Pereskia aculeata
species of plant
Pereskia aculeata is a scrambling shrub in the family Cactaceae. Common names include Barbados gooseberry, blade-apple cactus, leaf cactus, rose cactus, and lemonvine. It is native to tropical America. The leaves and fruits are edible, containing high quantities of protein, iron and other nutrients, and it is a popular vegetable in parts of the Brazilian state of Minas Gerais under the name of ora-pro-nóbis.
Description
Like other members of the genus Pereskia, these plants are unusual cacti with spiny non-succulent stems and large leaves.
It is a scrambling vine growing to 10 m (33 ft) tall in trees, with stems 2–3 cm (0.79–1.18 in) thick. Younger stems have hooked thorns and older stems have clusters of woody spines. The leaves are 4–11 cm (1.6–4.3 in) long and 1.5–4 cm (0.59–1.57 in) broad, simple, entire, and deciduous in the dry season. The strongly scented flowers are white, cream or pinkish, 2.5–5 cm (0.98–1.97 in) diameter, and numerous, produced in panicles. The fruit is a rounded berry, translucent white to light yellow, orange, or red, and 1.5–2 cm (0.59–0.79 in) in diameter.
“Pereskia aculeata” enters the record as species of plant. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Pereskia, aculeata and species can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Pereskia aculeata” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Pereskia, aculeata and species provides the most credible route into that argument.
Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Nov 9, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q134422. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
Current terminology should not be projected backward without checking the classification used when the underlying evidence was created. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. 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.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Pereskia aculeata”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Pereskia aculeata primary sources, Pereskia aculeata archive and Pereskia research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Pereskia aculeata”?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Pereskia aculeata” 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.