Graft-chimaera
plant chimaera created through grafting
In horticulture, a graft-chimaera may arise in grafting at the point of contact between rootstock and scion and will have properties intermediate between those of its "parents". Unlike graft hybrids, a graft-chimaera is not a true hybrid but a mixture of cells, each with the genotype of one of its "parents": it is a chimaera. Hence, the once widely used term "graft-hybrid" is no longer regarded as suitable for a graft-chimaera.
Propagation is by cloning only. In practice graft-chimaeras are not noted for their stability and may easily revert to one of the "parents".
Nomenclature
Article 21 of the ICNCP stipulates that a graft-chimaera can be indicated either by
a formula: the names of both "parents", in alphabetical order, joined by the plus sign "+":
Crataegus + Mespilus
a name:
if the "parents" belong to different genera a name may be formed by joining part of one generic name to the whole of the other generic name. This name must not be identical to a generic name published under the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICN). For example + Crataegomespilus is the name for the graft-chimaera which may also be indicated by the formula Crataegus + Mespilus. This name is clearly different from × Crataemespilus, the name under the ICN for the true hybrid between Crataegus and Mespilus, which can also be designated by the formula Crataegus × Mespilus.
if both "parents" belong to the same genus the graft-chimaera may be given a cultivar name.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Graft-chimaera” as plant chimaera created through grafting. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the science & nature register because the source frames it as plant chimaera created through grafting. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 31, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1668122. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. 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.
- 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 “Graft-chimaera”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Graft-chimaera primary sources, Graft-chimaera archive and Graft-chimaera 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 “Graft-chimaera”?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Graft-chimaera” 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.