Talk:Fe'i banana

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fe'i banana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150215135525/http://www.kamus.net/indonesia/ to http://www.kamus.net/indonesia

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:05, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Genetics
I removed this claim [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fe%27i_banana&diff=prev&oldid=1220789986] added here [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fe%27i_banana&diff=prev&oldid=971854697], since I could not find any mention of the fe'i banana in the source or any of the top level synonyms (fehi, fei). The rest of the article suggests they're most likely not descendant primarily from either Musa acuminata, or Musa balbisiana so would not be AA, AB or BB regardless of whether they're diploid. Even if I missed something, I'd be very cautious of using that source to make any claims about the origins of the fe'i bananas. It's general look at bananas sourced from collections in Nigeria and Uganda. These are quite far from where the fe'i banana is widely cultivated so it's easily possible what they have as fe'i bananas are not in fact fe'i bananas. The source may be good for info on bananas local to Nigeria and Uganda, but IMO for making such bold claims, we really need a source which concentrated on fe'i bananas or at least gave an indication they'd done sufficient work to ensure what they had was what's normally called fe'i bananas. If the source doesn't mention fe'i bananas but some other name allegedly a synonym, I think we need to use even more caution since it's easily possible this is in fact a different variety or there are multiple varieties which go by that name as our article sort of notes. Nil Einne (talk) 23:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I support this removal. As you say, even if they were diploid, they wouldn't fit in the groups used for M. acuminata, M. balbisiana and their hybrids. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC)