Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation
A Research Division of Carnegie Mellon University

Hunt Institute Archives Text Discovery Platform

Search a large and growing portion of our online collections, including handwritten documents.
PROTOTYPE

This prototype uses state-of-the-art artificial intelligence, including a vision-language model (VLM) capable of reading handwritten documents as well as typed and printed text, to create searchable transcriptions of digitized materials in the Hunt Institute Archives. This makes it possible to search the textual contents of individual pages, including material that may not be described in the archival catalog.

Use Keyword search for specific words, names, dates, scientific names, or phrases. Try Semantic search (experimental) to describe a topic, question, or kind of material when you do not know the exact wording used in the documents.

About the AI-generated transcriptions

The transcriptions are generated automatically from page images and may contain errors, especially with difficult handwriting, unusual names, multiple languages, image-quality problems, or complex layouts. They are intended primarily as a discovery aid rather than authoritative transcriptions.

Each result provides the generated transcription and links to the original digitized material and associated archival description so that readings can be checked against the source. The transcription workflow uses AI models run locally by the Hunt Institute.

About Keyword and Semantic search

Keyword search is the default and matches the wording in the transcriptions. Results contain all your terms. Use quotes for an exact phrase. Substring matching is supported, so aceae can find plant-family names ending in -aceae.

Semantic search (experimental) is useful when you know what kind of material you are looking for but do not know the words used in the documents. It ranks transcribed passages by similarity of meaning, so relevant results may not contain the exact words in your query.

Semantic queries can be broad research topics, descriptions of activities or relationships, or natural-language questions. For example:

Semantic search is not a chatbot: a question is used as a search query, and the system returns archival passages that appear conceptually related to it rather than generating an answer or summary. Short descriptions and ordinary research questions generally work better than lists of disconnected keywords. Quotation marks have no special meaning in Semantic mode. Cross-language matching may work in some cases, but it should not be treated as translation.

Keyword and Semantic search are complementary. Keyword search lets you require particular wording; Semantic search can surface differently worded passages about the same subject. Depending on the research question, trying both can reveal different useful material.

Open a result: use the prominent page-and-transcription link to see the metadata, PDF, and full transcription. Keyword-search terms are highlighted in the transcription.

Archives Collections Database (ArchivesSpace): the Collection, Item/Folder, and Digital Object links open the corresponding archival records. Collection-level dates describe the collection as a whole, not necessarily the specific item or page.

If a PDF does not load: on the detail page, use the Digital Object link, click “Go to file” in ArchivesSpace, and navigate to the page number shown here.

Current limitations
  • Automated transcriptions can contain missing or incorrect text or unintended repetition. Difficult handwriting, image quality, unusual layouts, and multiple languages can reduce accuracy. Always consult the original page image when an exact reading matters.
  • Semantic search remains experimental. Its rankings are an additional discovery aid, not a complete or definitive set of relevant results, and highly ranked pages can sometimes be only broadly related.
  • This is an active prototype. Search coverage, transcriptions, functionality, and the interface may continue to change as additional archival material is processed and the system is improved.

← Back to results

Page 9 · DO #405 · 204_Popenoe_Bx30aFF6r

Collection
Wilson Popenoe (1892–1975) family papers
Item/Folder
Encyclopedia Britannica articles on various tropical fruits, March 1958–1964
Digital Object
DO #405, page 9
Collection-level dates
1882–1975
Open PDF at page 9 ↗

Page transcription

But most of the seedlings so abundant throughout the tropics
do not represent this fruit at its best. While of good flavour,
they are commonly characterised by coarse fibres throughout the
flesh which makes eating an annoying process. In contrast, the fine
grafted varieties which have originated in India and a few other
regions, as well as seedlings of the race cultivated in the Philippines
and a few other gloms (known in Mexico as Mangos de Manila in Mexico
and Filipinos in Cuba) are almost devoid of fibre and of excellent
quality.

In 1889 the U.S. Department of Agriculture introduced into
Florida the first of the grafted Indian varieties (known in
this country, the variety Mulgoba, of superb quality but not highly
productive. In subsequent years, mainly through the efforts of
Reasoner Brothers and David Fairchild, more than fifty other choice
varieties were brought to the U.S., whence the cultivation of
several gradually spread to many parts of the American tropics. The
British and French also introduced a number into the West Indies.
Some of the best imported varieties are Fairi (known in Jamaica
as Bombay), Borsha, and Amini. In addition to these such varieties
as Carabao from the Philippines and Saigon from Cambodia should be
mentioned, as well as Julie which first received horticultural
attention in the French West Indies and is now popular in Jamaica.

Due to the failure of many varieties to produce regular and
heavy crops of fruit, they have been replaced in commercial orchards
by Haden (a seedling of Mulgoba which originated in Florida) and
others which have been developed in that state.

Mango trees are injured by a few degrees of frost. They are
successfully grown commercially in southern Florida, but have not
been wholly successful in California, though numerous trees have
fruited in that state. The mango is not particular as to soil, but
the finer varieties only produce good crops where there is a well-
marked dry season to stimulate fruit production rather than vegetative growth. There is another serious problem in rainy areas:
a fungous disease known as anthracnose (Colletotrichum) which
destroys the flowers and young fruits and is expensive to control.

Propagation is by means of grafting or budding. Inarching is
widely practiced in tropical Asia, but is tedious and relatively
expensive. In Florida better methods have been developed and are used
commercially. Chief among these are veneer grafting and chip budding.
However, seedling trees of the Philippine race usually produce fruit
like that of the parent and for this reason are extensively grown
in Mexico. This race is polyembryonic, which means that trees
usually do not develop from fertilized ovules, but from what are
known as nucellar buds arising from the vegetative tissues surrounding
the egg cell, hence they are in most respects similar to grafted
plants. On the other hand, most of the Indian varieties are
monoembryonic, which means that young plants develop only from
fertilized ovules and therefore are subject to the variation which
is characteristic of cultivated fruit trees in general.