The famous "Maharajah coconut pearl" sitting in the shell of a coconut. This alleged botanical jewel was on display at the Fairchild Tropical Garden in the city of Coral Gables, Florida. This "pearl" originally given to Dr. Fairchild in 1940 was not in its original coconut, so there is serious doubt as to its authenticity.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and the proof of authentic pearls from coconuts is lacking. This is certainly true of calcareous pearls made of aragonite. Some so-called coconut pearls are really pearls of giant clams or another mollusk. Whether coconuts occasionally contain hard objects of unknown structure and origin may still be open for discussion. The meticulous writings of naturalists such as Georg Eberhard Rumphius indicate that calcareous coconut pearls are real; however, these naturalists did not see the original "blind coconuts" from which the pearls were extracted. If blind coconuts were the property of the Radja, then there should be records of these coconuts producing "coconut pearls." The pearl apparently develops in the embryonic region of the coconut, but there is no explanation for how such a smooth, spherical or oblong calcareous structure could be formed. In mollusks, a pearl is often produced when a foreign object becomes lodged between the shell and outer flesh (mantle) of a bivalve. Foreign objects can be naturally-occurring, or they may be induced, such as in cultured pearls of oysters. The mantle epidermis responds by encapsulating the object within thin concentric layers of aragonite, a form of calcium carbonate known as nacre or mother-of-pearl. Aragonite has unique optical properties that account for the light refraction and beautiful opalescence of nacre. A number of mollusks that do not produce commercially valuable pearls have iridescent nacreous layers lining their shells that are used to make mother-of-pearl jewelry.

A recent Internet image (December 2003) of a coconut pearl for sale in Singapore shows an oblong, opaque stone within a coconut; however, the "pearl" extends through the endocarp layer into the fibrous husk region. If coconut pearls develop within blind coconuts without functional germination pores, then how did this pearl grow and penetrate through the hard endocarp. Since the endocarp has clearly been sectioned and removed from the coconut, this pearl could have easily been inserted through an enlarged germination pore and into the husk. In addition, the photo shows faint parallel striations described by Reyne (1947) for Molluskan pearls. There is simply no adequate botanical explanation for the formation of a true, aragonite pearl inside of a coconut. Coconuts do not have calcium-forming tissues comparable with the mantle of mollusks.

Ideally, each of these arguments (hypotheses) should be tested to see if any of them hold up. Detailed examinations could determine if alleged coconut pearls have the concentric aragonite layers as in true molluskan pearls. This has already been done by the Dutch zoologist A. Reyne during the late 1930s and 1940s who studied the structure of so-called coconut pearls in public and private collections, and concluded that they were the pearls of giant clams of the genus Tridacna or the Indo-Pacific clam Hippopus. Dr. Reyne's extensive research was also mentioned in Nature Vol. 160 page 653 (1947). Microscopic examinations could also determine if coconut pearls have the dense, cellular structure of vegetable ivory. Comparisons of their refractive index and specific gravity could determine if they are composed of aragonite like the pearls and shells of mollusks. But the most conclusive test of all would be to actually find one inside a coconut first hand. This seems very unlikely considering the fact that millions of coconuts are opened each year in plantations and no pearls have ever been found. Most eyewitness records of coconut pearls cited in the literature are secondhand accounts that were not observed by the authors of these articles. There are few firsthand, published accounts of pearls observed inside coconuts, but these have been shown to be fraudulent. The existence of coconut pearls is another myth like the "Loch Ness Monster" and "Bigfoot," only in the case of coconut pearls, realistic fabrications will always be around to cloud the truth. In fact, there are websites where you can actually purchase "coconut pearls." One site claims that the authenticity of their "coconut pearls" is based on psychic verification by a trained shaman. They also state that they cannot guarantee the authenticity of their "coconut pearls" with 100 percent certainty, but this "does not mean the pearls and stones are fake." I suppose it isn't too surprising to see "coconut pearls" for sale on the Internet since there are also websites offering extraterrestrial real estate for sale on the moon.

During the 1990s I published several articles where I suggested that coconut pearls might exist. Completely independent of my articles, J.F. Veldkamp of the National Herbarium of the Netherlands published an article in 2002 on coconut pearls entitled "VIII. Mestica Calappa, the Coconut Pearl, Trick or True?" for the prestigious Flora Malesiana Bulletin Vol. 13. He recently (14 August 2007) sent me an addendum to his original article that will be published in Vol. 18 of Flora Malesiana Bulletin. It seems that Dr. Veldkamp and myself both arrived at the same conclusion regarding the lack of authenticity for coconut pearls.

Although I once supported the existence of coconut pearls, I now believe there is insufficient evidence to support such a conclusion. If you find any old Internet references that credit me as a believer in coconut pearls, they are incorrect and should be updated. In the above table of arguments, my agreement percentages clearly favor the arguments against the existence of coconut pearls. For statements 1, 3, 4 and 5, I have an agreement of 5% for the existence of coconut pearls compared with a 95% agreement against coconut pearls. For statement 2, my agreement certainty for coconut pearls is 40% compared with a 60% certainty against. For statement 6, my agreement certainty is 15% for coconut pearls and 85% against. Therefore, my overall percentage agreement with the six arguments for the existence of coconut pearls is 12.5%, compared with an agreement of 87.5% against the existence of coconut pearls. This data is summarized in the following cluster bar graph.

My quest for coconut pearls began during several Palomar College field expeditions to tropical regions in the 1980s and 1990s. My original position regarding the plausibility of coconut pearls was based on a number of reputable sources that verified their authenticity. E.J.H. Corner, Professor of Tropical Botany at the University of Cambridge flatly stated that coconut pearls exist in his classic book The Natural History of Palms (1966): "Inside some coconuts, which seem to have no power of germination, there are found the rare coconut pearls, half to one inch long, made of calcium carbonate, not siliceous as the bamboo pearls, but endowed also with magical properties." Other references were more vague about the existence coconut pearls, but generally concluded that they could be authentic. I had no reason to doubt these authorities.

When I first saw the Maharajah coconut pearl on display at Fairchild Tropical Garden in the early 1990s, I was convinced there might be some truth to the existence of these "botanical gems." Unfortunately, I published an on-line note about this "pearl" in 1996 before I discovered that it did not come from a coconut. My old note still appears on some websites, even though there is overwhelming evidence to show that so-called "coconut pearls" do not come from coconuts! Years later I discovered that the origin of the Maharajah coconut pearl (and other so-called coconut pearls) was secondhand. The original botanist or writer, in this case Dr. David Fairchild, never actually saw the "pearl" in its original coconut. It was presented to him on Celebes Island in 1940. This revelation became clear to me after reading his book Garden Islands of the Great East: Collecting Seeds From the Philippines and Netherlands India in the Junk "Chêng Ho," published in 1943 by Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. A photo of the pearl appeared on page 128 with the following caption: "This rare jewel is pictured about as it would be found in the white meat of a coconut near the end where the sprout comes out through the pore." It is obvious that the "pearl" had been placed in a sectioned coconut for the photograph. In other words, the "pearl" was not photographed in situ within its original coconut.

I began to doubt the existence of coconut pearls when I was offered one over the Internet for $60,000 U.S. dollars. If the seller hadn't been so greedy I might have purchased it; however, the photo image was highly suspect because the "pearl" appeared to be inserted into the sectioned husk of a coconut. When I researched my article for Ornament Magazine (2005), I conducted a thorough library search through the University of California and the Gemological Institute of America. I found many references dating back more than 60 years that clearly showed that coconut pearls in various collections were derived from giant clams or another source, and did not come from coconuts. In fact, the aragonite structure of mollusk shells and pearls can readily be identified using translumination studies with high intensity fiber optic light, X-ray diffraction, and comparisons of their refractive index and specific gravity. It is surprising that some of the authors that have perpetuated the coconut pearl myth did not come across these excellent references.

In 2007, I submitted a summary of my Ornament article to the Drifting Seed Newsletter in Florida. Apparently Dr. J.V. Veldkamp of the National Herbarium of the Netherlands and editor of the prestigious journal Flora Malesiana Bulletin, saw this newsletter. Completely independent of my articles, he has also been studying coconut pearls called "mestica calappa" and published a paper on this subject for Flora Malesiana Bulletin in 2002. Although he expressed considerable skepticism, he concluded that they might exist based on previous articles prior to 2002, including a few of my own. Like myself, he is now convinced that they are a hoax and is updating his original article in the next issue of Flora Malesiana Bulletin. He is citing my Ornament article, Palomar College and my pages on Wayne's Word. Scholarly journals typically cite botanists through their affiliated institution and herbarium which is published in Index Herbariorum. The official acronym for Palomar College is PASM. So my coconut pearl quest has come full circle, from my early articles in Terra (1992) and Palomar's early website in 1996, to my latest articles in Ornament and The Drifting Seed, culminating in Dr. Velkamp's update for the Flora Malesiana Bulletin. His update is quoted in the following table:

Return To WAYNE'S WORD Home Page Return To NOTEWORTHY PLANTS Page Go To Biology GEE WHIZ TRIVIA Page Go To The LEMNACEAE ON-LINE Page