CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Prunus mume

species of plant

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 16, 2026
Entity authorityQ157763 ↗
Source-derived summary

Prunus mume, also known as a Chinese plum, is a tree species in the family Rosaceae. It is also referenced by its flowers as plum blossom. Although referred to as a plum in English, it is classified in the Armeniaca section of the genus Prunus, making it an apricot. Mei flowers, or meihua (梅花), which bloom in the late winter and early spring, notably during the spring festival (春節), symbolize endurance, as they are the first to bloom despite the cold; the flower is one of the Three Friends of Winter.

The plant is intimately associated with art, literature, and everyday life in China, from where it was then introduced to Korea, Vietnam, and Japan. In East Asian cuisine (Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese cuisine), the fruit, known as meizi (梅子) in Chinese, is used in juices and sauces; as a flavoring for alcohol; and may be pickled or dried. It is also used in traditional Chinese medicine. Meihua are also appreciated for their characteristic fragrance, which is unique among apricots.

Prunus mume should not be confused with the plum Prunus salicina, a related species also grown in China, Japan, Korea, and Vietnam also referred to with the common name of Chinese plum, nor with the common apricot Prunus armeniaca, which is closely related under the same section.

Origin

Prunus mume originated in the region around the Yangtze River in southern China and was cultivated domestically for both its ornamental beauty and its fruit.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Prunus mume” as species of plant. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA sound reference starting point where classification, measurement and the date of the underlying evidence remain visible. The current 244-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Prunus, mume and species can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the science & nature register because the source frames it as species of plant. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 16, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q157763. The Library of Congress control number is sh97007276. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Prunus mume”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Prunus mume primary sources, Prunus mume archive and Prunus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Prunus mume”?
  2. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
  3. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Prunus mume” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.