Talk:Jerusalem artichoke

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 April 2019 and 5 June 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mayrahdez15.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Oh Great.

I planted these like a month ago, and we've got this enormous bumper crop coming up. Now I find out they're this awful, extravagant flatuence-type thing, and they're invasive. Is there any crop more damned? I guess I'd better do the shovel thing before they make themselves at home. Banality 03:56, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The editor who states that there is a "misconception" that JAs produce wind and hence colic, implying that the source for this misunderstanding is Gerard's herbal may not have had personal experience of consuming large quantities of this undeniably tasty and nutritious vegetable. It is without doubt highly flatogenic - if anyone wishes to see for themselves, cook and eat a kilo and within a few hours you will discover the truth Nomis62 17:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe so, but who on earth would want to eat a kilo of artichokes at a sitting? If you eat a kilo of cabbage I can assure you that you will experience even more flatulence! I have eaten artichokes frequently in reasonable quantities and never experienced flatulence from them, though I have from cabbage. Brumel (talk) 17:48, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

I just watched a video on YouTube about sunchokes that had a grower saying that he eats a pound per day - apparently for weeks at a time. The world is full of nutters. MarkinBoston (talk) 02:27, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

In the sure and certain knowledge that personal experience count for nothing here (which is as it should be), I am wholly in agreement with Nomis62 - but only a few grammes produces an uncomfortable and anti-social effect. This outcome is of course what one might expect from a vegetable rich in inulin which the human digestive system find difficult to process but which gas producing gut in the colon find much to their liking. Try growing E. coli on an inulin medium and you will be assailed with a familiar odour!  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   18:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Agreed that personal experience counts for nothing in the article itself, but this discussion does make clear that what happens varies from person to person. It seems to me that Gerard's is an extreme reaction and his very colourful account seriously unbalances the article and is likely to put off people who would otherwise grow artichokes, as is evidenced by Banality above. While the quotation should certainly be there (since Gerard was an important figure in the history of plant cultivation) it would be nice to get something more positive to balance it out. After all, if his were the only story, why would anybody bother to cultivate artichokes at all? Yet they do! It is perhaps notable that there is nothing similarly off-putting in the article on cabbage, or, for that matter, broccoli, although flatulence is mentioned in both, while flatulence is not even mentioned (so far as I can see) in the article on onions, although onions have a similar reputation when eaten in large quantities. Unfortunately I am not well-read in authorities on gardening or cooking, so I cannot make a contribution here. Brumel (talk) 19:40, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Some sources seem to imply that the longer artichokes are stored, or perhaps the longer they are frozen, the more inulin is converted to fructose. See for instance http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/afcm/jerusart.html where it says "Once the tubers are stored in the ground or refrigerated, the inulin is converted to fructose and the tubers develop a much sweeter taste" or http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/hort/hil/hil-1-a.html which states, "The principal storage carbohydrate in sunchokes immediately after harvest is inulin rather than starch" which implies that later on the composition changes. Since it is the inulin that is the problem, this suggests that the longer you leave the artichokes before eating them, the less they will cause flatulence. I only eat artichokes late in the UK season, i.e. late January to March, having left them in the ground until January or February. That could partly explain why I have not suffered from flatulence and others have. If anyone can find a source that states this categorically, it would be worth putting in the article.Brumel (talk) 09:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

The link between inulin and Flatulence seems to be the result of Fructose malabsorption a trait common in Europe. 82.37.59.17 (talk) 17:45, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Why no mention of the scandal?

Maybe what I posted on October 5th didn't have a perfect Wikipedia formatting (my html skills are lacking), but there most certainly was a Jerusalem Artichoke pyramid scheme in the mid 80s. My grandfather was a Lutheran pastor in Marshall, MN and had to counsel many farming families who fell victim to a rogue seed distributor. Some committed suicide as a result of their financial ruin. The seeds were sold as being the next big thing when in reality there was no market for the crop at the time. The initial farmers received some profits, but only as a result of selling seeds to other farmers who had been duped into planting large acreage of the crop. Additionally, contrary to Apokryltaros's deletion label, my post was in no way intended to be "spam". I'm not selling anything. The link was to a university website about the Jerusalem Artichoke. That website also mentioned the scandal. Hence the link. I just intended to relay an interesting (and yes, factual) story my grandfather relayed to me about this strange tuber and back it up with an external link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.225.158.117 (talk) 21:51, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

You would appear to be correct, i have returned your edit and added a couple of more refs. so, in no particular order: institutional apologies from Wikipedia (there is a lot of crap to sift the good parts out of and a lot of mistakes do get made), welcome to wikipedia and hopefully you'll find other things to contribute, and you've learned one of the wikipedia secrets; if you make some noise, there's a good chance somebody will notice and hear. anyway, at very minimum, sincere thanks for the contribution. Gzuckier (talk) 06:41, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure about this pyramid scheme - I never heard of it and lived in the Mid-west at the time, and I was an avid gardener, grew Jerusalem artichokes (how I hate the name and most others too!), and lived amongst farms, and many of my friends were farmers or farmers sons and daughters. However it's even more remarkable as these plants are not grown by seed, but by tuber. They infrequently produce seeds, and those produced do not result in a true-to-type crop. That is, they do not produce plants like the parents, though they will likely be usable, the desirable qualities of a particular cultivar will not be there, much like potatoes, and many tree fruits such as apples. I do know there was a sort of fad with these plants at the time - especially with organic gardeners (which I was, though not strictly so). It seems it was a resurgence of interest as there was an earlier popularity of the plant too - I think around the WW2 years (from older farmers and gardeners stories). Now I live in UT, and they also mention this here, that is people in there 60-70's (or even older) remember the plants being really popular as kids. Also this plant is one of the few native to North America that is used world-wide (most other 'American' or New World food plants are actually native to Central or South America). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.202.24.164 (talk) 14:34, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

The nature of such scams is that they don't want too much publicity, or else people will get wise to them and/or they will garner the attention of the authorities. So, the scam usually involves an element of "keep this secret or X bad thing will happen", both to make the mark think they are in on some exclusive offer and to keep the bunco squad away. And, for a scam like this, they wouldn't want to target farmers, who would know how to evaluate the market for a particular crop, as their survival depends on it. So, individual gardeners would make a better target. Given all this, it's not that surprising that you wouldn't have heard about it. StuRat (talk) 14:46, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Source for characterization as a "pyramid scheme"?

It seems, from the way this is described, that this was not a pyramid scheme, but rather trading fraud. The difference is in the way money propagates. If the first tier farmers were required to share a portion of their seed profits with those who sold them the seed, then this is a true pyramid scheme, but if you just sell a good to someone by suggesting that they'll be able to sell some of the good to someone else, that's not a pyramid scheme. Granted, if you do so by claiming that the good will soon be listed on a commodity exchange falsely, then that's securities fraud and a whole other kind of crime, and there are various other sorts of fraud that might apply. -38.111.20.226 (talk) 18:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

mismatch in information about protein content?

There is an issue with the current information on this page. In the text it is written that the percentage of protein in this vegetable is 10%. However, the nutritional table indicates that for 100g of Jerusalem artichoke, the protein content is of 2g. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.201.71.156 (talk) 08:25, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

%10 of the calories come from protein.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.124.116.101 (talk • contribs) 02:14, August 4, 2019 (UTC)

Please HALT suggestion to "treat the field with a weedkiller (such as glyphosate)". Gyphosate is TOXIC!

I am very upset to read in the article: "Farmers growing Jerusalem artichokes who then rotate the crop may have to treat the field with a weedkiller (such as glyphosate) to stop their spread. Each root can make an additional 75 to 200 tubers during a year." Yes, advising farmers that spread is rapid and can be troublesome is wise. HOWEVER: suggesting to "treat the field with a weedkiller (such as glyphosate)" is not necessary, and it ignores increasing data that glyphosate is toxic to humans and destroys soil fertility. PLEASE cut this "suggestion" from the article. Farmers can make their decisions to manage rapidly-spreading plants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5B0:49D3:6948:5C3A:6C33:6264:7298 (talk) 20:30, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

It would be interesting to read the reliable sources that state that it is toxic to humans. Please see the discussions at Glyphosate and Monsanto for a rather more nuanced view.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   10:47, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

That sentence in the article deserves a citation. Do reliable sources on farming recommend glyphosate in particular, or state that it is disproportionately used to control H. tuberosus? If not the parenthetical example could be removed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 12:19, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Removed (completely disregarding the discussion above) on grounds that WP:NOTMANUAL and that, whatever is your opinion, a WP:RS is needed. 107.190.33.254 (talk) 22:01, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Trivially easy to find reliable sources suggesting the use of glyphosate, for example the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs here. DuncanHill (talk) 23:17, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

WP:SOFIXIT. 107.190.33.254 (talk) 23:20, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

trivially easy to find reliable sources where entire countries around the world have banned the use of glyphosphate, too. 173.222.1.155 (talk) 07:10, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

There was no need to remove it. The problem lies entirely in the words "have to". It should read "Farmers growing Jerusalem artichokes who then rotate the crop often treat the field with a weedkiller (such as glyphosate) to stop their spread." Largoplazo (talk) 12:28, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

"Palestine soup" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Palestine soup. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 13#Palestine soup until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:19, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Preparation

Please provide more information about recommended preparation. I just tried some of these and got a huge amount of flatulence and some nausea. I don’t know if I cooked them long enough or whether they need to be peeled. Skysong263 (talk) 18:22, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, but Wikipedia articles aren't meant to make recommendations, give advice, or supply specific recipes. See WP:NOTHOWTO. Largoplazo (talk) 19:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

​For over ten years, the article has included the following quote:

"...They stir and cause a filthy loathsome stinking wind within the body, thereby causing the belly to be pained and tormented, and are a meat more fit for swine than men."

That should be enough warning.

And don't cook them; just clean them with a stiff brush and eat them raw. —  AjaxSmack  14:32, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Name change

I’ve altered this article’s title, captions, and names throughout from Jerusalem artichoke to sunchoke, originally a commercial name. However, in some historical instances (e.g., Monet’s painting title, commonly so known in English) I’ve left the traditional name intact.

I am in no way connected to agriculture or greengrocery (and it was only in reading Wikipedia’s article that I learned of a decades-old scheme to encourage planting of sunchoke, then with little commercial market, by U.S. farmers). Rather, I’ve done this because Jerusalem artichoke, besides being overlong, is not only a misleading, though traditional, name for this New World plant but, more important, now less common a one than sunchoke.

N.B.: A 2/10/2022 Google search turns up well over twice as many hits for sunchoke (~2,910,000) as for Jerusalem artichoke (~1,350,000). Usage of the alternative names topinambur plant (~507,000, “plant” added to differentiate result from foregoing), sunroot (~368,000), wild sunflower (~195,000, the results often referring to the common sunflower), and earth apple (~133,000, the results often referring to the common potato) is far behind.

These Google results come despite the frequent use to this day of Jerusalem artichoke as the alternative name for H. tuberosus in scientific papers, which convention I attribute to scientists' familiarity with the old name, including in the standard translation of foreign names for this plant into English. So also, in the latter instance, with the name’s use in translations from foreign commerce, such as for German “Jerusalem artichoke brandy.” — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mucketymuck (talk • contribs) 20:53, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Move reverted as it was done without discussion or consensus for a very long established article.. For the record I would Oppose any name change.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   00:54, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Oppose move. I disagree with the assertion that Jerusalem Artichoke is now less common than sunchoke. Purely on Google hits (not a particularly good indicator, but as that was the principal justification cited) I find there to be twice as many instances of Jerusalem Artichoke (5,330,000 vs 2,850,000). More importantly, a review of some of the results suggests that whenever the term Sunchoke is used it is qualified as an alternative (and usually secondary) name, whereas the reverse is not true. A review of the websites of some UK and US supermarkets (surely attuned to the common usage) shows that they are sold overwhelmingly as Jerusalem Artichokes. Sunchoke may become more prevalent in time but for now the move was WP:TOOSOON. Dorsetonian (talk) 08:28, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Oppose a move to an infantilized marketing term. "Sunchoke" is also highly inaccurate and misleading; neither the plant nor its roots are balls of hot plasma and they have no relation to choking. —  AjaxSmack  14:24, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Just FYI, not advocating for anything here: A Google ngram I ran out of curiosity shows "sunchoke" overtaking "jerusalem artichoke" in the late 1980s. The ngram seems to indicate an introduction of the new term in the early 70s (disregarding a couple strangely perfect bumps in earlier decades). Eric ^talk 13:09, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

In my opinion, if we do change the name, it should be to Helianthus tuberosus." Mr Fink (talk) 02:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Image discussion

User:Velella, you invited me here to discuss your revert,[1] but I see nothing on the talk page. I feel like you have stood me up. What is it you would like to talk about? Viriditas (talk) 04:19, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I thought the photo was suitable, I'm also interested in knowing the rationale for removing it. It's true that the way this is supposed to work is that if you add something someone objects to and they remove it, if you feel strongly enough that it should be restored, you initiate the discussion to see if you can gain consensus for it. But that presupposes that the person who removed it has explained in their edit summary why they removed it. That allows the person who'd added the content to consider it, perhaps agree with or accept it, but otherwise to know what argument of the reverting editor's they should be responding to. Velella left out that part, which wasn't fair.

PS: I just noticed that I'm talking to/about two ancient veterans of this project, which makes this situation surprising, and makes it weird that I found myself, above, spelling out the situation as though I were reassuring a newbie with regard to another newbie's behavior. Largoplazo (talk) 04:59, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

FYI all, I made a comment on another talkpage that you may find relevant to this discussion: Talk:Cassoulet#Image_discussion. Eric ^talk 15:16, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I've responded to you there. Largoplazo (talk) 15:49, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I think the article is better with this picture. As far as I can see, Jerusalem artichoke is not only a plant but also a food, and the picture gives a better idea of the latter. One could drop the "French restaurant in California" part from the caption if you think this is promotional. --Cyfal (talk) 19:01, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree Mr Fink (talk) 19:39, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I also agree. The photograph is of good quality. Without the name of the restaurant I think specifying the type and place gives a better sense of why/where sunroot (my preferred common name) is used in cuisine. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 21:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Y'all I'm getting sick of these discussions on my good faith photographs. I reverted it and added it back in. The photograph is educational in value. The caption reports it is a French restaurant in the United States using the ingredient. All of it is educational. There is nothing promotional about that. On Commons we categorize many recipes and ingredient uses by how it is used in countries. The way it is usd at a French resturant in California may be different than a French restaurant in France. Until someone can come up with a legit policy-based rational – and I asked on Velella's user page and received no response – this "battle" over a bowl of soup needs to stop. I really don't want to escalate this. Thanks everyone for assuming good faith and editing Wikipedia. Missvain (talk) 23:39, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

@Missvain Sorry that the discussion is making you sick. Sometimes minor changes get tied up in an unexpected difference of opinion. I think it is not a Wikipedia thing; it is a human collaboration thing. I was jumping in with support on the talk page rather than just putting the photo back because I try to move more slowly when editors are disagreeing. No deadline, and all that. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 04:17, 11 January 2024 (UTC)