Gabro -- I can't ID your plant, but I can offer an opinion: What you have is NOT Coffea arabica. The shape of the leaves, their apparent substance & lack of clearly pronounced veining, their lack of deep/dark green coloration, and the tapered shape of the leaf petioles (clearly visible in the 3rd photo) are very atypical of Coffea.

The most convincing evidence that this is not Coffea is your own statement in the first sentence of your post. Coffee plants are difficult to grow indoors, rarely show a lot of growth in a short period of time & (unless it was potbound when you acquired it) would probably not require repotting for quite a long while.

Perhaps others here can either correct my observations or provide a definitive ID.

It may be an Exotic Angel angel plant bought at HD or Lowes. We know they are infamous for mislabeling their plants! I can't offer any ID advice, but would say, based on the picture, that it appears to be overpotted. What size pot is that?

GH

It looks like a type of Ardisia to me. Grown as shrubs in warmer areas. I dont know much about them, google images and see what you think.

Jen

Looks like ardisia to me too, and they do like smaller pots

I will definitely look into the ardisia. But I repotted it because I came home one day and it was wilted (it wasn't overwatered or underwatered, but roots were coming out of the drainage hole. I figured that's why it was wilted. So I repotted it into a pot that was an inch and a half bigger, and it perked up immediately. By the way, GH, I got it at a great local nursery (biggest one around me), and I think it was EA...it's also in a 7" pot to answer your question. Thanks for everyone's help.
Gabi
Thanks,
Gabi

Gabi...I'm quite sure it's the {{gwi:117573}}of Ficus Amstel King. I have several of them in my lab. It's not easy to i.d. this small plant because the photos on the web (Google images) are of more mature plants. Care for it like a Ficus benjamina.

BTW, you did a good job with your i.d. photos. That helped!

Greenscaper

It sure isn't a coffee!

Thanks Greenscaper. I was so sure it was an Ardisia. I looked it up and I figured it was an Ardisia Squamulosa...that was the only one that really fit my plant description and appearance. Now I'm so confused...because the leaves on the Amstel king look like mine. But my branches aren't twisted...does it get like that with age? I would be so happy if that's what it was...what a beautiful tree that is! Thanks for your help, and if anyone else has any suggestions as to what it may be, please help!
Thanks,
Gabi

...not a Coffea plant or an Ardisia either. Note the smooth edged leaves as a clue. There's no doubt in my mind what it is. Ignore the braided (twisted) trunks in some photos. That's the hand of man rather than mother nature. BTW, this species of Ficus has a slender trunk when compared to Ficus benjamina (Weeping Fig).

I remembered that I had some Ficus Amstel King photos from back in October 2002. They're now the start of a new plant i.d. photo set.

{{gwi:117579}}
{{gwi:117580}}

Oh yeah, that's my plant alright :)
Thanks so much for the right ID. I would have been sitting here waiting for coffee beens for years and years otherwise!
Gabi

I must say if you've ever owned an Ardisia , you couldnt' mistake them, and that one is not. Ardisias actually have very wavy margins that have raised edges and you can even feel that, if you run your fingers along an Ardisia leaf.
I have several year or so old specimens in my home right now. I can post a picture if anyone is interested.

I hate to, but I'm going to add to the confusion, here.

I'm certainly not saying your plant *isn't* the ficus mentioned, but if it *was* an EA plant, I think it's more likely that it's an Ardisia, as tsangel and senga mentioned.

There are several different Ardisia in cultivation. The most common one, often called Ardisia crenulata (though there are other synonyms for it) *does* have the obvious wavy leaf margins, but one, in particular that doesn't and is marketed by EA is Ardisia humilis.

Another one is Ardisia elliptica. A. humilis and A. elliptica may be synonyms, as well....didn't have time to look into that, sorry.

Here is a link to a photo of A. elliptica:

http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/photos/ardel03.jpg

And here is a link to EA's website showing their A. humilis....I think this one looks a lot like your plant, too.

Just thought you might want to give it a little more thought before you tag it as definintely being a Ficus.
I know that EA sells the Ardisia, and though they do sell many ficus, they've given them all 'common' names so I couldn't figure out if they do sell the ficus that greenscaper mentioned....if you want to check out their Ficus varieties, go to their website and type ficus in the searchbox (exoticangel.com)

Here is a link that might be useful: EA's Ardisia humilis

Nanw...thanks for all your research. I really appreciate it. However, when I first thought it was Ardisia, I ruled out elliptica immediately. The only Ardisia my plant looked like and sounded like (description-wise) was A. Squamulosa. And after looking into A. Humilis just now, I can say with almost 100% certainty that it is not that. I really do believe it is a Ficus Amstel King, but I do love these discussions and I welcome other thoughts, cause I very well could be wrong! Thank you...
Gabi

Hold it! This i.d. party ainÂt over yet. IÂm not bashful about stating my opinion or changing it if I find itÂs wrong. Gabi, please pardon me for leading you down the wrong garden path.

My plant is not a Ficus Amstel King. Nan you get a taxonomy trophy or tiara if you prefer. ;-) Thanks to you IÂve discovered that my plant is in fact an Ardisia elliptica aka humulis (common name Shoebutton Ardisia). This set of photos was the clincher. They clearly show what my little juvenile plants grew up to be.

To add insult to injury they are on a list of "Hawaii's Most Invasive Horticultural Plants." Now I can't go back to Hawaii. I hope they don't know where I live. ;-)

Regardless of how I pruned them, they were definitely not my vision of good quality tabletop plants. They looked exactly like the photos from Hawaii. So, I gave them away earlier this year.

HereÂs the back-story. I bought the plants at Home Depot 4 years ago. They were tagged as Ficus. I posted the photo you see above on this very same forum for i.d. help and a credible GWeb member said it was a F. Amstel King. I also went back to H.D. and found the department manager. I gave her a copy of the plant photo. She showed it to the grower/supplier who confirmed that it was F. Amstel King.

I was never able to groom them into looking anything like Ficus Amstel King trees over the four years they were in my lab. The plants stayed looking rather awkward and ungainly. So now, I know why. BTW, I wonder what a real juvenile F. Amstel King tree form looks like.

Thanks,
Greenscaper

My apologies for such a "quick" post, and soometimes I forget that though I may be familiar with just one species of a particular genus, and may not have researched the topic or ever heard of other species, I stand corrected on the possibility that it is a species of Ardisia. I must look further and do more research, since I find them interesting plants, but do like the crenatas!

My apologies for such a "quick" post, and soometimes I forget that though I may be familiar with just one species of a particular genus, and may not have researched the topic or ever heard of other species, I stand corrected on the possibility that it is a species of Ardisia. I must look further and do more research, since I find them interesting plants, but do like the crenatas!

Oh boy! I have to say Greenscaper, after looking at those photos, I really believe your plant (or the plant that was once yours) is an Ardisia. However, I really really don't think mine is. Here is why - none of my branches are red (look at my third pic), although the redness could possibly come out as the plant ages. Also, a lot of the leaves on the Ardisia Elliptica/Humilis are red, and none of mine are. They start off as tiny red points, but the buck stops there - the second they start taking the form of a leaf they are completely green. This plant is still very young, so if anyone has a young Ficus Amstel King or a young Ardisia Humilis, I'd love to see a pic. I'm still not sure what this is. But I have to admit, I went to Lowe's yesterday and saw a similar looking plant to mine from EA, and it was labeled Ardisia Humilis! Ughhh..maybe I'll just choose out of a hat.

Hey Gabro,

I bought the exact same plant as you at Wal-Mart and it too was mislabeled Coffee Arabica. Ever since, i have been trying to figure out what it was. No such luck so far, but i did give it more growing room and a good amount of water and light, and i must say, it is really taking off lately. I guess ill just have to learn thru trial and error to find out how to take good care of this plant, rather that looking at some tag.

- pete

LOL!! Such a quandary!
No trophy nor tiara needed, Greenscaper...glad that I was helpful.

There really are a lot of plants out there that look alike, especially when comparing different stages of growth.

OK, now when Greenscaper posted his photos above, gabro, you stated Oh yeah, that's my plant alright :)
Thanks so much for the right ID. You've changed your mind? ;)

New growth and stems on this Ardisia (to be honest, it looks like all 3 ardisias mentioned, humilis, elliptica and squamulosa are synonymous, from what I've read) are known to be 'reddish', but the stems are often reported to be green, as well, so I do think that you have an Ardisia.

I had this plant at one time and also gave it away.
I did some research on it at that time, as the only Ardisia I was familiar with was crenata.
One article mentioned that in South Florida this plant will have reddish stems, but that groups of them growing elsewhere had green stems.
With that said, it's obvious that environment plays a part in the coloration of the stems, and likely in the coloration of the leaves that you'd seen pictured as 'reddish' as well.
That seems to be true of many plants grown indoors.

Choosing from a hat is tempting, isn't it? LOL!!

If you've noted lots of new growth and have found it necessary to repot, then you're obviously meeting it's cultural needs.

Nanw...you're absolutely right, I did say that. What changed my mind was when I looked at his plant again (compared to pics of Ardisia) and saw that his had some red stems like the Ardisia. But I don't know...it's really a toss up. And you're right about the environment. Mine is grown in bright sun, which is why I would think my plant would have red leaves or stems if it was an Ardisia.
But I have to look at the bright side (pun intended)...at least the identity has been narrowed down to 2 names, right?!
I will look into it more, but now I'm starting to think you're right about it being an Ardisia.

Hey Plantfreak...do you have a pic of yours that you can post? You're right...nametags aren't as important as taking care of the plant and enjoying it. I just have a little tinge of plant OCD. I need to know the exact name and family of my plants, AND I CAN'T REST UNTIL I FIND THIS ONE! LOL!

Hey Gabro,

Sorry it took me so long to get back. I forgot that i posted on here. but here are the pics of my mystery plant we are both trying to identify. The plant looks brighter because the image was taken with a grow light on overhead.

{{gwi:117581}}
{{gwi:117582}}
{{gwi:117583}}
{{gwi:117584}}

Hey Plantfreak,
Thanks for posting those pics. That plant does look a lot like mine...probably the same one. I really think it is an Ardisia Humilis, so that's what I've been sticking to. Let me know if you get any other possibilities.
Thanks,
Gabi

Hey Gabro,

I still have no idea what this plant might be. I looked up Ardisia Humilis, and couldn't find much info. Maybe if i travel to Wal-Mart in the near future, i can look for one of these plant. Hopefully, at least one of them will have a correct tag on it. If i do, ill be sure to post it here.

In the mean time, i think it would be a good idea to perhaps try to post the pictures of this plant in maybe another forum or simply start a new thread, since maybe someone knows what it is but missed the thread. If you do, decide to repost, let me know, since i'm just as eager to know what this plant may be. If you want anymore pictures of this plant, let me know. Ill be more than happy to take as many as you need.

- Pete a.k.a "Plant Freak"

P.S feel free to e-mail me if you need anything else. My e-mail address is, DracoMalfoy347@aol.com

Good idea Pete. I'll wait awhile, then post again as a new thread. Maybe I'll title it "Ardisia?". I'll definitely email you if I find any answers. For now, I'm content because I am definitely meeting its needs...she's constantly blooming new leaves. One that just opened up is kind of wavy on the edges...that's new to me with this plant, I haven't seen that yet. Oh, and I made a trip to Wal-Mart earlier this week...NO PLANTS :(
The pic offer is the same for you...let me know if you want to see more. Feel free to email me as well (you should be able to email me from my link).
Take care,
Gabi

Gabi, your Ardisia will get some red color if you keep it outside next summer (in shade, however). With both short and less intense winter days, inside, and in our mid-atlantic area, your plant just can't get enough light to color up properly.

Thanks RJM...I'll give that a try. I'd love to see some red leaves. But for now, as long as it is thriving, I'm happy.

Walking through Lowe's garden department earlier this week, I was surprised to see a rather homely looking 5-6' tree tagged "Ficus Amstel". I've never seen one before at retail. It had skinny braided trunks just like most of these Google images. Not worth growing in my opinion. BTW, I'm not a fan of braided trunks. Evidently even in South Florida high humidity the trunks on this Ficus cultivar do not grow thicker. Interesting! Ficus Amstel King photos