 1
Mend. 1926: Man. Pl. Breed. Trop.: 296
Merr. 1923 – In: Enum. Philipp. Flow. Pl.: 361
Jimenez 1937 – In: Philipp. Agric.: 587
de Vogel 1990: Seedlings Dicots: 355: f. 129
Pellegr. 1911 – In: Fl. Indo-Chine: 733.
Webster 1915: p. 110. – In: Philipp. Agr. Rev.: t. 8b
Villegas 1936 – In: Univ. Philipp. Nat. Appl. Sc. Bull.: 293
Miq. 1859 – In: Fl. Ind. Bat.: 541
L.M. Perry 1980: Med. Pl. E & SE Asia: 262
Briq. 1935 – In: Mém. Inst. Nat. Genev.: 45
Hassk. 1855 – In: Retzia: 146
Mabb. 1989: p. 249. – In: Tree Fl. Malaya: f. 8B