The best coffee?

Like many people, I enjoy drinking coffee. My preference is for lightly roasted beans and I don't mind whether the coffee is made using a French press, a filter, or a commercial coffee machine. 

World-wide demand is such that many countries now produce coffee beans and the resultant crops vary in quality, depending on whether they are grown at altitude, as an understory in forests, in intensive plantations, or by other farming methods. Coffea arabica, the most widespread coffee plant, comes originally from north-east Africa and its global spread has brought problems, with much effort being given to controlling coffee borer beetles and other pests. Spraying of the crop is sometimes needed as there is often no natural biological control of the pests, and monoculture provides optimal conditions for pest transmission.

Ripe "cherries" are red, those that are over-ripe are dull brown-red and those that are yet to ripen are green (see above), so hand picking is often the best method of collection. The bean that we roast is contained within the cherry and, in the picture below, a cherry has been halved and the two beans it contains partly removed. The pulp and mucilage that surrounds each are obvious, as is the white parchment-like coating of the bean itself.

Coffee beans only develop their flavour upon roasting so they must first be extracted from the cherry.  As in many fruits, the soft pulp evolved to protect the bean (seed) from drying, or abrasion, and the mucilage layer provides an extra barrier that also allows easy penetration of the shoot when the seed germinates. Mucilage has many functions in Nature [1] and the layer is important in allowing the production of the famous Kopi Luwak from Indonesia [2]:

Although Kopi Luwak.. ..comes from the Indonesian islands of Java, Sumatra and Sulawesi, it is not its exotic location of origins but rather its unusual and quite unexpected method of production which contribute to its mystique and price. The desire to consume unique food products is a characteristic of passionate coffee drinkers.

So, what is the method of production of Kopi Luwak? The skin and pulp of ripe coffee cherries are naturally sweet and are thus attractive as foods for a number of vertebrates. Among these, the African civet feeds on coffee cherries in north-east Africa, the original home of the plant, utilising the pulp and then depositing the beans, protected largely by the mucilaginous coat, in their faeces. This passage is the basis of the production of Kopi Luwak, and begins with the collection of faeces of palm civets (below, upper) that climb trees and eat the beans in situ. They would originally have fed upon the many other forms of fruit available, but the arrival of coffee plantations provided a new, and concentrated, source of food. Coffee beans are retrieved from the palm civet faeces (below, lower) and are then washed and prepared for export. The collection of faeces from the wild has now been superseded by a battery-farming approach [3], with caged civets being fed coffee cherries, but the beans that have passed through civets are still a very tiny part of the total market for coffee beans. The same is true of coffee beans that pass through Jacu birds [4], that rival the fame of Kopi Luwak.

Ingestion of fruits results in the dispersal of seeds, but there are many other methods for this essential process that are more familiar to us:

- Coconuts falling into the sea and being carried large distances to other islands

- The winged seeds of sycamore that we used as "helicopters" when we were children

- The "clocks" of dandelions, with each seed having a parachute

- The explosive pods of gorse that fling seeds large distances

- Seeds of avens with hooks that attach to animal fur

These are just a few examples of a large number of dispersal mechanisms that have evolved and all readers will know of others. However, the passage of seeds through animal guts is less familiar to us, yet we eat many berries and pay little attention to what happens to the seeds they contain. The purple droppings that result from birds eating blackberries, elderberries and other fruits are more familiar, especially to car owners in late summer, but we are less aware that the droppings often contain seeds and that these are deposited in fertiliser, far from the parent plant.

Anna Traveset has reviewed the effect of frugivores (birds, non-flying mammals, bats, reptiles, fishes) on the germination of seeds that pass through the gut of animals and concludes [5]:

In addition to moving seeds from the parent plant to sites that can be suitable for recruitment and seedling growth, frugivore seed dispersers have the capacity to modify the germination patterns of many plants by varying the potential germinability of seeds, the rate of germination, or both.

The effect on germination is complex and depends on many factors, varying also from individual to individual. Each plant is likely to produce many seeds, so the main beneficial effect of having fleshy fruits is dispersal, just as it is for the other mechanisms listed above. All worth thinking about when eating strawberries, or when savouring a cup of Kopi Luwak, This unusual coffee is yet another example of the extraordinary power of evolution and of the ingenuity of humans in taking advantage of natural processes. Is it the best coffee though?

[1] http://rwotton.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/we-cant-exist-without-slime.html

[2] Massimo F. Marcone (2004) Composition and properties of Indonesian palm civet coffee (Kopi Luwak) and Ethiopian civet coffee. Food Research International 37: 901-912.

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2013/sep/13/civet-coffee-cut-the-crap

[4] http://modernfarmer.com/2013/10/flight-jacu-bird/

[5] Anna Traveset (1998) Effect of seed passage through vertebrate frugivores' guts on germination: a review. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 1/2: 151-190.

Scotney Castle and an eminent Natural Historian

The Scotney Castle Estate in Kent provides a wonderful example of an English Romantic landscape. The original castle was modified extensively in the early Nineteenth Century (below, upper) and a new house, in a quite different style (below, lower), built on the hill overlooking it. The grounds are beautiful, but the old castle and its moat are the dominant features and can be seen from all the best rooms in the new house, completed on the instructions of Edward Hussey III in 1843.

When visiting large houses owned by the National Trust, I always make a point of looking at the titles of the books in their libraries. It is clear that Edward Hussey III, like many of his class in the mid-Nineteenth Century, was interested in Science and Natural History. Among the books in the new house were Jabez Hogg's The Microscope: it's History, Construction and Application (published in 1854), James F. Johnston's The Chemistry of Common Life (published in 1855) and Mrs T. J. Hussey's Illustrations of British Mycology (published in two parts in 1847 and 1855). Hogg's book was very popular at the time, selling over 50,000 copies, and it describes the physics of microscopy; the construction of microscopes; how to prepare materials for microscopy; and descriptions of animals, plants and their parts. It was a comprehensive guide for those indulging in this Victorian passion, and Johnston's work gave some answers to questions about the biology of organisms that were observed, with sections on air and odours; water; soil; foodstuffs and digestion; liquors; and narcotics (!).

However, it was Mrs Hussey's book that most attracted my attention, as she had a family connection to Scotney Castle. Anna Maria was married to Thomas John Hussey, the son of the Reverend John Hussey, who was the younger brother of Edward Hussey, the grandfather of Edward III who built the new house. Maria (the name by which she was known in the family) was the daughter of the Reverend J. T. A. Reed and the Reed family, like the Husseys, were acquainted with many leading figures of the day in science, including Babbage, Herschel, Fox Talbot and Graves. Both families knew the Darwins of Downe and Maria's younger brother George Varenne Reed was tutor to Charles Darwin's sons [1].

Maria had three younger sisters, all of whom were interested in botany and in collecting plants [2], and she wrote a wonderfully personal journal during a visit that she made to Dover with her youngest sister Kate (Catherine) in 1836 [2]. At the time, Maria was 31 years old, with two young children, and Kate 19 years old. In addition to many visits to the shore to observe marine life, the two collected plants, fossils and other geological specimens during walks in the Dover area, some of which required short trips by boat. There is no mention of her interest in fungi in the journal.

In Illustrations of British Mycology, Maria describes fungi (funguses to her) that can be collected in Britain; the means of collecting them; and how to identify them. It is detailed, accurate and scholarly, with many plates that show the skill of both Maria and her sister Fanny (Frances) as illustrators - montages of some of the lithographs in the book are shown below. We learn from Elizabeth Finn that Maria was not happy with the work of the lithographers [1] and one can only wonder at how good the originals must have been:

In addition to its value in allowing accurate identifications, the book also conveys Maria's enthusiasm for the subject. Here are two examples of her descriptions, first of toadstools and then of mushrooms [3]:

This splendid Agaric lifts its head boldly, the "observed of all observers", even the most careless so that it is oftener kicked to pieces, and other attentions of the kind bestowed on it, than most "Toadstools" receive: I have mourned over specimens nearly a foot across, their pure ivory gills and glowing scarlet pileus crushed in the dusty road.

The English "Mushroom" proper takes two different forms, according to soil and other conditions of site. The first case is that of rich cool loam districts, such as the extensive grazing pastures where the dairymen of Bucks herd their cows, and which have not been ploughed or mowed within the scope of the remotest tradition; the herbage is kept down by the cattle, and neither rude gravel below, not rank matted grass above, offers obstacles to the regular development of the fairest and most fragile of mushrooms, the very perfection of the thing! no freckles deface the white silky pileus, no thick cottony screen swathes a clumsy stem betokening coarse over-feeding; a light soft veil is all the protection the gills ever had, and they have expanded so rapidly even that has disappeared, or left only a few lacerated fragments on the stem; tender, succulent, friable and digestible, nourished on pure earth, in air redolent of wild thyme and the breath of kine, by dew which might be Fairies' nectar it is so free from the impurities of city miasma..

I do not know if Maria visited Scotney, but I would like to think that she did, as the estate must have been a splendid place for hunting fungi. The presence of her book in the Library indicates that Edward III was likely to have had an interest in this activity, and perhaps in looking at details of fungi using a microscope, and who better than a relative (by marriage) to act as a guide? Judging from her descriptions in the book and in her journal, she would have made a fascinating companion on Nature rambles and she deserves to be ranked alongside Margaret Gatty, Anna Atkins, and Amelia Griffiths, all eminent Victorian Natural Historians.

[1] Elizabeth A Finn (2009) Hussey, Anna Maria (1805-1853). Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

[2] Elizabeth Finn Botany, Boats and Bathing Machines: Anna Maria Hussey's Holiday in Dover 1836. Available as an e-book from Kent Archives Service - Ref U3754.

[3] Mrs T. J. Hussey (1847) Illustrations of British Mycology, containing Figures and Descriptions of the Funguses of Interest and Novelty Indigenous to Britain. London, Reeve Brothers.

Where is Heaven?

I attended Winner Street Baptist Church in Paignton, Devon as a child. It attracted families and there were often three generations present on Sunday mornings when the service included hymns, prayers, announcements and a short sermon that was more comforting than challenging. I wasn't conscious of much questioning, or even discussion, of the topics raised.

As would be expected, Heaven and Hell were mentioned frequently and it was made clear to us that going to the former resulted from being good and to the latter from being sinful. As to locations, I imagined that Hell was somewhere deep in the Earth because of all the fire and brimstone that characterised the place: Heaven, on the other hand, must be above the Earth, but I didn't know where. I learned that, after death, the soul left on its journey to Heaven (at least one person in the Winner Street congregation told me it was possible to see this) and no-one wanted to contemplate going to Hell. As I grew older, and began to question my religious beliefs, I began to wonder where Heaven might be.

If I now ask "Where is Heaven?", I am influenced by two sources, art and literature and, especially, The Holy Bible. Paintings show Heaven to be in close proximity to the surface of the Earth and images provide us with the reassurance that the souls of those who die, especially our loved ones, are not far away from us. It also means that Heaven and Earth can be represented on one canvas:

What does The Holy Bible say about the location of Heaven? A search of the Authorised Version of the King James' Bible reveals that there are 691 mentions of "heaven" (in all its meanings) [1], so, for a literalist interpretation of Heaven, as described in Genesis, I turned to The Bible, Genesis and Geology [2]. An illustration from their website is shown below and this has the arrangement of the three Heavens, with the final one (where souls reside?) beyond the waters above the firmament and, presumably, in a specific location. Although the diagram is drawn as a series of linear strata, it is based on a geocentric view, pertaining at the time The Holy Bible was written and remaining unchanged for over a thousand years. Some literalists may still believe in it.

The mediaeval view of Heaven is expressed by Dante in The Divine Comedy [3]. Dante maintains the geocentric approach and uses ideas relevant at the time, like those of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite on the hierarchy of angels, and melds them into a highly influential work. Many readers of Paradiso must have been convinced that Dante's description was based on a revelation of the true nature of Heaven. It differs from the literal Biblical account and is a good example of embellishment - an excellent summary diagram of Dante's view is given in the Oxford World's Classics edition of The Divine Comedy [3]:

In 1543, Copernicus proposed the heliocentric view of the Universe that better explained our observations and this is the view that we have today. We now know that our solar system occurs within a galaxy and that the expanding universe contains myriads of galaxies all within a void, about which we know very little indeed. It is assumed to contain dark matter and dark energy, both of which are theoretical constructs, and there are areas of modern cosmology that seem like metaphysics to those of us that don't have a sufficient level of understanding, or acceptance. What can certainly be said is that, if we take the literal interpretation of The Holy Bible, souls have a very long journey to Heaven, if it is outside the expanding Universe [4].

Given that the Christian religion centres on the fate of one's soul, the position of Heaven is important to those with an enquiring mind.  Where is it? Is there any evidence that it exists, other than through religious faith?

[1] BibleGateway website: https://www.biblegateway.com/

[2] The Bible, Genesis and Geology website: http://www.kjvbible.org/firmament.html

[3] Dante Alighieri (early 14th Century) The Divine Comedy (read in the translation by Charles H. Sisson). Oxford, Oxford University Press (reissued as a paperback in 2008).

[4] http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy/

Macho Natural History

I was brought up in Torbay and enjoyed walking along the (then) quiet lanes of South Devon, often venturing up on to Dartmoor. Holne, near Buckfastleigh, was on one of my routes and I didn't know at the time that Charles Kingsley had lived there for the first few weeks of his life.

Charles Kingsley's father, also called Charles, inherited money as a young man and set himself up as a country gentleman in Hampshire, spending his time hunting and shooting. Unfortunately, the money didn't last long and Kingsley Senior then had to find a job, choosing to become a curate in the Church of England. It was while he held a position at Holne that Charles was born and the child was destined to develop an interest in Natural History, especially under the influence of his mother. Susan Chitty describes her love of the countryside [1]:

..So great was Mrs Kingsley's passion for the Devonshire landscape, that she walked about it constantly during her pregnancy, hoping to communicate her love to her unborn child.

Charles did not have strong religious beliefs as a youth and, while an undergraduate at Cambridge, enjoyed rowing, smoking, and all aspects of what he referred to as "manliness"; including shooting and riding to hounds, passions that were so important to his father. This liking for the macho stayed with him and he was openly passionate for most of his life, both in public and private.

While visiting his father at the Rectory in Checkenden, Oxfordshire, Charles met Frances Grenfell, one of four daughters of the late Pascoe Grenfell, who lived in a large house nearby. Frances, known as Fanny, was to become the love of his life, although members of her family were not impressed with him. It was through Fanny that he developed his religious faith and, with her support, he determined to become a priest. After they married, Charles was appointed the Rector of Eversley in Hampshire, a living that he held for decades.

Throughout their lives, Charles and Fanny suffered various illnesses that required periods of convalescence, this being especially so for Fanny who, in 1854, stayed in Torquay for months. Charles joined her there, leaving Eversley in the hands of others, and it was while on this visit that he collected the marine specimens described in his book Glaucus [2] that also contains his views on Natural Historians:

..there are those who regard it [Natural History] as a mere amusement, and that as a somewhat effeminate one; and think that it can at best help to while away a leisure hour harmlessly, and perhaps usefully, as a substitute for coarser sports, or for the reading of novels. Those, however, who have followed it out, especially on the sea-shore, know better. They can tell from experience, that over and above its accessory charms of pure sea-breezes, and wild rambles by cliff and loch, the study itself has had a weighty effect upon their hearts and spirits..

..Let no one think that.. ..Natural History is a pursuit fitted only for effeminate and pedantic men. I should say, rather, that the qualifications required for a perfect naturalist are as many and as lofty as were required.. ..for the perfect knight-errant of the Middle Ages: for (to sketch an ideal, of which I am happy to say our race now affords many a fair realization) our perfect naturalist should be strong in body; able to haul a dredge, climb a rock, turn a boulder, walk all day, uncertain where he shall eat or rest; ready to face sun and rain, wind and frost, and to eat or drink thankfully anything, however coarse or meagre; he should know how to swim for his life, to pull an oar, sail a boat, and ride the first horse which comes to hand; and, finally, he should be a thoroughly good shot, and a skilful fisherman; and if he go far abroad, be able on occasion to fight for his life..

..he must be of a reverent turn of mind also; not rashly discrediting any reports, however vague and fragmentary; giving man credit always for some germ of truth, and giving Nature credit for an inexhaustible fertility and variety; which will keep him his life long always reverent, yet never superstitious; wondering at the commonest, but not surprised by the most strange; free from the idols of size and sensuous loveliness; able to see grandeur in the minutest objects, beauty, in the most ungainly; estimating each thing not carnally, as the vulgar do, by its size or its pleasantness to the senses, but spiritually, by the amount of Divine thought revealed to Man therein..

..And last, but not least, the perfect naturalist should have in him the very essence of true chivalry, namely, self-devotion; the desire to advance, not himself and his own fame or wealth, but knowledge and mankind. He should have this great virtue; and in spite of many shortcomings (for what man is there who liveth and sinneth not?), naturalists as a class have it to a degree which makes them stand out most honourably in the midst of a self-seeking and mammonite generation, inclined to value everything by its money price, its private utility..

..men for the most part of manful heads, and yet of childlike hearts..

As a contemporary Natural Historian, how do I match up to Kingsley's ideal? I cannot agree with his view that "manliness" is required and, interestingly, collecting on the shore (his main focus in Glaucus) was a hobby shared by both men and women in the Nineteenth Century [3]. His macho approach extended to the "Muscular Christianity" that he espoused during his early adult years, raising awareness of the suffering of those in poor areas of cities, and his vigorous campaigning for the less fortunate tailed off after he became an Establishment figure [1]. Maybe his interest in Natural History became more reflective as he grew older? Perhaps he favoured the macho stance when younger, as he felt he had to prove himself, not least to members of the Grenfell family? Or was it to overcome feelings of inadequacy brought on by his pronounced stutter?

What else of the description in Glaucus? Certainly, Natural History inspires awe and I join Kingsley in that, although his explanations of the wonders of the natural world centred on God's design, whereas mine are based on the combination of time and mutation. We know that Kingsley supported Darwin's ideas [4], but he still believed the evolution of species to be part of God's plan, rather than the result of an extraordinary number of chance events.

Of the rest, there is no doubt that Natural History brings an awareness that there is so much that we do not understand. This results in a childlike curiosity, and critical questioning of everything around us, that counters the "mammonite" approach that dominates many people's thinking today, just as it did in the Nineteenth Century. Natural Historians are likely to take a less anthropocentric, and less materialistic, view than most and this informs their decisions. Were he alive today, the young Kingsley would have been a campaigner on environmental matters and I'm sure that he would be a force for good; as long as he constrained his macho approach and didn't again become absorbed by the Establishment.

[1] Susan Chitty (1974) The Beast and the Monk: A Life of Charles Kingsley. London, Hodder and Stoughton.

[2] Charles Kingsley (1855) Glaucus; or, The Wonders Of The Shore. Cambridge, Macmillan & Co.

[3] http://www.rwotton.blogspot.com/2013/12/women-on-shore.html

[4] http://www.rwotton.blogspot.com/2016/05/charles-kingsley-creation-and-evolution.html