The History of Vanilla pompona Schiede in the U.S., Part 2 of 2

Part 1 of this article, Vanilla pompona’s Comeback in the United States: A Sustainability Opportunity (Part 1), appeared in the February 2026 edition of this magazine^a and argued that Vanilla pompona, a historically important species in U.S. commerce, could diversify the crop base thanks to its disease resistance, hardiness and distinctive sensory profile. Recognizing V. pompona under U.S. vanilla standards could therefore support greater biodiversity, supply-chain resilience and new opportunities for domestic and regional cultivation.

Part 2 of this article is published in memory of our colleague, Daphna Havkin-Frenkel, Ph.D. -Editor

Vanilla is derived from the cured fruit of orchids in the genus Vanilla, a tropical group comprising more than 100 species. Of these, Vanilla planifolia Andrews, Vanilla tahitensis Moore and Vanilla pompona Schiede have been the principal species of commercial importance. As the world’s largest importer of vanilla, the United States has had an outsized role in shaping the international vanilla market through its standard of identity. Under 21 CFR 169.3(a), “vanilla beans” are defined as the properly cured and dried fruit pods of V. planifolia and V.  tahitensis, thereby excluding other species from the standardized definition for vanilla extract and related flavorings.

Yet historical trade and manufacturing records show that V. pompona was in commerce in the U.S. for many years and was used in foods, beverages, medicines, cordials, and vanilla extracts (Beringer, 1895; Childers & Cibes, 1948; Correll, 1953).  That historical context remains relevant as the flavor industry considers more resilient vanilla germplasm, greater supply diversification (Chambers et al., 2021; Barreda-Castillo et al., 2023, Sustainable Vanilla Initiative, 2025), together with a broader range of natural sensory profiles (Galeas, 2015, Tran et al., 2024). This article reviews the evidence for V. pompona in U.S. commerce and explores the historical, commercial and regulatory factors that may explain its absence from the U.S. standards of identity for vanilla products.

Vanilla pompona in Early U.S. Commerce

Prior to the establishment of U.S. standards of identity, vanilla commerce was characterized by a multi-origin and multi-species supply network. Vanilla entering the United States originated primarily from Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean and, later, French colonial territories. Commercial practice emphasized geographic origin, curing quality, availability and sensory properties more than strict botanical identity (Rolfe, 1896). Nineteenth-century commercial references described vanilla as a product derived from three or four species whose beans were often grouped together in trade as commercial vanilla, including Vanilla pompona Schiede (Desvaux, 1848; Simmonds, 1877; Rolfe, 1896).

V. pompona was documented in producing regions of Mexico and Central America as early as 1676 (Correll, 1953). By 1839 it was established in the French West Indies, particularly Guadeloupe, Martinique and Dominica, where its fruits became commercially known as “vanillons” and entered international trade, including the U.S. market. F-1 offers a historical view of “ vanilla” preparation in Guadeloupe, one of the principal French West Indian producing origins.

F-1. A historical view of vanillon preparation in Guadeloupe, one of the principal French West Indian producing originsBibliothèque Nationale de France

Desvaux (1848) noted that  vanilla lots  from Veracruz often  included V. pompona, known in France as vanillon  . Beringer (1895) later observed that V. pompona was more widely diffused than V. planifolia in some producing regions, consistent with broader commercial distribution. By the early 20th century, Encyclopaedia Britannica recognized V. pompona as a distinct commercial variety from Brazil, Peru, and other parts of South America used in food, beverage, medicines and other applications (Ferguson, 1905, p. 22). The USDA program documented the introduction of V. pompona vines in Puerto Rico from Guadeloupe, Panama and Mexico (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1912). F-2 places vanilla in the context of Martinique’s principal exports from 1913 to 1915.

F2. Martinique export values for 1913–1915, showing vanilla among the island’s principal traded products. Source: T. R. Wallace, “French West Indies: Martinique,” Supplement to Commerce Reports^a (1916); https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=pst.000072094433&seq=1HathiTrust Digital Library

The strongest evidence for V. pompona in U.S. commerce comes from the convergence of U.S. government trade, contemporary botanical identification and American manufacture literature. The Annual French West Indies Supplement to Commerce Reports (1915-1920) identified vanilla as a principal export of Guadeloupe to the United States. Guadeloupe’s export report explicitly distinguished vanilla and vanillons separately within the same export category of vanilla, corresponding to V. planifolia and V. pompona, respectively (Wallace, 1916). In Martinique, the report recorded exports of 23,963 pounds in 1914 and 23,476 pounds in 1915 to the United States, including a larger proportion than usual of vanillons. The report also noted that the United States was the second-largest importer of Martinique products and, together with France, a principal destination for Martinique vanilla beans (Wallace, 1916). F-3 compares vanilla-bean exports from leading producing regions and documents the continued commercial presence of the French West Indies during the pre-standard period.

F-3. Vanilla-bean exports from leading producing regions, 1925–1946. The table documents the continued commercial presence of the French West Indies during the pre-standard period. Puerto Rico data extend through 1947. Source: USDA Puerto Rico Circular No. 28 (1948), based on U.S. Department of Commerce data. (Vanilla culture in Puerto Rico; https://www.growables.org/information/TropicalFruit/documents/VanillaUSDA.pdf)Vanilla Culture in Puerto Rico

Trade continuity into the mid-20th century indicates that V. pompona remained in U.S. supply channels well into the pre-standard era. Between 1933 and 1944, the French West Indies, an important producing region for V. pompona, exported approximately 120 tonnes of vanilla, of which about 71%, entered the United States (Childers & Cibes, 1948). F-3 also notes that Dominica’s vanilla exports rose during World War II from a few thousand pounds to 50,000 pounds or more, while Correll (1953) reported that exports in 1945 and 1947 became an important source of income for the Carib Reserve. Federal price controls continued to list West Indies vanilla as a distinct commercial origin (Office of Price Administration, 1943), and by 1948 USDA publications still recognized V. pompona under names including vanillon, West Indian, South American and pompona vanilla (Childers & Cibes, 1948). Correll (1953) mentioned a Guadeloupe’s production of 12-15 tons of vanilla in 1950 and 1951, respectively, with half exported to the U.S. and Canada. Although the aggregate data do not identify individual shipments botanically, they document an active U.S.-bound trade route from a region strongly associated with vanillon production.

Collectively, the botanical, commercial, and government records provide strong evidence that V. pompona was commercially cultivated, traded under recognized names, and introduced into U.S. supply channels. Contemporary records further indicate that it was not only present in commerce but also understood as a source of vanilla flavoring for foods, beverages, medicines and extracts.

Use in American Flavor and Extract Manufacture

Vanilla pompona was recognized in the United States as a usable vanilla material during the period in which vanilla had become a major flavoring ingredient in American extract, confectionery, beverage and ice-cream manufacture (Correll, 1953; Kramer, 1905; McCormick & Company, 1915). Culinary literature placed it among the vanillas available for American use. In Practical American Cookery (1885), Jules Arthur Harder described pompona, or “Babo vanilla,” from South America and the West Indies as suitable for medicine, perfumery and cookery, noting its dark brown pods and pronounced anise-like aroma and discussing it alongside commercial V. planifolia in preparations such as custards, creams and cakes (Harder, 1885). George Beringer likewise reported in 1895 that V. pompona had long been known as an article of commerce (Beringer, 1895). This positioning reflects not only market hierarchy but sensory distinctiveness. 

 Industrial sources more directly place it within extract manufacture. In Kramer’s Book of Trade Secrets (1905), a technical manual for manufacturers and jobbers, pomponas or vanillons were listed among the materials used in making vanilla extract alongside Mexican, Bourbon and Tahitian beans (Kramer, 1905). Kramer further noted that vanillons and Tahiti vanilla contributed color and body to extracts. McCormick’s The Vanilla-Bean: A Talk on Tea (1915) likewise treated vanillons as a distinct commercial category, placing them with Tahitian vanilla below the more highly regarded Mexican and Bourbon beans, yet still within a differentiated market for food and extract applications (McCormick & Company, 1915; Kramer, 1905; Correll, 1953). 

Mid-20th-century federal and agricultural sources indicate that commercial recognition of V. pompona continued well beyond the 19th century. As shown in F-4, wartime federal price controls continued to list West Indies vanilla as a distinct commercial origin in U.S. trade (Office of Price Administration, 1943). Although the schedule did not identify species or quantify shipments, it shows that West Indies vanilla remained a recognized commercial origin within the U.S. import-pricing system (Office of Price Administration, 1943). Contemporary agricultural and botanical sources strongly associated that origin with V. pompona cultivation and trade (Childers & Cibes, 1948; Correll, 1953).

F-4. Wartime (1943) federal price controls continued to list West Indies vanilla as a distinct commercial origin in U.S. trade; loc.gov/resource/fedreg.fr008140/?pdfPage=57&st=pdfFederal Register

Commercial vanilla manufacture during this period commonly involved blending beans of different origins and grades to achieve desired flavor, color, body and cost characteristics in confectionery, beverages, bakery products and ice cream (Kramer, 1905; McCormick & Company, 1915). Within this context, V. pompona appears to have served two related functions: as a distinct vanilla material with a recognizable sensory profile and as a practical component of blended extracts. Later analytical studies described vanillons as exhibiting heliotropin-like, floral and anisic notes (Ehlers & Pfister, 1997). These characteristics invite comparison with Tahitian vanilla, which likewise displays a floral and anisic profile distinct from that of Bourbon-type vanilla (Ehlers et al., 1994; Brunschwig et al., 2012). Kramer (1905) further noted that vanillons, together with V. tahitensis, contributed color, body and resin to vanilla extracts. Such blends may also have reflected economic considerations, including the extension of more expensive Mexican vanilla with lower-cost beans. Correll’s observation that V. pompona was generally marketed as a distinct commercial product, its fruits packed separately or sold in bulk rather than mixed with those of V. planifolia, further supports its status as a recognized material within the broader flavor and extract industry (Correll, 1953).

Taken together, these culinary, industrial, and commercial records place V. pompona within the networks that supplied the American flavor and extract industry. The evidence indicates that it was recognized as a usable vanilla material and valued for a sensory profile distinct from that associated with Bourbon- and Mexican-type V. planifolia beans. At the same time, the complexity of the vanilla trade and the growing use of synthetic and other substitute materials heightened concerns over authenticity, adulteration and standardization.

Adulteration and Authenticity of Vanilla 

The commercial value of vanilla stimulated efforts to identify and isolate its principal aroma constituent, culminating in the first chemical synthesis of vanillin in 1874. As synthetic vanillin and other low-cost substitutes became more available, federal concern centered increasingly on the authenticity of vanilla extracts, especially the use of undeclared artificial vanillin, coumarin-bearing additives such as tonka derivatives, and coloring materials, including caramel coloring, in products made with little or no natural vanilla from the beans themselves (Correll, 1953; Wiley, 1907, 1917). 

In reports to the U.S. Congress, Harvey W. Wiley of the USDA Bureau of Chemistry described the widespread adulteration of vanilla extracts with synthetic vanillin and tonka-derived coumarin, concerns that formed part of the broader public-health and misbranding objectives behind the Pure Food and Drugs Act of 1906 (U.S. Congress Senate Report, 1900; Wiley, 1907, 1917). F-5 reproduces Wiley’s treatment of artificial vanillin and other substitute materials in the 1907 and 1917 editions of Foods and Their Adulteration. Similar issues surfaced in a 1908 petition from Tahitian vanilla producers seeking federal action against substitution of natural vanilla with synthetic vanillin, and USDA enforcement records likewise documented adulteration cases involving vanilla products (U.S. Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Manufactures, 1908; U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1912). 

F-5a. Wiley’s treatment of artificial vanillin and other substitute materials in the 1907 and 1917 editions of Foods and Their AdulterationWiley/Foods and Their Adulteration

F-5b. Wiley’s treatment of artificial vanillin and other substitute materials in the 1907 and 1917 editions of Foods and Their AdulterationWiley/Foods and Their Adulteration

F-6 provides representative enforcement entries for vanilla extract and related flavoring products. Later oversight under the 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, together with the Federal Trade Commission [FTC] actions in 1939, continued to target economic deception in vanilla extract.

F-6a. Representative USDA enforcement entries for vanilla extract and related flavoring productsU.S. Department of Agriculture

F-6b. Representative USDA enforcement entries for vanilla extract and related flavoring productsU.S. Department of Agriculture

F-6c. Representative USDA enforcement entries for vanilla extract and related flavoring productsU.S. Department of Agriculture

These records show that federal action focused primarily on imitation, adulteration and misrepresentation rather than on excluding multiple botanical vanilla sources from commerce (Wiley, 1907, 1917; U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1912; FTC, 1939). In his descriptions of vanilla beans, Wiley referred only to the cured fruit of Vanilla planifolia (Wiley, 1907, 1917), thereby omitting not only V. pompona but also V. tahitensis, a species later incorporated into the U.S. standard of identity for vanilla. Wiley’s own discussions centered on artificial vanillin, tonka extracts and coloring practices. The description appears more consistent with prevailing supply conditions than with a deliberate effort to restrict regulatory acceptability of legitimate vanilla sources (Wiley, 1907, 1917; Correll, 1953). 

Federal adulteration concerns specifically targeted coumarin-bearing additives such as tonka derivatives because of public health concerns (Wiley, 1907, 1917; FTC, 1939). Analytical work on vanillons found no detectable coumarin in the tested extracts, clarifying earlier unsupported claims that had associated vanillons with such compounds (Ehlers & Pfister, 1997). In that respect, the U.S. federal enforcement record does not identify V. pompona as an adulterant in vanilla enforcement actions (Wiley, 1907, 1917; FTC, 1939). Later federal restrictions focused instead on tonka-derived additives and added coumarin, with the prohibition codified in 1977 (42 FR 14659, Mar. 15, 1977; Wiley, 1907, 1917; FTC, 1939).

Vanilla pompona trade persisted through successive phases of U.S. food law under established names such as vanillon and West Indian vanilla, including the Pure Food and Drugs Act era and the period following the 1938 FD&C Act (Childers & Cibes, 1948; Correll, 1953). This enforcement history matters because it shows that early federal concern centered on substitution and misrepresentation, while V. pompona itself was not identified in official records as a source of safety or adulteration concern.

The historical record therefore raises a different question: not why V. pompona was excluded from commerce, but why a species that persisted through these regulatory transitions was ultimately absent from the standards of identity later adopted for vanilla in the United States. 

Why Did Vanilla pompona Fall Outside the U.S. Standard of Identity?

The available evidence does not establish a single documented reason for the omission of V. pompona. It instead supports a market-representation hypothesis: the species declined in commercial visibility as standardized Bourbon vanilla expanded, leaving it absent from the industry petitions that framed the eventual rule. Three developments appear most relevant: the commercial preference for higher-ranked Mexican and Bourbon beans, the declining French West Indies production, and the absence of V. pompona from the industry petitions that initiated rulemaking.

Early 20th-century analytical and industrial literature increasingly defined vanilla quality through measurable compositional and commercial criteria. F-7 reproduces a contemporary example: Food Inspection and Analysis (Leach & Winton, 1920) ranked Mexican and Bourbon beans among the highest grades, while associating Tahitian beans and vanillons (V. pompona) with lower-priced applications. The Microscopy of Vegetable Foods (Winton & Moeller, 1906) described “vanilla of commerce” primarily in relation to Vanilla planifolia, while still recognizing V. pompona as a commercial vanilla with lower vanillin content and a different sensory profile. These classifications did not remove V. pompona from commerce, but they did place it along with V. tahitensis within an emerging quality hierarchy defined by vanillin levels, sensory character and market value.

F-7. Food Inspection and Analysis (Leach & Winton, 1920) ranked Mexican and Bourbon beans among the highest grades, while associating Tahitian beans and vanillons (V. pompona) with lower-priced applicationsLeach, A. E., & Winton, A. L. (1920). Food inspection and analysis: For the use of public analysts, health officers, sanitary chemists, and food economists (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

Part of V. pompona’s commercial reputation may have been shaped by its broad geographic distribution and variable post-harvest handling. Rolfe (1896) described the species as occurring throughout Mexico, Central America, northern South America, and the French West Indies. Contemporary accounts characterized its fruits as larger and fleshier than those of V. planifolia and more difficult to cure, while Ferguson (1905) emphasized that bean quality depended heavily on maturity and curing practices and varied substantially among producing regions. Vanillons may therefore have entered commerce with greater variability in flavor, appearance and extract performance than Bourbon vanilla. 

Tahitian vanilla offers an instructive comparison. Like vanillons, it was long regarded as distinct in sensory profile and often lower in value than Mexican and Bourbon vanilla (Doty, 1904; Ridley, 1912; Kevorkian, 1964; Brunschwig et al., 2012; Lubinsky et al., 2008). Early U.S. consular reporting described “unsatisfactory conditions” surrounding Tahitian vanilla and efforts to reassure American importers regarding quality (Doty, 1904), while Henry Ridley later remarked that Tahitian vanilla resembled vanillons in its heliotrope-like character and was less suitable for high-grade confectionery (Ridley, 1912). In Tahitian vanilla’s case, a lower market rank and a distinct sensory profile did not preclude later inclusion within the U.S. vanilla standard. 

Market perceptions and preferences also shifted over time. Nineteenth-century trade manuals frequently regarded Mexican vanilla as the finest grade, while Bourbon vanilla was initially described as less aromatic and valued below Mexican beans (Harrison, 1870; Simmonds, 1877; McCormick & Company, 1915; Leach & Winton, 1920). Over time, improved curing practices, expanding production in Madagascar, and the increasing availability of lower-priced, standardized Bourbon vanilla strengthened its position within U.S. supply chains. After World War II, these trends accelerated, while cheaper synthetic vanillin added further pressure to natural vanilla producers (Correll, 1953). In the same period, cultivation of vanillons in the French West Indies declined, reducing the market presence of V. pompona in the United States (Correll, 1953). The USDA report by Childers and Cibes (1948) reflected the resulting hierarchy: although it described V. pompona as more tolerant of adverse moisture and soil conditions, more resistant to root-rot disease, and useful in breeding work, it also characterized the species as lower in market value, and therefore unlikely to justify cultivation under Puerto Rico’s high production costs. By the 1950s, Bourbon vanilla had become the dominant commercial reference standard in the United States, available at lower cost than other origins (Vanilla Bean Association of America, 1955

In this context, U.S. vanilla standards of identity appear to have reflected the species that remained commercially represented in the supply chains serving the United States rather than the full historical range of materials once traded as vanillla. Although V. pompona had circulated widely in 19th- and early 20th-century trade and remained commercially visible through the federal food-law regimes established after 1906 and 1938, its presence had largely declined by the time the standards of identity were developed. The proposed rule, published in the Federal Register on July 19, 1960, originated in petitions submitted by flavor manufacturers that already defined vanilla beans as the properly cured and dried fruit pods of Vanilla planifolia Andrews and Vanilla tahitensis Moore. The final rule was published on September 1, 1962 (Food and Drug Administration, 1960, 1962). The proposed and final Federal Register notices do not state a scientific, safety-based or sensory rationale for excluding V. pompona, and the the species does not appear inthe industry petitions that framed the rulemaking process.

On the available record, V. pompona appears to have fallen outside the U.S. standard during a periodof declining market representatio relative to the other two commercial vanilla species. This historical context remains relevant because V. pompona has attracted renewed interest in agronomic and sensory characteristics that distinguish it from other cultivated vanilla species, including greater tolerance to water stress and disease and an aroma profile characterized by floral, fruity and anise-like notes (Dean, 2025; Pérez-Silva et al., 2021; Tran et al., 2024; Galeas, 2015). 

Recent technical assessments also treat V. pompona as part of the broader vanilla natural flavor complex, while noting that it is not specified in the current U.S. standard of identity for vanilla extract (Guengerich et al., 2026). As interest grows in sustainable strategies for diversifying vanilla supply and strengthening crop resilience through the use of related vanilla diversity (Sustainable Vanilla Initiative, 2025; Chambers et al., 2021; Barreda-Castillo et al., 2023), the historical record provides useful context for understanding the former commercial role of V. pompona and its absence from U.S. standard for vanilla products.

Conclusion

Historical records demonstrate that Vanilla pompona was a recognized commercial vanilla that participated in international trade and supplied food, flavor and extract applications in the United States. Although V. pompona, like V. tahitensis, generally ranked below Mexican and later Bourbon vanilla, its lower commercial position did not exclude it from trade. During the decades preceding development of the standards of identity, however, the commercial prominence of V. pompona declined as Bourbon vanilla became increasingly standardized, widely available and economically competitive within U.S. supply chains.

The evidence suggests that the omission of V. pompona from the U.S. vanilla standards reflected two historical circumstances: its declining commercial representation in the U.S. market and its absence from the petitions submitted during the rulemaking process. No documented scientific, safety-based, or sensory rationale for excluding V. pompona has been identified.

That history still matters. As interest grows in diversifying vanilla supply, strengthening crop resilience and exploring a wider range of sensory profiles, V. pompona may merit renewed consideration for possible inclusion among the species recognized under U.S. standards for vanilla products.

References

1. Barreda-Castillo, J. M., Monribot-Villanueva, J. L., Velázquez-Rosas, N., Bayman, P., Guerrero-Analco, J. A., & Menchaca-García, R. A. (2023). Morphological and physio-chemical responses to PEG-induced water stress in Vanilla planifolia and V. pompona hybrids. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 24(5), 4690.
2. Beringer, G. M. (1895). The assay of drugs and galenicals. J. B. Lippincott Company.
3. Brunschwig, C., et al. (2012). Odor-active compounds of Tahitian vanilla (Vanilla × tahitensis). Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 60(31), 7977–7986.
4. Chambers, A., Cibrián-Jaramillo, A., Karremans, A. P., et al. (2021). Genotyping-by-sequencing diversity analysis of international Vanilla collections uncovers hidden diversity and enables plant improvement. Plant Science, 311, 111019.
5. Childers, N. F., & Cibes, H. R. (1948). Vanilla culture in Puerto Rico. Circular No. 28. U.S. Department of Agriculture. https://archive.org/details/CAT31289489/page/n3/mode/2up
6. Code of Federal Regulations. (2025). Definitions, 21 C.F.R. § 169.3(a)
7. Correll, D. S. (1953). Vanilla: Its botany, history, cultivation and economic importance. Economic Botany, 7(4), 291–358.
8. Dean, D. (2025). Historical overview of Vanilla pompona, with an emphasis on Central American usage. Journal of Belizean Research, 3(2).
9. Desvaux, M. (1848). On vanilla and its culture (J. Bell, Ed.). Pharmaceutical Journal and Transactions, 7, 73–74. https://archive.org/details/s1317id1378020/page/n5/mode/2up
10. Doty, W. F. (1904, August 18). Government inspection of vanilla beans in Tahiti. In Monthly consular reports (No. 289, October 1904, p. 17). U.S. Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Statistics. Government Printing Office.
11. Ehlers, D., & Pfister, M. (1997). Compounds of vanillons (Vanilla pompona Schiede). Journal of Essential Oil Research, 9(4), 427–431.
12. Ehlers, D., Pfister, M., & Bartholomae, S. (1994). Analysis of Tahiti vanilla by high-performance liquid chromatography. Zeitschrift für Lebensmittel-Untersuchung und -Forschung, 199, 38–42.
13. Federal Trade Commission. (1939, September 27). In the matter of Averbach Company, Inc., et al. Federal Register, 4(186), 4059–4061.
14. Ferguson, A. M. (1905). All about vanilla: Including practical instructions for planting, cultivation & preparation for market with much useful information from a variety of sources.
15. Food and Drug Administration. (1960, July 19). Food flavorings; definitions and standards of identity: Vanilla extract and related products; notice of proposed definitions and standards of identity. Federal Register, 25(139), 6850–6852.
16. Food and Drug Administration. (1962, September 1). Food flavorings; definitions and standards of identity: Vanilla extract and related products. Federal Register, 27(171), 8757.
17. Food and Drug Administration. (1977, March 15). Substances prohibited from use in human food. Federal Register, 42, 14659; codified at 21 C.F.R. § 189.130.
18. Galeas, M. del P. (2015). Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and gas chromatography-olfactometry analysis of aroma compounds of Vanilla pompona Schiede [Master’s thesis, Rutgers University]. Rutgers University.
19. Guengerich, F. P., Cohen, S. M., Eisenbrand, G., Fukushima, S., Gooderham, N. J., Hecht, S. S., Rietjens, I. M. C. M., Rosol, T. J., Davidsen, J. M., Harman, C. L., & Taylor, S. V. (2026). FEMA GRAS assessment of natural flavor complexes: Vanilla extract, bitter almond oil, wintergreen oil and related flavoring ingredients. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 211, 115969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2026.115969
20. Harder, J. A. (1885). The physiology of taste: Harder’s book of practical American cookery. San Francisco.
21. Harrison, A. W. (1870). Harrison’s flavoring extracts: Pure, fresh and strong. The best in the world. A. W. Harrison.
22. Kevorkian, A. G. (1964). Pepper, vanilla, and other spices. In The yearbook of agriculture (pp. 195–202). U.S. Department of Agriculture.
23. Kramer, J. A. (1905). Kramer’s book of trade secrets: A collection of practical receipts and processes used in the manufacture of articles traded in by druggists, manufacturing pharmacists, perfumers, confectioners, and kindred industries. Spencer Publishing Company.
24. Leach, A. E., & Winton, A. L. (1920). Food inspection and analysis: For the use of public analysts, health officers, sanitary chemists, and food economists (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
25. Lubinsky, P., Romero-González, G. A., Heredia, S. M., & Cameron, K. M. (2008). Phylogenetic analysis of Vanilla and the origin of Vanilla × tahitensis. Annals of Botany, 101(1), 137–150.
26. Maruenda, H., et al. (2013). Volatile composition and sensory evaluation of vanilla extracts. Food Chemistry, 141(3), 1871–1879.
27. McCormick & Company. (1915). The vanilla-bean: A talk on tea. McCormick & Co.
28. Office of Price Administration. Revised Supplementary Regulation No. 14. Modifications of maximum prices established by the General Maximum Price Regulation: Sec. 1.3 Vanilla beans. 8 Fed. Reg. 9780 (July 16, 1943).
29. Pérez-Silva, A., et al. (2021). Chemical and genetic differentiation of Vanilla planifolia and Vanilla × tahitensis. Food Research International, 140, 109950.
30. Ridley, H. N. (1912). Spices. Macmillan & Co.
31. Rolfe, R. A. (1896). A revision of the genus Vanilla. Journal of the Linnean Society, Botany, 32, 439–478.
32. Simmonds, P. L. (1877). Tropical agriculture: A treatise on the culture, preparation, commerce, and consumption of the principal products of the vegetable kingdom. E. & F. N. Spon.
33. Sustainable Vanilla Initiative. (2025). 10 years of driving sustainability in vanilla: Towards a 2030 charter.
34. Tran, T. K. L., et al. (2024). Molecular aroma composition of vanilla beans from different origins. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 72(34), 19120–19130.
35. U.S. Congress, Senate, 1900. Adulteration of food products (S. Rep. No. 516, 56th Cong., 1st Sess.). Government Printing Office.
36. U.S. Department of Agriculture. (1912). Documents received and distributed by the Department of Agriculture during 1911 (H.R. Doc. No. 545, 62nd Cong., 2nd Sess.). Government Printing Office.
37. U.S. Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Manufactures, 1908. Monthly consular and trade reports (No. 336, H. Doc. No. 990, 60th Cong., 2nd Sess.). Government Printing Office.
38. Vanilla Bean Association of America, Inc. (1955). The story of pure vanilla with recipes.
39. Walbaum, H. (1909). Das Vorkommen von Anisalkohol und Anisaldehyd in den Früchten der Tahiti-Vanille. Wallach’s Festschrift, 649–653.
40. Wallace, T. R. (1916, November 20). French West Indies. Supplement to Commerce Reports, Annual Series No. 28a. Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, Department of Commerce. https://archive.org/details/supplementto28191620unit
41. Wiley, H. W. (1907). Foods and their adulteration: Origin, manufacture, and composition of food products; description of common adulterations, food standards, and national food laws and regulations. P. Blakiston’s Son & Co.
42. Wiley, H. W. (1917). Foods and their adulteration: Origin, manufacture, and composition of food products; infants’ and invalids’ foods; detection of common adulterations (3rd ed.). P. Blakiston’s Son & Co.
43. Winton, A. L., & Moeller, J. (1906). The microscopy of vegetable foods. John Wiley & Sons.

FOOTNOTES

^ahttps://www.perfumerflavorist.com/flavor/regulatory-research/article/22957630/vanilla-pomponas-comeback-in-the-united-states-a-sustainability-opportunity-part-1