7 responses to “Coffea arabica”

  1. Ruth brodie

    A fascinating description of Coffea arabica. It has made me reflect on the origin of that morning cup of coffee. Thank you, Daniel, for that great explanation. Have you thought of compiling your Botany Photo of the Day photos and explanations into a book? Each description is so well written!

  2. Daniel Mosquin

    Today’s author was again Tamara Bonnemaison, so I can’t take credit. A book would be difficult; too many permissions and licenses to be secured, since so much of BPotD features contributions from so far afield. I could do one solely with my own photographs, but it wouldn’t have the same depth or breadth of plant diversity — unless I find ways to increase my international travel.

  3. Moralea Milne

    A couple of years ago I was walking through a jungle in Mexico, near San Blas, photographing some butterflies. There were coffee plants interspersed throughout the forest, a truly sustainable agricultural model. I sampled a few of the red berries and they were delicious, very sweet.

  4. Diogenes

    What happened to coffea robusta? Did it get renamed canephora and I’m just waaay behind the times?

  5. marilyn brown

    Perfectly beautiful photo. What a rich range of color, plus many new things to think about as I enjoy my morning cup.

  6. MichaelF

    “What happened to coffea robusta? Did it get renamed canephora and I’m just waaay behind the times?”
    Yes; same thing. C. canephora is an older name (1897, vs. 1900 for C. robusta).

  7. Alison Place

    I love coffee, too! However, I remember seeing coffee plants (only 50-60 cm high) sparsely planted on what looked like a 45 degree slope on the Pacific side of Costa Rica, back in 1990. I also remember being told while I was there that topsoil was being washed out to sea at a huge rate, in part due to agriculture on such slopes.
    A quick search online gave me one figure (dating from 1987) estimating 860,000,000 tons of topsoil loss/year in Costa Rica, from a surface are of 51,000 km2. That’s 17,000 tons/km2/year. That’s fairly close to what I remember, which was about 8mm/year, or 11,500 tons/km2/yr (assuming 1.44 tons/m3). Of course, the forested land loses very little, while coffee plantations like the one I saw lose vastly more than that. Came back from that trip promising to buy only shade-grown coffee.

Leave a Reply