129
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] NephewAlphaBravo@hexbear.net 30 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The wood is soft and fibrous and the taste has been compared to chestnuts.

i would have guessed that "wood" is too strongly defined by all of its indigestible structural shit like lignin to the point that "wood" and "edible" are mutually exclusive, but apparently this one tree just happens to... not use lignin for some reason? pretty neat

[-] kristina@hexbear.net 26 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yeah no cellulose at all basically makes the bark taste like a nutty semi sweet tofu

[-] NephewAlphaBravo@hexbear.net 18 points 1 month ago

i'm mostly just surprised that it's still considered "wood" at that point instead of some other kind of plant part

[-] Keld@hexbear.net 16 points 1 month ago

I mean what else would it be? It's vascular tissue from a tree, it's a type of papaya tree.

[-] NephewAlphaBravo@hexbear.net 20 points 1 month ago

i only know enough to get myself in trouble

[-] FlakesBongler@hexbear.net 16 points 1 month ago

Taxonomy is a hell of a drug

[-] LeeeroooyJeeenkiiins@hexbear.net 14 points 1 month ago

that sounds awesome what the fuck

this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2026
129 points (100.0% liked)

Chapotraphouse

14374 readers
562 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS