IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v13y2023i7p1392-d1192735.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Flower-Visiting Insects Ensure Coffee Yield and Quality

Author

Listed:
  • Jesús Hernando Gómez

    (Entomology Department, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café—Cenicafé, Planalto Headquarters, km. 4 vía Antigua a Manizales, Manizales 170009, Caldas, Colombia)

  • Pablo Benavides

    (Entomology Department, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café—Cenicafé, Planalto Headquarters, km. 4 vía Antigua a Manizales, Manizales 170009, Caldas, Colombia)

  • Juan Diego Maldonado

    (Entomology Department, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café—Cenicafé, Planalto Headquarters, km. 4 vía Antigua a Manizales, Manizales 170009, Caldas, Colombia)

  • Juliana Jaramillo

    (Theme Lead Regenerative Agriculture, Rainforest Alliance, De Ruyterkade 6 BG, 1013 Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Flor Edith Acevedo

    (Department of Entomology, Pennsylvania State University, Penn State Behrend Campus, 651 Cemetery Rd, North East, PA 16428, USA)

  • Zulma Nancy Gil

    (Entomology Department, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café—Cenicafé, Planalto Headquarters, km. 4 vía Antigua a Manizales, Manizales 170009, Caldas, Colombia)

Abstract

(1) Background: The participation of insects in the pollination of self-pollinating plants, such as coffee, is still controversial. This study determined the effect of flower-visiting insects on coffee berry set, yield, and quality. (2) Methods: Over 2 years, five evaluations in different locations, dates, and harvest times were carried out. Each evaluation consisted of eight treatments with 50 replicates each, arranged in a completely randomized experimental design. Treatments were established to identify the contribution of insects, wind, gravity, self-pollination, and cross-pollination to coffee yield and quality. (3) Results: The insects contributed 16.3% of the berry set, 26.9% of the berry coffee yield, and 30.6% of the weight of supremo-type beans. No differences were observed in the sensory quality of coffee produced with or without insects. For stigma receptivity, results indicate that there is a 6.3% probability of self-pollination during pre-anthesis. (4) Conclusions: The species Coffea arabica , despite being a self-pollinating plant, benefits from the presence of flower-visiting insects. During anthesis, arabica coffee flowers are ready for cross-pollination.

Suggested Citation

  • Jesús Hernando Gómez & Pablo Benavides & Juan Diego Maldonado & Juliana Jaramillo & Flor Edith Acevedo & Zulma Nancy Gil, 2023. "Flower-Visiting Insects Ensure Coffee Yield and Quality," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:7:p:1392-:d:1192735
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/7/1392/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/7/1392/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David W. Roubik, 2002. "The value of bees to the coffee harvest," Nature, Nature, vol. 417(6890), pages 708-708, June.
    2. Hadfield, Jarrod D., 2010. "MCMC Methods for Multi-Response Generalized Linear Mixed Models: The MCMCglmm R Package," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 33(i02).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. I. Albarrán & P. Alonso-González & J. M. Marin, 2017. "Some criticism to a general model in Solvency II: an explanation from a clustering point of view," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1289-1308, June.
    2. Andrés López-Sepulcre & Sebastiano De Bona & Janne K. Valkonen & Kate D.L. Umbers & Johanna Mappes, 2015. "Item Response Trees: a recommended method for analyzing categorical data in behavioral studies," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(5), pages 1268-1273.
    3. Jesse Shore & Ethan Bernstein & David Lazer, 2014. "Facts and Figuring: An Experimental Investigation of Network Structure and Performance in Information and Solution Spaces," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-075, Harvard Business School, revised Jun 2014.
    4. Weliton Menário & Wendy J King & Timothée Bonnet & Marco Festa-Bianchet & Loeske E B Kruuk, 2023. "Early-life behavior, survival, and maternal personality in a wild marsupial," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 34(6), pages 1002-1012.
    5. Bakar, Khandoker Shuvo & Sahu, Sujit K., 2015. "spTimer: Spatio-Temporal Bayesian Modeling Using R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 63(i15).
    6. Amoroso, S., 2013. "Heterogeneity of innovative, collaborative, and productive firm-level processes," Other publications TiSEM f5784a49-7053-401d-855d-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Kandt, Jens & Leak, Alistair, 2019. "Examining inclusive mobility through smartcard data: What shall we make of senior citizens' declining bus patronage in the West Midlands?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Hart, Jordan D. A. & Franks, Daniel Wayne & Brent, Lauren & Weiss, Michael N., 2022. "bisonR - Bayesian Inference of Social Networks with R," OSF Preprints ywu7j, Center for Open Science.
    9. Tuomo Jaakkonen & Sami M. Kivelä & Christoph M. Meier & Jukka T. Forsman, 2015. "The use and relative importance of intraspecific and interspecific social information in a bird community," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(1), pages 55-64.
    10. Mohamed M. Mostafa, 2016. "Post-materialism, Religiosity, Political Orientation, Locus of Control and Concern for Global Warming: A Multilevel Analysis Across 40 Nations," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 128(3), pages 1273-1298, September.
    11. Alexander Robitzsch, 2021. "A Comprehensive Simulation Study of Estimation Methods for the Rasch Model," Stats, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-23, October.
    12. Ashleigh S Griffin & Suzanne H Alonzo & Charlie K Cornwallis, 2013. "Why Do Cuckolded Males Provide Paternal Care?," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-9, March.
    13. Jamie Dunning & Terry Burke & Alex Hoi Hang Chan & Heung Ying Janet Chik & Tim Evans & Julia Schroeder, 2023. "Opposite-sex associations are linked with annual fitness, but sociality is stable over lifetime," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 34(3), pages 315-324.
    14. Krieg Sabine & Boonstra Harm Jan & Smeets Marc, 2016. "Small-Area Estimation with Zero-Inflated Data – a Simulation Study," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 32(4), pages 963-986, December.
    15. Alonso, Pablo J., 2011. "Why using a general model in Solvency II is not a good idea : an explanation from a Bayesian point of view," DES - Working Papers. Statistics and Econometrics. WS ws113729, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Estadística.
    16. Jesse Shore & Ethan Bernstein & David Lazer, 2015. "Facts and Figuring: An Experimental Investigation of Network Structure and Performance in Information and Solution Spaces," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 1432-1446, October.
    17. Jennifer Born & Stefan G Michalski, 2019. "Trait expression and signatures of adaptation in response to nitrogen addition in the common wetland plant Juncus effusus," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-18, January.
    18. Ryan W. Buell & Dennis Campbell & Frances X. Frei, 2021. "The Customer May Not Always Be Right: Customer Compatibility and Service Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1468-1488, March.
    19. Jay P. McEntee, 2014. "Reciprocal territorial responses of parapatric African sunbirds: species-level asymmetry and intraspecific geographic variation," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 25(6), pages 1380-1394.
    20. Kitti, Mitri & Heikkilä, Jaakko & Huhtala, Anni, 2009. "‘Fair’ policies for the coffee trade – protecting people or biodiversity?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(6), pages 739-758, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:7:p:1392-:d:1192735. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.