Peruvian specialty coffee · research cutoff 2026-07-15
Claim-by-claim evidence ledger
Search and filter 69 source-checked claim records, including each source locator, excerpt, strength, and limitation.
“Source checked” is not “claim proven”
The ledger’s status confirms that this project checked the cited source, locator, and excerpt. It does not independently prove sample identity, chain of custody, laboratory interpretation, commercial representation, provenance, or causation. Read strength and limitations together.
69 records
| Claim | Source & locator | Evidence | Strength & limits | Review state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GEN-001The appropriate genetic reference for Panamanian Geisha is the cultivated population descended from CATIE accession T2722. | WCRGeishainstitutional variety referenceHTML sections “Genetic Description,” “Lineage,” and “History,” especially History paragraph 2; accessed 2026-07-15 | Panamanian Geisha descendent from T2722 is distinct and uniform.WCR treats T2722-derived Panamanian Geisha as a recognizable and comparatively uniform reference population. | HighInstitutional catalog summary rather than a raw genotype dataset; it does not test any Peruvian sample. | Source checkedHistorical and Genetic Background of Gesha |
| GEN-002Use of the name Gesha or Geisha does not by itself establish T2722 genetic identity. | WCRGeishainstitutional contradictory evidenceHTML introductory summary and “History” paragraph 2; accessed 2026-07-15 | multiple genetically distinct plant types that have been referred to as GeishaWCR explicitly warns that genetically different material circulates under the same market name. | HighThe warning establishes label ambiguity generally, not the identity of a particular Peruvian tree. | Source checkedHistorical and Genetic Background of Gesha |
| GEN-003T2722 has a documented institutional transfer chain from an Ethiopian collection through East African stations to CATIE and Latin America. | Anzueto2021institutional historical synthesisEnglish PDF pp. 4–5, printed pp. 3–4, subsection “Geisha,” especially the paragraph continuing onto PDF p. 5 | The first introduction the CATIE received (under code T-2722) was in July 1953Anzueto records bulk collection near Geisha mountain, transfers through Kitale, Kawanda, and Lyamungu, CATIE receipt in July 1953, and later distribution including Panama. | HighThe paper reconstructs institutional history; it does not authenticate a present Peruvian lot, and the original collection contained bulk seed from multiple trees. | Source checkedHistorical and Genetic Background of Gesha |
| GEN-004The principal peer-reviewed WCR authentication workflow used eight SSR loci and CATIE T.02722 as the Gesha reference. | PruvotWoehl2020peer-reviewed genetic methodsPDF p. 3, “Coffee Samples” and “DNA Extraction and SSR Marker Analysis” | same eight SSR primer pairsThe published workflow used eight SSR markers, PCR, capillary electrophoresis, GeneMapper calls, and visual review against a database containing the T.02722 reference. | HighThis is the documented 2014–2020 WCR workflow; it cannot be assumed to be the exact protocol used for the private Peruvian RD2 job. | Source checkedMethods and Source-Evaluation Framework |
| GEN-005Submitted coffees carrying the Gesha name often fail to match the T2722 reference. | PruvotWoehl2020peer-reviewed contradictory evidencePDF pp. 5–6, “Focus on Genetic Conformity of Two Varieties: Marsellesa and Gesha” | 39% were an exact match with the Gesha referenceAmong 88 supposed Gesha submissions, 39% exactly matched T2722, 24% were close, and 37% had unrelated backgrounds. | HighThe sample set consisted of submissions to WCR rather than a representative census, and it did not include an identified Inca Gesha cohort. | Source checkedHistorical and Genetic Background of Gesha |
| GEN-006An SSR fingerprint in tetraploid Arabica is an allelic phenotype, not a complete genome identity. | PruvotWoehl2020peer-reviewed methodological limitationPDF p. 3, “Data Analysis,” paragraph beginning “Because C. arabica is tetraploid” | SSR allelic phenotype rather than genotypePresence-or-absence allele scoring cannot distinguish all chromosomal arrangements that yield the same observed profile. | HighThis limitation does not negate discriminatory power, but it constrains claims of exact identity or descent. | Source checkedMethods and Source-Evaluation Framework |
| GEN-007Ethiopian Legacy is a broad genetic cluster containing multiple named cultivars, including SL-09; it is not synonymous with SL09. | Montagnon2022peer-reviewed population-genetic classificationPDF p. 7, “Results,” paragraph defining the fourth Domestication Pathway cluster | SL-09, SL-14, SL-17, SL-34 and K-7The 2022 admixture analysis placed five distinct worldwide cultivars in the cluster named Ethiopian Legacy. | HighCluster membership alone cannot discriminate a Peruvian sample as exact SL09 or establish an Ethiopian-landrace identity. | Source checkedEvidence Concerning SL9 Identity |
| GEN-008The published Ethiopian Legacy classification depends on a stated ten-SSR panel and defined statistical analyses. | Montagnon2022peer-reviewed genetic methodsPDF pp. 4–6, methods paragraphs and Table 2; PDF p. 9, Figure 6 caption | Ten SSR (Single Sequence Repeat) primer pairs were usedThe study used ten SSR loci, Dice dissimilarity, PCoA, hierarchical clustering, and an admixture model on 555 samples. | HighIts disclosed method provides context, but no public evidence shows that the private Peruvian test used exactly this panel and decision rule. | Source checkedMethods and Source-Evaluation Framework |
| GEN-009Historical SL.9 was a Scott Laboratories individual-tree selection from source material whose origin was already unknown. | Jones1956primary historical sourceScanned PDF pp. 11–12, printed pp. 307–308, “S.L. Selections” and entry “SL.9” spanning the page break | selected at the Scott Laboratories from a block of unknown originJones describes SL.9 as a selection from an unidentified block, not as a documented controlled cross with named parents. | HighThe scan establishes the historical description but contains no molecular evidence and no link to Peru. | Source checkedEvidence Concerning SL9 Identity |
| GEN-010The 1956 phenotype recorded for SL.9 included strong coffee-berry-disease susceptibility. | Jones1956primary historical sourceScanned PDF p. 12, printed p. 308, continuation of entry “SL.9” | very susceptible to Coffee Berry DiseaseJones reports heavy middle-altitude crops of good quality alongside marked CBD susceptibility. | HighA historical phenotype cannot authenticate a modern Peruvian tree; disease expression also depends on environment and pathogen pressure. | Source checkedEvidence Concerning SL9 Identity |
| GEN-011The publicly reported Peruvian RD2 sample did not exactly reproduce a fingerprint already present in the laboratory database. | Feran2026technical industry report reproducing private lab textHTML section “Inca Gesha, or should we say SL-9?,” paragraph beginning “I opened the text message from Lance,” transcription attributed to RD2 report p. 6, “Analysis and interpretation”; accessed 2026-07-15 | not seen this very fingerprintFeran’s transcription says the submitted leaf profile was rare and previously unseen in the comparison database. | ModerateThe underlying report, database version, allele profile, and sample manifest are not public; this verifies the public account, not the laboratory result independently. | Source checkedEvidence Concerning SL9 Identity |
| GEN-012The private RD2 interpretation reportedly placed one Peruvian leaf sample very near SL-09, while using conditional rather than exact-match language. | Feran2026technical industry report reproducing private lab textSame HTML section and RD2 report p. 6 transcription, sentence comparing the sample with SL-09; accessed 2026-07-15 | very close to SL-09The reported interpretation says the profile was very close to SL-09 and might be it if small differences in old references are accepted. | ModerateNo distance value, threshold, reference accession, raw alleles, or complete report is public; proximity is not exact identity. | Source checkedEvidence Concerning SL9 Identity |
| GEN-013The same reported RD2 interpretation rejects proximity to its undisclosed Geisha comparator more strongly than it confirms exact SL09 identity. | Feran2026technical industry report reproducing private lab textSame HTML section, immediately after the blockquote attributed to report p. 6; accessed 2026-07-15 | not even close to GeishaThe public account attributes to RD2 a clear exclusion of proximity to an unnamed Geisha comparator for the submitted sample. | ModerateThe statement is available only through Feran’s reproduction; the Geisha comparator's identity—including whether it was authenticated T2722—and its comparison profile and analytical output cannot be inspected. | Source checkedEvidence Concerning SL9 Identity |
| GEN-014Producer testimony and importer reporting preserve the distinction between similarity to SL09 and exact SL09 identity. | Khipu2026industry interview and importer reportHTML section “Only Similar to an SL09,” paragraph quoting Saulo Ibias; accessed 2026-07-15 | It is only similar to an SL09.Khipu reports the producer’s understanding that no exact database match existed and that the result indicated similarity only. | ModerateKhipu is a commercial importer; it supplies no report, job identifier, raw profile, sample count, or chain of custody. | Source checkedEmergence of Inca Gesha in Peru |
| GEN-015At least one current seller explicitly treats SL9 as a provisional working name rather than a definitive cultivar determination. | SEYJhonSaenz2026retail disclosureHTML “About SL9,” first paragraph; accessed 2026-07-15 | provisional working nameSEY acknowledges that the exact fingerprint is absent from the database and presents SL9 as a working label based on similarity. | ModerateThe page does not name the lab, publish a report, identify the tested sample, or establish that the Jhon Saenz lot itself was tested. | Source checkedNaming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| GEN-016The complete RD2 report discussed by Feran is not publicly inspectable; only a selected interpretation is reproduced. | Feran2026direct negative inspection of public evidenceHTML section “Inca Gesha, or should we say SL-9?,” paragraphs 105–115; site-wide inspection through 2026-07-15 | He’d attached the report from RD2Feran describes receiving a private attachment and reproduces part of page 6, but the article provides no downloadable six-page report or raw-data package. | High for the public-availability findingAbsent publicly: report ID/date, sample count and tree identity, custody, loci, allele calls, QC, reference accession/database version, distance values, thresholds, and signatures. | Source checkedLimitations and Research Agenda |
| GEN-017The exact marker panel used for the reported Peruvian RD2 job cannot be verified from RD2’s current public service page. | Feran2026;RD2DNAlaboratory-method negative evidenceFeran HTML paragraph 105; RD2 HTML “What is the result?” paragraphs 34–44; both accessed 2026-07-15 | latest proven set of molecular markersFeran calls the private job an eleven-SSR analysis, whereas RD2 publicly describes only unspecified molecular markers and a large database. | High for the disclosure gap; low for exact methodThe report or protocol could resolve the discrepancy; the public service description cannot establish loci, database version, distance metric, or decision threshold for this sample. | Source checkedMethods and Source-Evaluation Framework |
| GEN-018Genetic proximity to an SL09 reference does not establish a historical route from Kenya or any other source into Peru. | Jones1956;Feran2026primary historical and negative documentary evidenceJones scanned PDF pp. 11–12, printed pp. 307–308; Feran HTML “A theory of lost origins” and later update material, especially paragraph admitting no historical documentation; accessed 2026-07-15 | unknown originThe earliest SL.9 description leaves its source block unidentified, while later Peru-route accounts remain hypotheses without a continuous accession, shipment, nursery, or farm record. | High for absence in the cited record; low for any proposed routeAbsence of a located public record is not proof that no private or offline record exists; genetics alone cannot identify intermediary, date, or route. | Source checkedEmergence of Inca Gesha in Peru |
| AGR-001The archived OpenAlex full-text query for the exact phrase ‘Inca Gesha’ plus coffee returned zero works on 2026-07-15. | OpenAlexIncaGesha2026search-audit record; not substantive evidenceraw/web/openalex_Inca_Gesha_coffee.json, meta.count | "count": 0This records a null result for one reproducible database query. | Strong for this query result onlyA zero count does not prove that no relevant study exists; indexing, terminology, non-indexed repositories, unpublished research, and spelling variants can all produce false negatives. | Source checkedMethods and Source-Evaluation Framework |
| AGR-002PROMPERÚ's sensory map admitted washed 2018 coffees meeting at least 84 SCA points, so its profiles describe a preselected specialty subset. | PromPeru2019Tier 1 institutional report; documented selection protocolPDF p. 10, ‘Tipo de proceso’ and selection criterion c) ‘Calidad’ | Cafés lavados […] 84 puntos en taza, según estándar SCA.Only washed coffees at or above the stated cup threshold entered the sensory exercise. | Strong for the stated selection boundaryThe report does not provide a regional population sampling frame, all regional sample counts, full panel metadata, or evidence that the selected coffees represent ordinary Cusco production. | Source checkedMethods and Source-Evaluation Framework |
| AGR-003PROMPERÚ reports that Cusco coffee cultivation is concentrated almost entirely in La Convención. | PromPeru2019Tier 1 institutional report; regional geographic contextPDF p. 25, Cusco regional profile, opening paragraph | El café se cultiva casi en su totalidad en la provincia de La Convención.La Convención is the report's principal geographic frame for Cusco coffee. | Strong for the report's regional descriptionThe regional profile relies partly on older underlying statistics and does not identify Inkawasi, Inca Gesha, or SL09 plant material; it cannot establish lot-level provenance. | Source checkedAgronomy, Geography, and Terroir |
| AGR-004The Cirialo study evaluated 90 samples identified as Typica and Catimor rather than Inca Gesha or SL09. | MarquezRomero2020Tier 1 peer-reviewed observational field studyprinted p. 40, Resumen, opening sentence | se evaluaron 90 muestras de café (Coffea arabica L.) variedad Typica y CatimorThe study supplies close La Convención context but no direct observations of the disputed plant material. | Strong for the study's sample identityCultivar identity was reported rather than genetically verified; the observational sample does not permit transfer of its agronomic or sensory results to Inca Gesha or SL09-like trees. | Source checkedAgronomy, Geography, and Terroir |
| AGR-005The 90 Cirialo Typica/Catimor samples had a reported mean sensory score of 82.17 points. | MarquezRomero2020Tier 1 peer-reviewed observational field studyprinted p. 40, Resumen; results summarized on printed pp. 47–49 | El promedio de calidad sensorial fue 82.17 puntosWashed specialty-quality coffee was documented in the regional sample without any need to assume Gesha ancestry. | Strong for the reported sample meanThe study is descriptive: cultivar, farm, elevation, management, harvest timing, and processing can covary, and the mean does not characterize Inca Gesha or SL09-like coffee. | Source checkedProcessing, Roasting, and Sensory Evidence |
| AGR-006The 2025 Inkawasi comparison considered coffee produced at 1,600, 1,800, and 2,100 metres. | ChoqueQuispe2025Tier 1 peer-reviewed comparative field studyAbstract; §2.1, Study Area and Coffee Beans | Coffee beans produced at altitudes of 1600, 1800, and 2100 m were consideredThe study provides unusually close Inkawasi field context across three reported elevations. | Strong for the reported sampling frameThe material was Typica and Catimor, not Inca Gesha or SL09; the article does not clearly report independent farms, trees, or biological replicates per cultivar-by-altitude cell. | Source checkedAgronomy, Geography, and Terroir |
| AGR-007Within the sampled Inkawasi lots, higher-altitude Typica treatments were described as floral and fruity. | ChoqueQuispe2025Tier 1 peer-reviewed comparative field study§3.5, Cup Quality, paragraph discussing T1800 and T2100; Fig. 3 | with an aroma and flavor of floral and fruity notesFloral/fruity language occurred in documented regional Typica samples and therefore is not diagnostic of Gesha ancestry. | Moderate for within-study association; weak for causationBiological replication and processing history are unclear; cultivar, site, soil, management, pest pressure, harvest, and cooperative-panel context are confounded, so altitude causation cannot be isolated. | Source checkedProcessing, Roasting, and Sensory Evidence |
| AGR-008Inkawasi's municipality formally used ‘Variedad Geisha’ as a category in its August 2025 district specialty-coffee competition. | MunicipalidadInkawasi2025Tier 1 official primary record for institutional nomenclature; non-scientific event evidenceHTML body, winner list, line headed ‘Ganadores…’; accessed 2026-07-15 | Ganadores de la V Competencia Distrital de Cafés Especiales Inkawasi 2025 – Variedad GeishaThe official page directly documents local institutional use of the Geisha label. | Strong for nomenclature and the reported event; none for genotypeThe page provides no judging protocol, panel details, blind coding, process controls, sample chain of custody, accession number, or genetic verification. | Source checkedNaming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| AGR-009Cusco's regional agriculture office described a third-place FICAFÉ 2025 Inkawasi lot as SL09, honey-processed, and scored 89.97. | GERAGRI2025FicafeTier 1 official primary record for the authority's report; non-scientific competition evidenceHTML body ¶3, sentence on Gilber Huayllas Huamán; accessed 2026-07-15 | café SL09 (proceso Honey) y un puntaje de 89.97The page establishes the office's SL09 terminology, stated process, and reported contest outcome. | Strong for the official report; none for genetic identityNo laboratory report, sample identifier, marker method, chain of custody, judging protocol, or uncertainty is given; honey processing is a substantial sensory confound. | Source checkedNaming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| AGR-010World Coffee Research warns that multiple genetically distinct plant types have been called Geisha. | WCRGeishaTier 1 authoritative institutional variety catalogHistory, paragraph 3, line 341; accessed 2026-07-15 | multiple genetically distinct plant types that have been referred to as GeishaThe name Geisha is not by itself evidence of membership in T2722-derived Panamanian Geisha. | Strong for general name ambiguityThis catalog warning does not classify any Peruvian tree or lot; direct sample-level genetic and chain-of-custody evidence is still required. | Source checkedEvidence Concerning SL9 Identity |
| AGR-011In a controlled common-environment comparison, genotype significantly affected 9 of 31 volatile compounds identified in green beans. | Marie2024Tier 1 peer-reviewed controlled common-environment and multi-omics studyResults, ‘Identification of organic volatile substances characteristic of Geisha Especial,’ paragraph 4; PDF p. 8 | Genotype had a significant influence (p < 0.01) on 9 of the 31 compoundsThe experiment provides mechanistic evidence that genotype can contribute to coffee chemistry under substantially standardized conditions. | Strong mechanistic evidence for the studied linesOnly two Geisha Especial trees survived for biochemical analysis; sensory beans were pooled; one site, season, process, roast, and brew were represented; Geisha Especial was not Peruvian Inca Gesha or SL09. | Source checkedProcessing, Roasting, and Sensory Evidence |
| AGR-012In a 24-sample Panama Geisha study, correspondence analysis did not show clear grouping of individual coffees by production region. | Ledezma2025Tier 1 peer-reviewed observational sensory and physicochemical study§3.2, Sensory Evaluation, paragraph discussing Fig. 1 | the CA biplot showed individual coffee samples with no clear grouping based on regionsMarketed Geisha lots showed cross-regional sensory heterogeneity rather than a simple region-specific pattern in this analysis. | Moderate for the observed sample patternFarm processing and selection varied; regional sample sizes were unequal; environmental data and independent genetic verification were absent; one crop year, roast, brew, and consumer RATA panel were used. | Source checkedAgronomy, Geography, and Terroir |
| AGR-013A small Geisha-labeled washed-coffee experiment found statistically different sensory outcomes among at least some yeast-inoculation treatments. | CastilloAviles2024Tier 1 peer-reviewed controlled postharvest experimentprinted p. 39, ‘Análisis sensorial,’ opening results paragraph | El modelo estadístico indicó que al menos uno de los tratamientos presentó diferencias estadísticasChanging fermentation ecology can alter sensory outcomes even while the marketed variety label is held constant. | Moderate direct evidence for a postharvest effectThere were two Q Graders, three replicates per treatment, no uninoculated control, genus-level morphological yeast identification, resident Candida, different source lots, and rain-driven drying intervention. | Source checkedProcessing, Roasting, and Sensory Evidence |
| AGR-014Different roast techniques significantly changed the reported flavor profiles of Panama Geisha coffee. | Koyner2025Tier 1 peer-reviewed sensory and chemical study; abstract-level verificationAbstract/Conclusion, p. 6993 | Roasting techniques significantly affect the flavor profiles of Panama Geisha coffeeRoast trajectory is a non-genetic determinant of floral, citrus, bergamot, medicinal, musty, and fermented expression. | Strong for the abstract's central roast-effect conclusionOnly the lawful abstract and first-page preview were inspected in this research pass; the study concerns Panama Geisha, not Peru, and equal final color does not equal equal thermal history. | Source checkedProcessing, Roasting, and Sensory Evidence |
| AGR-015Counter Culture reports that two Lucio Luque seed samples had no exact genetic match and were most similar to SL9. | CounterCulture2026LuqueTier 3 commercial product and sourcing page; attributed genetic narrative onlyStory ¶4, lines 209–211; accessed 2026-07-15 | The tests showed that the samples had no exact match but were genetically most similar to SL9The page records a buyer's reported testing narrative, not a publicly auditable classification result. | Limited; useful only as a traceable industry claimNo laboratory report, sample IDs, assay, marker panel, reference distances, raw profile, chain of custody, or contemporaneous 2018 record is public; two seed samples cannot represent all farms or later lots. | Source checkedEvidence Concerning SL9 Identity |
| AGR-016SEY explicitly presents SL9 as a provisional working name based on reported similarity to SL09 rather than an exact database match. | SEY2026SaenzTier 3 commercial product page; market-disclosure evidence only‘About SL9,’ paragraph 1, line 39; accessed 2026-07-15 | its similarity to SL09 supports the use of SL9 as a provisional working nameThe seller's wording preserves uncertainty and avoids silently converting ‘closest to SL09’ into an exact identity claim. | Strong for how the seller qualifies its label; limited for geneticsThe page does not publish the laboratory, report, sample IDs, assay, markers, reference distances, raw result, representative sampling design, or chain of custody. | Source checkedEvidence Concerning SL9 Identity |
| MKT-001Dwight Aguilar Masías's two Nueva Alianza lots were publicly classified as Geisha in the 2018 Peru Cup of Excellence and each sold for $45.10/lb. | CupOfExcellencePeru2018Tier 3 official auction recordWinning Farms, rows 1a–1b; COE Auction Results, lots 1A–1B | “Geisha” (variety); “$45.10/lb” (high bid)The earliest strong auction record located links a named Cusco producer and farm to the Geisha label, a 91.08 score, and two realized high bids. | High for public label, score, and transaction price; none for genetic identityAuction variety fields are not authentication; the current page may be mutable and contains misspellings of the producer's name. | Source checkedEmergence of “Inca Gesha” in Peru; Naming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| MKT-002Counter Culture currently reports that Lucio Luque's coffee was locally called Inca Gesha and that two seed samples were sent for testing in 2018. | CounterCulture2026LuqueTier 3 product/archive page with retrospective company historyStory, paragraphs beginning “Although Lucio’s coffee...” and “The tests showed...” | “locally referred to as Inca Gesha”; “In 2018, we sent two seed samples”A buyer reports local compound-name use and a genetic inquiry by 2018. | Moderate for the company's own chronology; weak for any genetic conclusionNo contemporaneous 2018 page, laboratory report, sample IDs, method, reference panel, or chain of custody was located. | Source checkedEmergence of “Inca Gesha” in Peru |
| MKT-003Lucio Luque Vásquez's 2019 Nuevo Progreso entries were marketed as Gesha Bourbon Blend and both sold for $30.00/lb. | CupOfExcellencePeru2019Tier 3 official auction recordWinning Farms, Nuevo Progreso rows 2a–2b; COE Auction Results, rows 2a–2b | “Gesha Bourbon Blend”; “$30.00/lb”The 2019 record establishes the blend label, producer, farm, score, rank, and realized prices. | High for public label and transaction price; none for genetic identityThe explicit blend prevents attributing the price or cup result to one cultivar; auction covariates are uncontrolled. | Source checkedEmergence of “Inca Gesha” in Peru; Naming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| MKT-004Hilda Leguía Gonzales's winning 2020 Esperanza lots were officially labeled Gesha / SL-09 (Organic). | CupOfExcellencePeru2020Tier 3 official competition recordWinning Farms, Esperanza rows 1a–1b | “Gesha / SL-09 (Organic)”The earliest contemporaneous official SL-09 usage located is a dual label on the 2020 winning Cusco lots. | High for the published competition label; none for genetic identityThe source does not disclose who assigned the variety field, the evidentiary basis, or whether the current page preserves its original wording. | Source checkedEmergence of “Inca Gesha” in Peru |
| MKT-005The same 2020 Cup of Excellence table labels Lucio Luque and Valerio Almanza as SL-09 while retaining Gesha for Dwight Aguilar. | CupOfExcellencePeru2020Tier 3 official competition record showing internal nomenclatural conflictWinning Farms, Buena Vista row 9, Nueva Alianza row 10, and Nuevo Progreso row 13 | “SL-09 (Organic)” (Valerio and Lucio); “Gesha” (Dwight)Public classification was inconsistent across named Cusco lots within one competition year. | High for documentary inconsistency; indeterminate for biological relationshipsThe table cannot show whether farms held the same population, distinct material, mixtures, or merely inconsistent records. | Source checkedEmergence of “Inca Gesha” in Peru |
| MKT-006A contemporaneous report says Hilda Leguía's dual-identified 2020 coffee exceeded $50/lb and realized $42,752.47 for 380.84 kg. | ChaqraRuna2020Tier 2 contemporaneous regional reportingHeadline/deck; section “Precio record,” paragraphs 1–2 | “Logró más de 50 dólares la libra”; “US$ 42.752,47 por un total de 380,84 kilos”The reported 2020 sale set a then-record Peruvian price while the coffee was being described with both Geisha and SL-09 language. | Moderate-high for reported combined value and weightSecondary reporting rather than the auction ledger; exact per-lot bids are not on the current COE page, and the report's 50/50 description is organizer-derived. | Source checkedNaming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| MKT-007The 2021 Cup of Excellence again listed both Dwight Aguilar's Nueva Alianza and Lucio Luque's Nuevo Progreso as Gesha after SL-09 appeared in 2020. | CupOfExcellencePeru2021Tier 3 official competition recordWinning Farms, Nueva Alianza rows 1a–1b and Nuevo Progreso row 7 | “Gesha” (Nueva Alianza); “Gesha” (Nuevo Progreso)Competition naming reverted or remained inconsistent rather than completing a linear correction to SL-09. | High for published labels; none for genetic identityShared spelling does not establish shared plant material; the source provides no test or seed history. | Source checkedEmergence of “Inca Gesha” in Peru |
| MKT-008A 2021 Peru21 profile publicly identified Dwight Aguilar's winning coffee specifically as Geisha line T-2722. | Peru21Vargas2021Tier 2 contemporary producer profile/newsBody paragraph beginning “El 29 de octubre se conoció...” | “un geisha (línea t- 2722)”A strong Panamanian-reference pedigree claim circulated publicly for Dwight's coffee. | High for existence of the public claim; none for authenticityNo test, accession record, or seed trail is supplied; the article's 90.25 score differs slightly from the official 90.2. | Source checkedEmergence of “Inca Gesha” in Peru |
| MKT-009The earliest directly dated exact compound-name page located is the November 8, 2022 article El Geisha Inca de Incahuasi. | EuropaLatinaDario2022Tier 2 contextual trade/cultural articleArticle title, publication date, and opening paragraph | “EL GEISHA INCA DE INCAHUASI”The exact local/market label is directly documented online by November 2022. | High for dated public usage of the phraseThis is the earliest located source, not proof of coinage; the article's cultural and historical narrative is promotional and unreferenced. | Source checkedEmergence of “Inca Gesha” in Peru |
| MKT-010In 2024 an Incahuasi cooperative representative said the cooperative's Geisha was called Geisha Inca. | Inforegion2024Tier 2 named cooperative-representative interviewSection “Área de cultivo y tipos de café,” paragraph 2 | “Geisha, al que denominan Geisha Inca”A named cooperative representative directly describes Geisha Inca as local terminology. | Moderate-high for local naming practiceInterview evidence does not authenticate a cultivar or show when the name originated; the article does not document which farms or lots share material. | Source checkedEmergence of “Inca Gesha” in Peru |
| MKT-011SEY explicitly states that Julio Arotaype's coffee had previously been marketed as Gesha/Inca Gesha and was later corrected to SL9. | SEY2025ArotaypeTier 3 product page documenting a seller correctionSection “About Julio Arotaype,” first paragraph | “Last year, we mistakenly marketed this coffee as Gesha”A seller publicly acknowledges and corrects an earlier Gesha classification. | High for the seller's correction and current marketing positionThe underlying test is not linked; the page's broader claim about most Inca Gesha exceeds what this single product page can independently establish. | Source checkedEmergence of “Inca Gesha” in Peru; Naming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| MKT-012SEY's current SL9* disclosure says the name is provisional because the reported sample resembles SL09 but has no exact database fingerprint. | SEY2026SaenzTier 3 product page with explicit uncertainty disclosureSection “About SL9,” first paragraph | “similarity to SL09 supports the use of SL9 as a provisional working name”Current market language can retain SL9 while clearly marking that classification as provisional. | High for the seller's stated disclosure; weak for the unposted genetic resultNo laboratory report, sample ID, marker panel, distance, or chain of custody is provided; the page also makes a categorical no-Gesha statement that cannot be audited here. | Source checkedNaming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| MKT-013A live Port2050 seller page markets a Dwight Aguilar Nueva Alianza coffee under the dual variety label SL9 / Inca Gesha. | Port2050DwightAguilar2026Tier 3 retailer product pageHTML product title and fields “Origin,” “Variety,” “Producer,” and “Finca Nueva Alianza”; inspected in a browser 2026-07-15 | “Variety: SL9 / Inca Gesha”The directly inspected retailer page documents dual marketing language for the named producer and farm. | High for the displayed marketing languageThe mutable seller page has no publication date or genetic report and cannot resolve the 2021 T2722 conflict. Command-line retrieval returned 404, so no local HTML snapshot was retained. | Source checkedEmergence of “Inca Gesha” in Peru; Naming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| MKT-014FreeForm currently uses the Inca Gesha label for a Rutas del Inca cooperative lot from Cajamarca rather than Cusco. | FreeFormIncaGesha2026Tier 3 retailer product pageProduct title; “About the Coffee”; fields “Producer,” “Origin,” and “Cultivar(s)” | “Inca Gesha - Peru”; “Origin Cajamarca, Peru”The compound label is now commercially used outside the main Cusco/Incahuasi documentary cluster. | High for current product naming and stated originNo evidence connects this Cajamarca lot genetically to Cusco material or T2722; this may be semantic expansion, coincident naming, or unrelated material. | Source checkedEmergence of “Inca Gesha” in Peru |
| MKT-015Specialty-auction prices are jointly associated with sensory and reputation attributes, including ranking, origin, variety, and quantity, so raw Inca Gesha auction comparisons cannot isolate a name effect. | Donnet2008Tier 1 peer-reviewed hedonic price analysisAbstract; pp. 270–275, model variables and results | “market clearing prices are a function of sensory characteristics and reputation variables”Variety is one information signal among several simultaneous determinants of auction price. | High for multi-attribute auction price formationHistorical Central and South American auctions; not a treatment study of Peruvian SL9 or a same-lot label experiment. | Source checkedNaming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| MKT-016A recent Central American auction model does not demonstrate a positive Geisha premium: its abstract reports a 0.90% decrease relative to Bourbon. | DimasRodriguezEtAl2025Tier 1 peer-reviewed conference proceedingAbstract, result sentence on variety coefficients | “Geisha coffee showed the smallest decrease of 0.90% in price compared to the reference variety (Bourbon)”Recent multi-variable auction evidence cautions against assuming that the Gesha label automatically produces a positive premium. | Moderate-high as recent model evidenceFive Central American countries, not Peru; the abstract does not state whether the -0.90% coefficient is statistically distinguishable from zero, and full robustness requires table review. | Source checkedNaming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| ADD-001The 2024 Peru Cup of Excellence recorded a Cusco lot submitted as SL-09 at 89.29 points, 623.90 pounds, and $25 per pound. | ACE2024Peruofficial competition and auction recordHTML Winning Farms row 7, auction row 7, and disclaimer below the tables; accessed 2026-07-15 | San Sebastian … 89,29 … Sl-09 … 623,90 … $25,00; the specific coffee lot information is submitted by each farmerThe official page records the submitted label, score, sale quantity, price, and a warning that farm and lot information comes from farmers. | High for the recorded label, score, quantity, price, and disclaimer; none for genotypeThe variety field is farmer-supplied, the page publishes no authentication, and one auction result cannot isolate a causal label premium. | Source checkedNaming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| ADD-002Coffee quality is influenced by both genotype and environment, so evidence from one identity dimension cannot be transferred automatically to another. | Cheng2016peer-reviewed reviewPublisher HTML Abstract, Background and Key findings and conclusions; accessed 2026-07-15 | Genotype and environment (G and E) have been shown to influence coffee quality.The review treats coffee quality as jointly influenced by genetic and environmental regulation. | High for the general genotype-and-environment frameworkThis is a general review, not an experiment on Peruvian Inca Gesha or SL09-like material, and it cannot allocate effects in any disputed lot. | Source checkedIntroduction; Methods and Source-Evaluation Framework |
| ADD-003A contemporary trade report described Hilda Leguía Gonzales's 2020 winning coffee as a 50:50 mixture of Gesha and organizer-identified SL-09. | DailyCoffeeNewsBrown2020contemporary trade reporting of competition nomenclatureHTML body paragraph beginning “The top-scoring coffee lot”; accessed 2026-07-15 | a washed-process lot composed of 50% Gesha and 50% coffee variety identified by the event organizer as SL-09Daily Coffee News reported a mixture, adding a third public formulation alongside the official dual label and an unqualified Geisha report. | High for what the contemporary article reported; none for genetic identityThe article attributes SL-09 identification to the organizer and provides no laboratory report, sample identity, or chain of custody. | Source checkedEmergence of Inca Gesha in Peru |
| ADD-004A contemporary El Comercio report presented Hilda Leguía Gonzales's 2020 winning coffee simply as Geisha. | ElComercioContreras2020contemporary news report of public nomenclatureHTML headline, deck, and opening body paragraph; accessed 2026-07-15 | Con café de la variedad Geisha, la caficultora de La Convención ganó el primer lugarEl Comercio used an unqualified Geisha label for the same winning producer and event that other sources described with SL-09 language. | High for the article's public framing; none for genotypeThe article is a news account, not an authentication record, and its simplified label cannot resolve whether the lot was mixed or genetically conforming. | Source checkedEmergence of Inca Gesha in Peru |
| ADD-005High-end coffee value is constructed partly through provenance, exclusivity, and quality narratives rather than material cup attributes alone. | Fischer2021peer-reviewed ethnographic and economic analysisAbstract; PDF pp. 116–117 and 126–127 | a new lexicon of quality for coffee, one tied to narratives of provenance and exclusivity that creates much of the value addedFischer identifies provenance and exclusivity narratives as mechanisms through which Third Wave actors create symbolic value. | High for the qualitative value-formation mechanismThe ethnography concerns the US high-end market and Guatemalan producers; it does not estimate an Inca Gesha name premium or any single transaction's causal drivers. | Source checkedNaming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| ADD-006A 2022 Cusco regional project treated pest and disease management as a practical concern across eleven coffee districts including Inkawasi. | GeragriCusco2022official regional project announcementHTML body paragraphs 1–4 and district list; accessed 2026-07-15 | control de plagas de más de 4900 familias productoras de café de 11 distritos … InkawasiThe regional government announced a multi-district coffee pest-and-disease management project that included Inkawasi. | High for the announced program and geographic scope; none for measured pest incidenceThe press release reports planned activities and beneficiaries, not trial outcomes, prevalence estimates, or observations of authenticated Inca Gesha or SL09 plants. | Source checkedAgronomy, Geography, and Terroir |
| ADD-007In June 2026, regional authorities and SENASA held an Inkawasi workshop on biological control and integrated coffee-pest management. | GeragriSenasa2026official regional activity reportHTML body paragraphs 1–4; accessed 2026-07-15 | desarrollaron el Taller de Control Biológico de Plagas en el Café en el centro poblado de San Fernando, distrito de InkawasiThe official page documents current phytosanitary training in the same production landscape. | High for the reported workshop, place, and topic; none for agronomic efficacyA government activity report does not measure pest pressure, intervention effects, varietal response, or the identity of any participating farmer's trees. | Source checkedAgronomy, Geography, and Terroir |
| ADD-008The published chromosome-level Geisha genome used California plant material descended, according to the article, from seed sent from Panama rather than a Peruvian tree. | Medrano2025peer-reviewed genome resource and sample descriptionFull-text Introduction, final paragraph, and Materials and methods § Plant material collection; accessed 2026-07-15 | seeds were sent from Panama … to Jay Ruskey at Goodland Organics in Goleta, California … from where we collected plant materialThe genome is a resource based on a named California plant source and cannot authenticate Peruvian Inca Gesha material. | High for the study's stated plant source and genome scopeThe Panama-to-California seed history is partly attributed to personal communication; no Peruvian sample was analyzed, so genomic quality does not create an identity bridge. | Source checkedDiscussion |
| ADD-009A Ministry project guide uses Inkawasi for the district while using Incahuasi for the valley and one spelling of the cooperative name. | MinagriCuscoProjectsNDofficial institutional project guidePDF p. 12, project “Consolidación de la competitividad”; inspected 2026-07-15 | Cooperativa Agraria Cafetalera Valle de Inkawasi … en el valle de Incahuasi … Distrito : InkawasiThe same official project entry demonstrates that Inkawasi and Incahuasi can denote related but different administrative or geographic referents. | High for the document's terminologyThe guide does not define a cultivar, authenticate coffee material, or prove that every external use of either spelling refers to the same locality. | Source checkedEmergence of Inca Gesha in Peru |
| ADD-010This project did not reliably verify from the scanned 1993 CATIE catalog the repeated claim that accession T.02730 is SL09. | Morera1993direct negative inspection record of a scanned institutional catalogAll 118 scanned PDF pages and sparse extraction were inspected; no exact T.02730/SL09 locator was reliably recovered by 2026-07-15 | WARNING: Extraction is sparse. Inspect the original PDF visually; it may be scanned or figure-heavy.The catalog was obtained, but this research pass could not attach the claimed accession mapping to an exact, inspectable page. | High for the project's verification outcome; none for proving the mapping absent from the catalogScan quality and OCR failure can hide an entry. This row must not be cited as evidence that T.02730 is not SL09; the mapping remains unresolved. | Source checkedLimitations and Research Agenda |
| ADD-011The municipality's own 2023 report identifies the official administrative unit as the District of Inkawasi in La Convención, Cusco. | MunicipalidadInkawasi2023official municipal reportPDF p. 1, §1.1 Reseña descriptiva | El Distrito de Inkawasi es uno de los quince distritos de la Provincia de La Convención, ubicada en el Departamento de CuscoThe municipal report supports Inkawasi as the district spelling and locates it within La Convención and Cusco. | High for official administrative nomenclatureThis administrative statement says nothing about cultivar identity, seed movement, or whether a commercial origin field is lot-traceable. | Source checkedEmergence of Inca Gesha in Peru |
| ADD-012Inkawasi's municipality reported a nursery project preparing more than 200,000 combined seedlings under Geisha and hybrid labels. | MunicipalidadInkawasi2024official municipal project communiquéHTML opening body paragraph; accessed 2026-07-15 | viene preparando más de 200 mil plantones de las variedades más demandadas, como Geisha e HíbridoThe page directly documents local official use of the Geisha label in nursery activity. | High for the municipal report and label; none for genetic identity or adaptationThe page does not disaggregate seedling counts, identify seed sources, publish authentication, or supply trial data supporting its separate adaptation claim. | Source checkedAgronomy, Geography, and Terroir |
| ADD-013The archived OpenAlex full-text query for SL9 coffee Peru returned one nonresponsive earthquake record on 2026-07-15. | OpenAlexSL9Peru2026search-audit record; not substantive evidenceraw/web/openalex_SL9_coffee_Peru.json, meta.count and sole result display_name | “count”: 1 … “display_name”: “United States earthquakes, 1955”The sole hit was unrelated, so this specific query produced no responsive coffee study. | High for this exact archived query result onlyIndexing, query syntax, terminology, non-indexed repositories, and unpublished or offline work prevent a null responsive result from proving that no study exists. | Source checkedMethods and Source-Evaluation Framework; Limitations and Research Agenda |
| ADD-014In one Panama Geisha sample set, an electronic nose separated three roast levels and two processing methods. | Santamaria2023peer-reviewed analytical and sensory studyPDF p. 1 Abstract; p. 3 §2.1; pp. 12–13 §3.4 | The EN demonstrated its ability to differentiate the three levels of roasting, two production processes, and adulteration in the analyzed samples.The study demonstrates that roast and process can create separable olfactory patterns within coffee supplied as Geisha. | High for within-study analytical separationAll eight samples came from one farm and harvest, genotype was supplier-labelled rather than authenticated, and the result cannot characterize Peruvian Inca Gesha or ancestry. | Source checkedProcessing, Roasting, and Sensory Evidence |
| ADD-015SEY distinguishes one Luis Salas lot from SL9 or Inca Gesha and represents its seed as sourced from Panama. | SeyLuisSalas2025commercial product-page representationHTML product introduction and “About Luis Salas”; accessed 2026-07-15 | Rather than SL9 or ‘Inca Gesha,’ Luis Salas is cultivating Gesha with seeds sourced from Panama.The product page shows that the seller does not apply its SL9 correction to every high-elevation Peruvian coffee called Gesha. | High for the seller's stated distinction; weak for pedigreeNo seed receipt, accession record, genetic report, or chain of custody is published, so the page cannot independently establish T2722 identity. | Source checkedEmergence of Inca Gesha in Peru |
| ADD-016Cup of Excellence auction prices reflect symbolic attributes and market conditions as well as material sensory attributes. | Traore2018peer-reviewed hedonic auction analysisPDF p. 1 Abstract and pp. 349–351 | specialty coffee prices are mainly determined by symbolic attributes and market conditions such as the number of coffees in the auctionThe multi-country study supports treating auction price as a jointly formed outcome rather than a direct measure of one variety name's effect. | High for associations in the analyzed 2004–2015 cup of excellence dataThe model is not Peru- or Inca-Gesha-specific and does not compare the same lot under alternative labels, so it cannot estimate a causal Inca Gesha premium. | Source checkedNaming, Market Signaling, and Value Formation |
| ADD-017WCR's 2023 open reference database uses 45 SNP markers for 23 common Latin American varieties and reports validation with more than 30,000 samples including Peru. | WCR2023Databaseinstitutional technical statementHTML body paragraphs describing marker panel and validation; accessed 2026-07-15 | uses 45 Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) molecular markers … for 23 … varieties … validated … using over 30,000 leaf samples … PeruWCR describes a high-volume SNP reference database distinct from the privately reported SSR analysis of Inca Gesha. | High for wcr's stated database design, scope, and validation programThe database is a living institutional resource; the page publishes no Inca Gesha sample result and does not connect the private RD2 job to this panel. | Source checkedDiscussion |
| ADD-018Gesha and Geisha are alternate spellings in coffee usage; spelling alone does not define a genetic population. | WCRGeishainstitutional terminology statementHTML section ‘History,’ final two paragraphs; accessed 2026-07-15 | The spellings Geisha and Gesha are often used interchangeably, relating to the fact that there is no set translationWCR explains the spelling variation as a transliteration issue rather than a biological classification. | High for institutional terminologyInterchangeable spelling does not make all plants sold under either name genetically equivalent and does not authenticate any Peruvian sample as T2722. | Source checkedHistorical and Genetic Background of Gesha |
| ADD-019The label SL-09 is not globally unambiguous: Feran distinguishes Indian Selection 9 from Kenyan Scott Laboratories SL.9, while Jones directly describes the Kenyan selection. | Feran2026;Jones1956technical industry nomenclature report plus primary historical descriptionFeran HTML paragraph following the reproduced RD2 result and section “Scott Labs Selection 9,” accessed 2026-07-15; Jones scanned PDF pp. 11–12, printed pp. 307–308 | I knew of two different cultivars commonly referred to as SL-09 … selected at the Scott Laboratories from a block of unknown originFeran reports two SL-09 referents and appears to interpret the private result as the Kenyan Scott selection documented by Jones. | Moderate for nomenclatural ambiguity and the reported private-result referent; high for jones's kenyan sl.9 descriptionFeran is secondary for Indian Selection 9, and the private report does not disclose its SL09 reference accession; even the intended referent therefore remains provisional. | Source checkedEvidence Concerning SL9 Identity |