IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Analysis of value added of Arabica Coffee
Yield Qualities Evaluation for Gayo Arabica Coffee in Central Aceh Regency (case of Indi
Gayo Coffee business unit)
Germplasm W I Nasution, H Hasyim and S N Lubis

- Optimization and characterization of n-

hexane extracts of arabica coffee ground
To cite this article: Samsudin et al 2022 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1038 012017 (Coffea arabica L.) fromgayo plateau as
source of natural antioxidant
Salfauqi Nurman, Asmeri Lamona and
Muhammad Nasir

- Analysis of cupping, colour and caffeine

View the article online for updates and enhancements. content of Gayo Arabica coffee
H Sinaga and A Hilman

This content was downloaded from IP address 36.82.99.1 on 21/07/2022 at 05:28

AESAP-2021 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1038 (2022) 012017 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1038/1/012017

Yield Qualities Evaluation for Gayo Arabica Coffee

Germplasm

Samsudin1, T Iflah2, Syafaruddin2, Y Ferry1

1
Indonesian Industrial and Beverage Crops Research Institute (IIBCRI), Jl. Raya
Pakuwon Km 2, Parungkuda, Sukabumi.
2
Indonesian Center for Estate Crops Research and Development, Jl. Tentara Pelajar
No. 1, Bogor, Jawa Barat

Email: samsudin.afaqih@gmail.com

Abstract. Gayo Arabica coffee has been known in the world market as specialty coffee. Some
lines of Arabica coffee that have been planted in the Gayo Experimental Station (GES) for
more than 20 years have the potential to be released as superior varieties. This study aimed to
evaluate the physical, physicochemical and organoleptic qualities of 15 Arabica coffee lines in
the GES germplasm. The physical quality test of beans refers to SNI 2907-2008 by observing
the length, width, thickness, and weight of 100 beans. Physicochemical content testing was
carried out on beans, including caffeine, protein, fat, and ash. Organoleptic testing was carried
out by certified panelists referring to the Specialty Coffee Association of America (SCAA)
standards. The evaluation results of 15 Gayo Arabica coffee lines showed that all lines had the
good physical quality of beans. Protein content ranges from 10.79-14.14%, caffeine 0.51-0.82,
and fat 12.48-15.68%. All tested Arabica coffees had a total score of more than 80, which
means they are included in the specialty category. The Ateng Super, C 49, and SLN 9 lines had
a better taste (85.75) than the superior varieties released, namely Gayo 1 (83.75) and Gayo 2
(85.50).

1. Introduction
Indonesia is the most prominent specialty coffee producer in the international coffee market. Specialty
coffee has a distinctive and unique taste and aroma based on the specific region of origin has a
cupping test value of above 80 on a scale of 100 [1]. Therefore, specialty coffee was usually named
according to the region of origin of the coffee produced [2]. The advantage of specialty coffee
compared to other coffees lies in the high quality of taste. Several factors that influence the taste of
coffee are variety, agroecology (soil type, elevation, climate), fertilization, harvest time, picking
method, processing, and storage method [3]. One of the Indonesian specialty coffees widely known in
the international market is Gayo Coffee [4].
Gayo coffee is one of the leading commodities originating from the Gayo highlands. This coffee
plantation, which has been developed since 1908, thrives in the districts of Central Aceh, Bener
Meriah and a small part in the Gayo Lues area. The three areas, which are located at an altitude of
1200 m above sea level, have the largest coffee plantations in Indonesia, with an area of about 99,500
ha. Each of them is 48,300 ha in Aceh Tengah Regency, 47,300 ha in Bener Meriah Regency and the
remaining 3,900 ha in Gayo Lues Regency [5]. Gayo coffee is known as coffee with an excellent taste
with light acidity, strong aroma, and heavy body (good viscosity).

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
AESAP-2021 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1038 (2022) 012017 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1038/1/012017

The development of Arabica coffee in the Gayo highlands cannot be separated from the duties and
functions of the Gayo Experimental Station (GES) which is one of the experimental stations of the
Aceh Assessment Institute for Agricultural Technology (AIAT), the Indonesian Agency for
Agricultural Research and Development (IAARD). The GES, which was originally built from the
IDAP project (1976-1986) in collaboration between Indonesia and the Netherlands, has an Arabica
coffee germplasm plantation containing at least 40 lines/varieties from various regions in Indonesia
and several other countries such as Thailand, Australia, Brazil, India, Papua. New Guinea, America,
and others [6].
The Arabica coffee germplasm garden in GES has a complete collection of Arabica coffee types
worldwide. However, the utilization of the collection has not been carried out optimally. In 2010 from
GES germplasm, 2 superior varieties of Arabica coffee were released, namely Gayo 1 and Gayo 2.
Currently, Arabica coffee breeding is more emphasized to get superior varieties with good taste and
physical quality of beans [7]. Seeing the huge source of genetic diversity from the existing collections,
the opportunity to get new superior Arabica coffee varieties is very large. To obtain the expected Gayo
Arabica coffee lines which have the same physical quality and taste as or better than the Gayo 1 and
Gayo 2 varieties, it is important to evaluate the physical, physicochemical, and organoleptic qualities
of the 15 Arabica coffee lines from the GES germplasm.

2. Materials and methods

The plant materials evaluated for physical quality, phytochemical content and taste were 15
lines/varieties, namely: Ateng Super, PB 88, C 41, CTT, C 47, CH 306, C 50, BP 542, C 48, C 49,
Catimor Jaluk , Cattura Kuning, SLN, Gayo 1, and Gayo 2 originating from several regions in
Indonesia and other countries and have been planted in GES germplasm for more than 20 years.

2.1. Evaluation of green bean physical quality

The processing of Gayo Arabica coffee which is evaluated follows the processing method of local
farmers, namely semi-wash processing. Harvesting of cherries is done selectively on red cherries only.
Gayo cherry coffee is sorted by soaking the coffee cherries in an immersion bath. After sorting, the
coffee cherries are peeled using a fulfing machine then fermented for ±12 hours and washed
thoroughly. After washing, the coffee is dried in the sun to partially dry with a moisture content of
about 30-35% and then milled. After grinding, the coffee beans are then re-dried in the sun to a
moisture content of 13%.
Evaluation of the physical characteristics of coffee beans has been carried out at the Integrated
Laboratory, Indonesian Industrial and Beverage Crops Research Institute (IIBCRI) in Sukabumi, West
Java. The physical quality test of rice seeds refers to SNI 2907-2008 [8], each test is carried out in
triples. Some of the components observed included seed length, seed width, seed thickness and weight
of 100 seeds.

2.2. Evaluation of physicochemical content

The evaluation of physicochemical content was carried out to determine the ash, caffeine, protein, and
fat content of coffee beans. Chemical content testing was carried out on green bean that had been
sorted into quality I according to SNI 01-2907-2008 [8], including caffeine content using the
chromatography-spectrophotometry method, protein content using the Kjeldahl method, fat content by
Soxhlet method and ash content by gravimetric method.

2.3. Organoleptic testing (cupping test)

Organoleptic testing (cupping test) was conducted in Bener Meriah District, Aceh by international
certified panelists. The test is carried out by roasting quality I green bean which is at a medium level
and processed into powder, then an organoleptic cupping test is carried out which refers to the
Specialty Coffee Association of America (SCAA) standard by a minimum of 3 expert/trained panelists
[1], with the taste parameters assessed including aroma/fragrance (smell of aroma when brewed),

2
AESAP-2021 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1038 (2022) 012017 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1038/1/012017

flavor (taste on the tongue), body (thickness), acidity, aftertaste (taste left in the mouth), sweetness,
balance (taste balance aspect), clean cup (general taste impression), uniformity (the existence of
uniformity of taste from each cup), and overall (overall taste aspect). Flavor parameter scale : 6.00 -
<7.00 = good; 7.00 - <8.00 = very good; 8.00 - < 9.00 = superior; 9.00 - < 10.00 = excellent; 10 =
perfect. If the total score for the quality of the brewed coffee is 80 on a scale of 100 based on the
cupping test, it can be categorized as specialty coffee. The coffee flavor character assessment refers to
the coffee tasters flavor wheel diagram [9].

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Arabica coffee bean physical quality
The results of the physical quality evaluation of the 15 Gayo Arabica coffee lines/varieties based on
the variables of length, width, and thickness are shown in Table 1. The results of the physical quality
evaluation show that there are 3 lines, namely Ateng Super, P 88, and BP 542 which have physical
qualities of beans that are not significantly different from varieties that have been released for
comparison, namely Gayo 1 and Gayo 2. The Ateng Super line with physical characteristics is 10.83
mm long, 7.47 mm wide, and 4.16 mm thickness. The P 88 line bean has an average length of 10.95
mm, a width of 7.30 mm, and a thickness of 3.91 mm. While the BP 542 line bean has a length of
11.42 mm, a width of 7.34 mm, and a thickness of 3.83 mm.
The results of the measurement of the weight of 100 beans from each Gayo Arabica coffee
lines/varieties are shown in Figure 1. These results indicate that the average weight of 100 beans from
the Ateng Super, P 88, and BP 542 lines was 24.81, 20.45, and 19.93 g, respectively. The weight of
100 beans from the three lines was almost the same as the weight of 100 beans from the varieties Gayo
1 (21.45 g) and Gayo 2 (23.77 g) which were already known as “jagur” coffee.

Table 1. Characteristics of the physical quality of 15 Arabica Gayo coffee beans

Line/Variety Length (mm) Width (mm) Thickness (mm)
No.
1. Ateng Super 10.83 7.47 4.16
2. P 88 10.95 7.30 3.91
3. C 47 9.84 6.80 3.55
4. C 41 9.76 6.97 3.63
5. BP 542 11.42 7.34 3.83
6. CH 306 10.39 6.91 3.52
7. C 50 10.05 6.48 3.41
8. CTT 10.39 6.94 3.61
9. C 48 8.67 6.85 3.69
10. C 49 9.91 6.82 3.58
11. Catimor Jaluk 9.33 7.11 3.91
12. Catura Yellow 9.34 6.75 3.73
13. SLN 9 10.38 6.63 3.67
14. Gayo 1* 12.18 7.11 3.77
15. Gayo 2 * 10.96 7.94 4.12
* Arabica coffee varieties that have been released

The results of the physical quality evaluation of the beans showed that the Ateng Super line had the
largest bean size and weight. The superiority of the Ateng Super line is what attracts local farmers to
develop this coffee. This is also driven by foreign market demand which grades the quality of coffee
beans based on the variable size and shape. However, according to local traders, this Ateng Super line
has a lower yield than the Gayo 1 and Gayo 2 varieties, so it has a lower price. This is because farmers
generally sell coffee in the form of cherries so that when drying, coffee lines with low yields will
experience more significant weight loss.

3
AESAP-2021 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1038 (2022) 012017 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1038/1/012017

Figure 1. Weight of 100 coffee beans from 15 Gayo Arabica lines/varieties at GES

3.2. Arabica coffee physicochemical content

In general, the quality of coffee taste is directly related to the chemical compounds contained in the
coffee beans [10]. Test results on the physicochemical content of 15 Gayo Arabica coffee lines,
namely: Ateng Super, PB 88, C 41, CTT, C 47, CH 306, C 50, BP 542, C 48, C 49, Catimor Jaluk,
Cattura Yellow, SLN 9, Gayo 1 and Gayo 2 are shown in Table 2. Protein is the chemical compound
with the highest concentration found in dry coffee beans [11]. The degradation of protein compounds
into free amino acids mainly occurs during tree ripening and drying processes. Free amino acids are
formed but do not react with reducing sugars. In the distillation process, NH3 will evaporate and then
condense and react with Conway's reagent to increase the protein concentration. The test results
showed that the protein content of the 15 Gayo Arabica coffee lines ranged from 10.79 to 14.14%.
The chemical compound that is very influential on the taste of coffee is caffeine. Caffeine is a non-
volatile compound that contributes to brewed coffee's strength, body, and bitterness [12]. Caffeine is a
secondary metabolite compound of the alkaloid group and has a bitter taste. Based on SNI 01-3542-
2004, the maximum caffeine content in ground coffee is 2%, the less caffeine content, the better the
coffee taste because the bitterness level is low. According to [13], the caffeine content in Arabica
coffee ranges from 0.9 to 1.3, while on average, Robusta coffee is higher in the range of 1.5 to 2.5.
The test results showed that the 15 Gayo Arabica coffee lines/varieties tested had a low caffeine
content of 0.51-0.82.
Another chemical content that determines the quality of coffee taste is fat. Fat is one of the
compositions contained in coffee beans. The fat content in coffee gives flavor to coffee brewing,
namely increasing body (thick taste) and milky (fatty taste) [12]. According to [14], the amount of fat
contained in coffee beans will affect the taste of coffee grounds. This is because the higher the fat
content, the lower the quality of the coffee. In addition, the increase in free fatty acids during storage
will cause rancidity in the coffee grounds, which will affect the taste and reduce the quality of the
coffee grounds. The test results showed that the fat content of 15 Arabica coffee lines was still
considered normal, in the range of 12.48-15.68%.

4
AESAP-2021 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1038 (2022) 012017 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1038/1/012017

Table 2. Physicochemical content of 15 Gayo Arabica coffee lines

Line/Varieties Protein content (%) Caffeine content (%) Fat content (%) Ash content (%)
Ateng Super 12.36 0.82 13.40 5.36
P 88 11.88 0.77 12.97 4.56
C 47 11.79 0.65 13.65 5.55
C 41 12.97 0.71 12.48 4.65
BP 542 12.29 0.72 13.25 4.65
CH 306 14.00 0.73 13.14 4.24
C 50 10.93 0.74 14.01 5.55
CTT 12.21 0.64 13.80 4.40
C 48 13.14 0.68 13.16 5.36
C 49 14.14 0.60 15.42 5.38
Catimor Jaluk 13.82 0.66 15.22 5.83
Catura Yellow 11.50 0.74 13.25 4.39
SLN 9 11.52 0.72 13.14 5.27
Gayo 1* 11.28 0.51 14.46 4.67
Gayo 2* 10.79 0.69 15.68 4.52
* Arabica coffee varieties that have been released

3.3. Gayo Arabica coffee taste

The quality of coffee is a combination of both the plant's genetic makeup and environmental condition,
including human involvement in production and processing, finally affecting the flavor and aroma of
the cup quality [15][16][17]. The evaluated Arabica coffee comes from GES, which is located at an
altitude of 1,485 m (asl), a volcanic soil contains more than 5% organic matter, depth is more than 100
cm, soil pH is 5.5-6.5, the land slope is about 30%, rainfall ranges from 1000-2500 (mm) per year with
143-170 rainy days, temperature ranges from 13-26°C and relative humidity 20-75.8%. Variables of
quality of coffee cupping test results that change due to differences in altitude are aroma, flavor,
aftertaste, acidity, balance, and overall. In contrast, the cup quality variable that does not change is the
body [18].
Gayo Arabica coffee flavor score are shown in Table 3. Gayo has sensory attributes of aroma 7.50
(very good) - 8.50 (superior), flavor ranges from 7.50 (very good) - 8.50 (superior), aftertaste ranges
from 7.25 (very good) – 8.00 (superior), acidity ranges from 7.00 – 7.75 (very good), body ranged
from 7.8 (very good) - 8.00 (superior), and balance ranges from 7.25 (very good) - 8.00 (superior).
The attributes of uniformity, clean cup and sweetness of Gayo arabica coffee all achieved a score of 10
(perfect). Overall Gayo Arabica coffee ranges from 7.25 (very good) - 8.0 (superior).
The results of the semi-washed coffee taste test show that all tested arabica coffees had a total score
of more than 80 (81.25 - 85.75), meaning that all tested arabica coffee strains were: Ateng Super, PB
88, C 41, CTT, C 47, CH 306, C 50, BP 542, C 48, C 49, Catimor Jaluk, Cattura Yellow, SLN 9 can
be categorized as specialty coffees [1]. The results of this study were not different from those of Purba
et al. (2020)'s research showed that the average cupping test scores for Arabica coffee from Central
Aceh and Bener Meriah districts ranged from 82.75 - 85.25 [19].
The lines that had the highest total flavor score were the Ateng Super, C 49, and SLN 9 (85.75)
lines which were able to outperform the Gayo 2 (85.50) and Gayo 1 (83.75) varieties, each of which
was released as a superior arabica coffee variety. The results of this study are the same as previous
studies, which showed that the Ateng Super line had the highest total cupping test score, both with the
semi wash processing method (85.36 ± 0.14) or with full wash processing (84.79 ± 0.03) compared to
another [20].

5
AESAP-2021 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1038 (2022) 012017 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1038/1/012017

Table 3. The flavor score of Gayo Arabica coffee

Line/Variety Aroma Flavor Afertaste Acidity Body Balance Overall
Ateng Super 8.25 8.00 7.75 7.75 8.25 7.75 8.00
P 88 7.75 7.50 7.50 7.50 8.00 7.25 7.25
C 47 7.75 8.00 7.50 7.50 7.75 8.00 8.00
C 41 7.50 7.75 7.50 7.50 8.00 7.25 7.50
BP 542 7.75 7.50 7.25 7.50 7.75 7.25 7.50
CH 306 8.00 7.75 7.50 7.50 8.00 7.50 7.50
C 50 8.25 8.00 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50
CTT 8.50 8.00 7.75 7.50 7.75 7.75 8.00
C 48 8.00 8.00 7.50 7.50 7.75 7.25 8.00
C 49 8.50 8.50 7.75 7.75 7.75 7.50 8.00
Catimor Jaluk 8.00 8.00 8.00 7.75 8.00 7.75 8.00
Yellow Catura 7.50 7.50 7.25 7.00 7.50 7.25 7.25
SLN 9 8.50 8.50 7.75 7.75 7.75 7.50 8.00
Gayo 1 8.00 7.75 7.50 7.50 7.75 7.50 7.75
Gayo 2 8.50 8.00 7.75 7.50 7.75 8.00 8.00

Based on the total score, a rating of the quality of the taste of Gayo Arabica coffee tested can be
made as shown in Table 4. This taste data indicates that the Ateng Super, C 49, and SLN 9 lines have
the best taste, even better than the Gayo 2 and Gayo 1 varieties, which is well known for its taste
which is classified as specialty coffee. The characteristic and pleasant taste of roasted coffee at 193°C
(light roasting) is nutty, floral, and sweet, and at a moderate roasting temperature (204°C), it is nutty,
floral, and spicy. Meanwhile, coffee beans roasted at a temperature of 213°C (dark roast) will produce
coffee with nutty, fruity, herby, floral, spicy, and grassy characters [21].

Table 4. Total score and taste character of Arabica coffee

No. Lines/ Varieties Total Score Taste Character
1. Ateng Super 85.75 Fruity, med-good body, light acidity
2. C 49 85.75 Orange, med to light body, light acidity
3. SLN 9 85.75 Orange, med to light body, light acidity
4. Gayo 2 85.50 Green tea like, med-good body, light acidity
5. Catimor Jaluk 85.50 Orange like, med to light body, light acidity
6. CTT 85.25 Fruity juicy, med-good body, light acidity
7. C 47 84.50 Spicy, med-good body, light acidity
8. C 48 84.00 Choco, med to light body, light acidity
9. Gayo 1 83.75 Fruity citrucy, med-good body, light acidity
10. CH 306 83.75 Tarty, med-good body, light acidity
11. C 50 83.75 Tarty, med-light body, light acidity
12. C 41 83.00 Fruity, med-good body, light acidity
13. P 88 82.75 Spicy, med-good body, light acidity
14. BP 542 82.50 Spicy, med-good body, light acidity
15. Yellow Catura 81.25 Bright nutty, med body, light acidity

6
AESAP-2021 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1038 (2022) 012017 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1038/1/012017

4. Conclusion
The Ateng Super, P 88, and BP 542 lines had the best physical bean quality characters. All Arabica
coffee lines evaluated had protein, caffeine, and fat content, which were not significantly different
from the Gayo 1 and Gayo 2 varieties as comparisons. All of the evaluated lines had a taste of more
than 80, which meant they were included in the specialty category. The Ateng Super, C 49, and SLN 9
lines had a better taste (85.75) compared to the superior varieties Gayo 1 (83.75) and Gayo 2 (85.50),
which were released in 2010. Therefore, the Ateng Super line is recommended to be released as a new
superior variety that has the best physical bean quality and taste.

Acknowledgement
The author would like to thank the Sustainable Management of Agricultural Technology Research and
Dissemination Program (SMARTD), which financed this activity, and to Mr. Ishar, a staff of Gayo
Experimental Station, who assisted in implementing this research.

References
[1] Specialty Coffee Association 2018 Coffee Standards A Spec. Coffee Assoc. Resour. 1–14
[2] Yusianto, Hulupi R, Sulistyowati, Mawardi S and Ismayadi C 2005 Sifat fisiko-kimia dan cita
rasa beberapa varietas kopi Arabika Pelita Perkeb. 21 200–22
[3] Decazy F, Avelino J, Guyot B, Perriot J J, Pineda C and Cilas C 2003 Quality of different
Honduran coffees in relation to several environments J. Food Sci. 68
[4] Neilson J, Wright J and Aklimawati L 2018 Geographical indications and value capture in the
Indonesia coffee sector J. Rural Stud. 59 35–48
[5] Siregar M and Irawan 2021 Manajemen agribisnis kopi Gayo di Takengon J. Pengabdi. Masy. 3
1–8
[6] Bakar B A, Azis A and Firdaus 2016 Analisis kebijakan dampak pemanasan global terhadap
produktivitas kopi Arabika Gayo Pus. Sos. Ekon. dan Kebijak. Pertan. Aceh 243–56
[7] Hulupi R, Mawardi S and Yusianto Y 2012 Pengujian sifat unggul beberapa klon harapan kopi
arabika di kebun percobaan Andungsari, Jawa Timur Pelita Perkeb. 28 62–71
[8] [SNI] Standar Nasional Indonesia 2008 SNI 01-2907-2008: Biji Kopi Badan Standarisasi Nas.
4–5
[9] Caspersen B A 2017 A Well-Rounded Palate A Guid. to Coffee Tast. Flavor Wheel 39–46
[10] Fadri R A, Sayuti K, Nazir N and Suliansyah I 2020 Production process and quality testing of
Arabica ground coffee (Coffee arabica L) Solok Regency, West Sumatera J. Appl. Agric. Sci.
Technol. 4 36–55
[11] Montavon P, Mauron A F and Duruz E 2003 Changes in green coffee protein profiles during
roasting J. Agric. Food Chem. 51
[12] Buffo R A and Cardelli-Freire C 2004 Coffee flavour: An overview Flavour Fragr. J. 19 99–104
[13] Farah A 2012 Coffee: emerging health effects and disease prevention ed Y-F Chu (Iowa 50014-
8300,: A John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication)
[14] Hayati R, Marliah A and Rosita F 2012 Sifat Kimia dan Evaluasi Sensori Bubuk Kopi Arabika
Floratek 66–75
[15] Alemnew S and Kebede G 2020 Factor affecting coffee (Coffee arabica L) quality and grading
methods J. Nat. Sci. Res. 10 13–20
[16] Bobkova A, Fikselova M and Snirc M 2017 Selected parameters of Arabica caffee quality
affected by its geographical origin Potravin. Slovak J. Food Sci. 11 260–5
[17] Izzati R, Katim A, Arabia T, Hifnalisa, Manfarizah, Syakur and Hafid I 2019 Analysis of taste
quality of Coffea arabica L. in several altitudes at Gayo Lues District Int. J. Adv. Res. 7 461–8
[18] Nugroho D, Basunanda P and Yusianto Y 2020 Performance of biochemical compounds and cup
quality of Arabica coffee as influenced by genotype and growing altitude Pelita Perkeb. 36 1–23
[19] Purba P, Sukartiko A C and Ainuri M 2020 Analysis of physical quality and flavor of Gayo
Arabica coffee J. Tanam. Ind. dan Penyegar 7 83–92

7
AESAP-2021 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1038 (2022) 012017 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1038/1/012017

[20] Abubakar Y, Hasni D, Muzaifa M, Sulaiman, Mahdi and Widayat H P 2019 Effect of varieties
and processing practices on the physical and sensory characteristics of Gayo Arabica specialty
coffee IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 523
[21] Abubakar Y, Sabariana S, Rasdiansyah R and Hasni D 2021 Sensory characteristic of espresso
coffee prepared from Gayo arabica coffee roasted at various times and temperatures IOP Conf.
Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 667 1–7