CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Camellia sinensis

species of plant

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 16, 2026
Entity authorityQ101815
Source-derived summary

Camellia sinensis, commonly known as tea plant, tea shrub, and tea tree, is a species of evergreen shrub in the flowering plant family Theaceae. Originally native to the highlands of the Hengduan–Purvanchal region between southwestern China, northern Myanmar and northeastern India, the leaves, buds and stems of C. sinensis are harvested by humans to produce tea, leading to its artificial introduction and cultivation as valuable cash crops in many other parts of the world, with China, India and Kenya being the three largest tea-producing countries.

Tea leaves used to make white tea, yellow tea, green tea, oolong, dark tea (which includes pu'er tea) and black tea are all made from two of the five varieties of C. sinensis that form the bulk of the tea crops now grown, C. sinensis var. sinensis and C. sinensis var. assamica, but are processed differently to attain varying levels of oxidation, with black tea being the most oxidized and white being the least. Kukicha (twig tea) is also made from C. sinensis, but uses only twigs and stems rather than leaves and buds.

Names

The name sinensis is a compound meaning "from China" in Botanical Latin. The two parts are sin from Latin meaning China and -ensis the suffix meaning place of origin.

The generic name Camellia is taken from the Latinized name of Rev. Georg Kamel, SJ (1661–1706), a Moravian-born Jesuit lay brother, pharmacist, and missionary to the Philippines.

Editorial summary

“Camellia sinensis” enters the record as species of plant. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Camellia, sinensis and species can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA sound reference starting point where classification, measurement and the date of the underlying evidence remain visible. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1661, 1706—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Camellia, sinensis and species.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Camellia sinensis” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Camellia, sinensis and species provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 16, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q101815. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1661 and 1706.

Critical limits

Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Camellia sinensis”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Camellia sinensis primary sources, Camellia sinensis archive and Camellia research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Camellia sinensis”?
  2. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
  3. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Camellia sinensis” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.