text:
Molecular mechanisms of neuroplasticity: An expanding universe by N. V. Gulyaeva (237-242).
Biochemical processes in synapses and other neuronal compartments underlie neuroplasticity (functional and structural alterations in the brain enabling adaptation to the environment, learning, memory, as well as rehabilitation after brain injury). This basic molecular level of brain plasticity covers numerous specific proteins (enzymes, receptors, structural proteins, etc.) participating in many coordinated and interacting signal and metabolic processes, their modulation forming a molecular basis for brain plasticity. The articles in this issue are focused on different “hot points” in the research area of biochemical mechanisms supporting neuroplasticity.
Role of atypical protein kinases in maintenance of long-term memory and synaptic plasticity by A. A. Borodinova; A. B. Zuzina; P. M. Balaban (243-256).
Investigation of biochemical mechanisms underlying the long-term storage of information in nervous system is one of main problems of modern neurobiology. As a molecular basis of long-term memory, long-term changes in kinase activities, increase in the level and changes in the subunit composition of receptors in synaptic membranes, local activity of prion-like proteins, and epigenetic modifications of chromatin have been proposed. Perhaps a combination of all or of some of these factors underlies the storage of long-term memory in the brain. Many recent studies have shown an exclusively important role of atypical protein kinases (PKCζ, PKMζ, and PKCι/λ) in processes of learning, consolidation and maintenance of memory. The present review is devoted to consideration of mechanisms of transcriptional and translational control of atypical protein kinases and their roles in induction and maintenance of long-term synaptic plasticity and memory in vertebrates and invertebrates.
Mechanisms of long-term plasticity of hippocampal GABAergic synapses by A. V. Rozov; F. F. Valiullina; A. P. Bolshakov (257-263).
Long-term potentiation and depression of synaptic transmission have been considered as cellular mechanisms of memory in studies conducted in recent decades. These studies were predominantly focused on mechanisms underlying plasticity at excitatory synapses. Nevertheless, normal central nervous system functioning requires maintenance of a balance between inhibition and excitation, suggesting existence of similar modulation of glutamatergic and GABAergic synapses. Here we review the involvement of G-protein-coupled receptors in the generation of long-term changes in synaptic transmission of inhibitory synapses. We considered the role of endocannabinoid and glutamate systems, GABAB and opioid receptors in the induction of long-term potentiation and long-term depression in inhibitory synapses. The preand postsynaptic effects of activation of these receptors are also discussed.
Modulating effect of cytokines on mechanisms of synaptic plasticity in the brain by S. G. Levin; O. V. Godukhin (264-274).
After accumulation of data showing that resident brain cells (neurons, astrocytes, and microglia) produce mediators of the immune system, such as cytokines and their receptors under normal physiological conditions, a critical need emerged for investigating the role of these mediators in cognitive processes. The major problem for understanding the functional role of cytokines in the mechanisms of synaptic plasticity, de novo neurogenesis, and learning and memory is the small number of investigated cytokines. Existing concepts are based on data from just three proinflammatory cytokines: interleukin-1 beta, interleukin-6, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha. The amount of information in the literature on the functional role of antiinflammatory cytokines in the mechanisms of synaptic plasticity and cognitive functions of mature mammalian brain is dismally low. However, they are of principle importance for understanding the mechanisms of local information processing in the brain, since they modulate the activity of individual cells and local neural networks, being able to reconstruct the processes of synaptic plasticity and intercellular communication, in general, depending on the local ratio of the levels of different cytokines in certain areas of the brain. Understanding the functional role of cytokines in cellular mechanisms of information processing and storage in the brain would allow developing preventive and therapeutic means for the treatment of neuropathologies related to impairment of these mechanisms.
Neonatal proinflammatory stress induces accumulation of corticosterone and interleukin-6 in the hippocampus of juvenile rats: Potential mechanism of synaptic plasticity impairments by M. V. Onufriev; S. V. Freiman; D. I. Peregud; I. V. Kudryashova; A. O. Tishkina; M. Yu. Stepanichev; N. V. Gulyaeva (275-281).
Infectious diseases in early postnatal ontogenesis can induce neuroinflammation, disrupt normal central nervous system development, and contribute to pathogenesis of cerebral pathologies in adults. To study long-term consequences of such early stress, we induced neonatal proinflammatory stress (NPS) by injecting bacterial lipopolysaccharide into rat pups on postnatal days 3 and 5 and then assessed the levels of corticosterone, proinflammatory cytokines and their mRNAs, and neurotrophins and their mRNAs in the hippocampus and neocortex of the one-month-old animals. Long-term potentiation (LTP) was studied in hippocampal slices as an index of synaptic plasticity. NPS-induced impairments of LTP were accompanied by the accumulation of corticosterone and IL-6 in the hippocampus. In the neocortex, a decrease in exon IV BDNF mRNA was detected. We suggest that excessive corticosterone delivery to hippocampal receptors and proinflammatory changes persisting during brain maturation are among the principal molecular mechanisms responsible for NPSinduced neuroplasticity impairments.
Status epilepticus impairs synaptic plasticity in rat hippocampus and is followed by changes in expression of NMDA receptors by T. Y. Postnikova; O. E. Zubareva; A. A. Kovalenko; K. K. Kim; L. G. Magazanik; A. V. Zaitsev (282-290).
Cognitive deficits and memory loss are frequent in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy. Persistent changes in synaptic efficacy are considered as a cellular substrate underlying memory processes. Electrophysiological studies have shown that the properties of short-term and long-term synaptic plasticity in the cortex and hippocampus may undergo substantial changes after seizures. However, the neural mechanisms responsible for these changes are not clear. In this study, we investigated the properties of short-term and long-term synaptic plasticity in rat hippocampal slices 24 h after pentylenetetrazole (PTZ)-induced status epilepticus. We found that the induction of long-term potentiation (LTP) in CA1 pyramidal cells is reduced compared to the control, while short-term facilitation is increased. The experimental results do not support the hypothesis that status epilepticus leads to background potentiation of hippocampal synapses and further LTP induction becomes weaker due to occlusion, as the dependence of synaptic responses on the strength of input stimulation was not different in the control and experimental animals. The decrease in LTP can be caused by impairment of molecular mechanisms of neuronal plasticity, including those associated with NMDA receptors and/or changes in their subunit composition. Realtime PCR demonstrated significant increases in the expression of GluN1 and GluN2A subunits 3 h after PTZ-induced status epilepticus. The overexpression of obligate GluN1 subunit suggests an increase in the total number of NMDA receptors in the hippocampus. A 3-fold increase in the expression of the GluN2B subunit observed 24 h after PTZ-induced status epilepticus might be indicative of an increase in the proportion of GluN2B-containing NMDA receptors. Increased expression of the GluN2B subunit may be a cause for reducing the magnitude of LTP at hippocampal synapses after status epilepticus.
Role of nerve growth factor in plasticity of forebrain cholinergic neurons by N. K. Isaev; E. V. Stelmashook; E. E. Genrikhs (291-300).
Neuronal plastic rearrangements during the development and functioning of neurons are largely regulated by trophic factors, including nerve growth factor (NGF). NGF is also involved in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease. In the brain, NGF is produced in structures innervated by basal forebrain cholinergic neurons and retrogradely transported along the axons to the bodies of cholinergic neurons. NGF is essential for normal development and functioning of the basal forebrain; it affects formation of the dendritic tree and modulates the activities of choline acetyltransferase and acetylcholinesterase in basal forebrain neurons. The trophic effect of NGF is mediated through its interactions with TrkA and p75 receptors. Experimental and clinical studies have shown that brain levels of NGF are altered in various pathologies. However, the therapeutic use of NGF is limited by its poor ability to penetrate the blood–brain barrier, adverse side effects that are due to the pleiotropic action of this factor, and the possibility of immune response to NGF. For this reason, the development of gene therapy methods for treating NGF deficit-associated pathologies is of particular interest. Another approach is creation of low molecular weight NGF mimetics that would interact with the corresponding receptors and display high biological activity but be free of the unfavorable effects of NGF.
Interplay between brain BDNF and glutamatergic systems: A brief state of the evidence and association with the pathogenesis of depression by N. V. Gulyaeva (301-307).
The excitatory neurotransmitter glutamate system and the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) system are principally involved in phenomena of cellular and synaptic plasticity. These systems are interacting, and disclosing mechanisms of such interactions is critically important for understanding the machinery of neuroplasticity and its modulation in normal and pathological situations. The short state of evidence in this review addresses experimentally confirmed connections of these mechanisms and their potential relation to the pathogenesis of depression. The connections between the two systems are numerous and bidirectional, providing for mutual regulation of the glutamatergic and BDNF systems. The available data suggest that it is complex and well-coordinating nature of these connections that secures optimal synaptic and cellular plasticity in the normal brain. Both systems are associated with the pathogenesis of depression, and the disturbance of tight and well-balanced associations between them results in unfavorable changes in neuronal plasticity underlying depressive disorders and other mood diseases.
Neurotrophic factors (BDNF and GDNF) and the serotonergic system of the brain by N. K. Popova; T. V. Ilchibaeva; V. S. Naumenko (308-317).
Neurotrophic factors play a key role in development, differentiation, synaptogenesis, and survival of neurons in the brain as well as in the process of their adaptation to external influences. The serotonergic (5-HT) system is another major factor in the development and neuroplasticity of the brain. In the present review, the results of our own research as well as data provided in the corresponding literature on the interaction of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) with the 5-HT-system of the brain are considered. Attention is given to comparison of BDNF and GDNF, the latter belonging to a different family of neurotrophic factors and being mainly considered as a dopaminergic system controller. Data cited in this review show that: (i) BDNF and GDNF interact with the 5-HT-system of the brain through feedback mechanisms engaged in autoregulation of the complex involving 5-HT-system and neurotrophic factors; (ii) GDNF, as well as BDNF, stimulates the growth of 5-HT neurons and affects the expression of key genes of the brain 5-HT-system–those coding tryptophan hydroxylase-2 and 5-HT1A and 5-HT2A receptors. In turn, 5-HT affects the expression of genes that control BDNF and GDNF in brain structures; (iii) the difference between BDNF and GDNF is manifested in different levels and relative distribution of expression of these factors in brain structures (BDNF expression is highest in hippocampus and cortex, GDNF expression in the striatum), in varying reaction of 5-HT2A receptors on BDNF and GDNF administration, and in different effects on certain types of behavior.
Impact of changes in neurotrophic supplementation on development of Alzheimer’s disease-like pathology in OXYS rats by E. A. Rudnitskaya; N. G. Kolosova; N. A. Stefanova (318-329).
Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is the most common type of age-related dementia. The development of neurodegeneration in AD is closely related to alterations in neurotrophic supplementation of the brain, which may be caused either by disorder of neurotrophin metabolism or by modification of its availability due to changes in the microenvironment of neurons. The underlying mechanisms are not fully understood. In this work, we used senescence-accelerated OXYS rats as a unique model of the sporadic form of AD to examine the relationship of development of AD signs and changes in neurotrophic supplementation of the cortex. Based on comparative analysis of the transcriptome of the frontal cerebral cortex of OXYS and Wistar (control) rats, genes of a neurotrophin signaling pathway with different mRNA levels in the period prior to the development of AD-like pathology in OXYS rats (20 days) and in the period of its active manifestation (5 months) and progression (18 months) were identified. The most significant changes in mRNA levels in the cortex of OXYS rats occurred in the period from 5 to 18 months of age. These genes were associated with neurogenesis, neuronal differentiation, synaptic plasticity, and immune response. The results were compared to changes in the levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), its receptors TrkB and p75NTR, as well as with patterns of their colocalization, which reveal the balance of proneurotrophins and mature neurotrophins and their receptors. We found that alterations in neurotrophic balance indicating increased apoptosis precede the development of AD-like pathology in OXYS rats. Manifestation of AD-like pathology occurs against a background of activation of compensatory and regenerative processes including increased neurotrophic supplementation. Active progression of AD-like pathology in OXYS rats is accompanied by the suppression of activity of the neurotrophin system. Thus, the results confirm the importance of the neurotrophin system as a potential target for development of new approaches to slow age-related alterations in brain and AD development.
Brain mitochondrial subproteome of Rpn10-binding proteins and its changes induced by the neurotoxin MPTP and the neuroprotector isatin by A. E. Medvedev; O. A. Buneeva; A. T. Kopylov; O. V. Tikhonova; M. V. Medvedeva; L. N. Nerobkova; I. G. Kapitsa; V. G. Zgoda (330-339).
Mitochondria play an important role in molecular mechanisms of neuroplasticity, adaptive changes of the brain that occur in the structure and function of its cells in response to altered physiological conditions or development of pathological disorders. Mitochondria are a crucial target for actions of neurotoxins, causing symptoms of Parkinson’s disease in various experimental animal models, and also neuroprotectors. Good evidence exists in the literature that mitochondrial dysfunction induced by the neurotoxin 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP) influences functioning of the ubiquitin-proteasomal system (UPS) responsible for selective proteolytic degradation of proteins from various intracellular compartments (including mitochondria), and neuroprotective effects of certain antiparkinsonian agents (monoamine oxidase inhibitors) may be associated with their effects on UPS. The 19S proteasomal Rpn10 subunit is considered as a ubiquitin receptor responsible for delivery of ubiquitinated proteins to the proteasome proteolytic machinery. In this study, we investigated proteomic profiles of mouse brain mitochondrial Rpn10-binding proteins, brain monoamine oxidase B (MAO B) activity, and their changes induced by a single-dose administration of the neurotoxin MPTP and the neuroprotector isatin. Administration of isatin to mice prevented MPTP-induced inactivation of MAO B and influenced the profile of brain mitochondrial Rpn10-binding proteins, in which two pools of proteins were clearly recognized. The constitutive pool was insensitive to neurotoxic/neuroprotective treatments, while the variable pool was specifically influenced by MPTP and the neuroprotector isatin. Taking into consideration that the neuroprotective dose of isatin used in this study can result in brain isatin concentrations that are proapoptotic for cells in vitro, the altered repertoire of mitochondrial Rpn10-binding proteins may thus represent a part of a switch mechanism from targeted elimination of individual (damaged) proteins to more efficient (“global”) elimination of damaged organelles and whole damaged cells.
Optogenetic stimulation increases level of antiapoptotic protein Bcl-xL in Neurons by D. A. Lanshakov; U. S. Drozd; N. N. Dygalo (340-344).
The antiapoptotic protein Bcl-xL is associated with several neuroplastic processes such as formation of synapses, regulation of spontaneous and evoked synaptic responses, and release of neurotransmitters. Dependence of expression on activity of neurons is characteristic for many proteins participating in regulation of neuroplasticity. Whether such property is exhibited by the Bcl-xL protein was analyzed using in vivo optogenetic stimulation of hippocampal glutamatergic neurons expressing channelrhodopsin ChR2H134 under CAMKIIa promoter in the adeno-associated viral vector, followed by immunohistochemical determination of the level of Bcl-xL protein in these neurons and surrounding cells. Increase in the level of early response c-Fos protein following illumination with blue light was indicative of activation of these hippocampal neurons. The optogenetic activation of hippocampus resulted in a significant increase in the level of antiapoptotic protein Bcl-xL in the photosensitive neurons as well as in the surrounding cells. The dependence of the level of expression of Bcl-xL protein on the activity of neurons indicates that this protein possesses one more important property that is essential for participation in neuroplastic processes in the brain.
Effects of short-term exposure to lithium on antiapoptotic Bcl-xL protein expression in cortex and hippocampus of rats after acute stress by N. N. Dygalo; A. V. Bannova; E. V. Sukhareva; G. T. Shishkina; K. A. Ayriyants; T. S. Kalinina (345-350).
The antiapoptotic protein Bcl-xL is involved in development of neurobiological resilience to stress; hence, the possibility of use of psychotropic drugs to increase its expression in brain in response to stress is of considerable interest. Lithium is a neurotropic drug widely used in psychiatry. In work, we studied effects of lithium administration (for 2 or 7 days) on the expression of Bcl-xL mRNA and protein in the hippocampi and cortices of rats subjected to stress that induced depression-like behavior in the animals. In contrast to the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), whose expression decreased in the hippocampus in response to acute stress, stress increased the level of Bcl-xL mRNA in the hippocampus, but decreased it in the frontal cortex. Treatment of stressed animals with lithium for 2 or 7 days increased Bcl-xL protein levels 1.5-fold in the hippocampus, but it decreased them in the cortex. Therefore, Bcl-xL expression in the brain can be modulated by both stress and psychotropic drugs, and the effects of these factors are brain region-specific: both stress exposure and lithium administration activated Bcl-xL expression in the hippocampus and suppressed it in the frontal cortex. The activation of Bcl-xL expression in the hippocampus by lithium, demonstrated for the first time in this study, suggests an important role of this protein in the therapeutic effects of lithium in the treatment of stress-induced psychoemotional disorders.
Mechanisms of brain glucocorticoid resistance in stress-induced psychopathologies by V. M. Merkulov; T. I. Merkulova; N. P. Bondar (351-365).
Exposure to stress activates the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis and leads to increased levels of glucocorticoid (GC) hormones. Prolonged elevation of GC levels causes neuronal dysfunction, decreases the density of synapses, and impairs neuronal plasticity. Decreased sensitivity to glucocorticoids (glucocorticoid resistance) that develops as a result of chronic stress is one of the characteristic features of stress-induced psychopathologies. In this article, we reviewed the published data on proposed molecular mechanisms that contribute to the development of glucocorticoid resistance in brain, including changes in the expression of the glucocorticoid receptor (GR) gene, biosynthesis of GR isoforms, and GR posttranslational modifications. We also present data on alterations in the expression of the FKBP5 gene encoding the main component of cell ultra-short negative feedback loop of GC signaling regulation. Recent discoveries on stressand GRinduced changes in epigenetic modification patterns as well as normalizing action of antidepressants are discussed. GR and FKBP5 gene polymorphisms associated with stress-induced psychopathologies are described, and their role in glucocorticoid resistance is discussed.
Cooperative synthesis of dopamine in rat mediobasal hypothalamus as a compensatory mechanism in hyperprolactinemia by A. U. Kurina; T. S. Pronina; L. K. Dilmukhametova; G. V. Maleev; M. V. Ugrumov (366-372).
Dopamine (DA), synthesized in the mediobasal hypothalamus by dopaminergic neurons containing two enzymes of DA synthesis–tyrosine hydroxylase and decarboxylase of aromatic L-amino acids, or by monoenzymatic non-dopaminergic neurons containing one DA synthesis enzyme in cooperation, is known to have an inhibitory effect on prolactin secretion. Deterioration of this inhibitory control leads to an increase in prolactin concentration in the blood and to the development of hyperprolactinemia syndrome. In a rat model of hyperprolactinemia induced by administration of a neurotoxin causing degeneration of dopaminergic and noradrenergic neurons, the level of DA first decreases, leading to an increase in prolactin level (decompensation stage), while later both levels are restored to normal (compensation stage). However, the mechanism of such compensation is still not clear. The aim of the present study was to analyze whether the increase in cooperative synthesis of DA by monoenzymatic neurons during hyperprolactinemia is a manifestation of a compensatory mechanism representing a particular case of neuroplasticity. The level of cooperative synthesis in the hyperprolactinemia model and in the control was estimated as the level of synthesis of DA and L-dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-DOPA)–an intermediate product of DA synthesis, when L-DOPA transfer from neurons containing tyrosine hydroxylase into neurons containing aromatic L-amino acid decarboxylase is inhibited. The level of DA synthesis during the decompensation stage was not changed, while during the compensation stage it was lower than the control. Along with a reduction in DA level, during the compensation stage an increase in the extracellular L-DOPA level in the medium was detected. Thus, the compensation of DA deficiency after degeneration of dopaminergic neurons in the mediobasal hypothalamus is due to the increase in cooperative synthesis of DA by monoenzymatic neurons containing one of the complementary enzymes of the DA synthesis pathway.
Plasticity of central and peripheral sources of noradrenaline in rats during ontogenesis by N. S. Bondarenko; L. K. Dilmukhametova; A. Yu. Kurina; A. R. Murtazina; A. Ya. Sapronova; A. P. Sysoeva; M. V. Ugrumov (373-379).
The morphogenesis of individual organs and the whole organism occurs under the control of intercellular chemical signals mainly during the perinatal period of ontogenesis in rodents. In this study, we tested our hypothesis that the biologically active concentration of noradrenaline (NA) in blood in perinatal ontogenesis of rats is maintained due to humoral interaction between its central and peripheral sources based on their plasticity. As one of the mechanisms of plasticity, we examined changes in the secretory activity (spontaneous and stimulated release of NA) of NA-producing organs under deficiency of its synthesis in the brain. The destruction of NA-ergic neurons was provoked by administration of a hybrid molecular complex–antibodies against dopamine-β-hydroxylase associated with the cytotoxin saporin–into the lateral cerebral ventricles of neonatal rats. We found that 72 h after the inhibition of NA synthesis in the brain, its spontaneous release from hypothalamus increased, which was most likely due to a compensatory increase of NA secretion from surviving neurons and can be considered as one of the mechanisms of neuroplasticity aimed at the maintenance of its physiological concentration in peripheral blood. Noradrenaline secretion from peripheral sources (adrenal glands and the organ of Zuckerkandl) also showed a compensatory increase in this model. Thus, during the critical period of morphogenesis, the brain is integrated into the system of NA-producing organs and participates in their reciprocal humoral regulation as manifested in compensatory enhancement of NA secretion in each of the studied sources of NA under specific inhibition of NA production in the brain.
Molecular mechanisms mediating involvement of glial cells in brain plastic remodeling in epilepsy by L. G. Khaspekov; L. E. Frumkina (380-391).
In this review we summarize published data on the involvement of glial cells in molecular mechanisms underlying brain plastic reorganization in epilepsy. The role of astrocytes as glial elements in pathological plasticity in epilepsy is discussed. Data on the involvement of aquaporin-4 in epileptogenic plastic changes and on participation of microglia and extracellular matrix in dysregulation of synaptic transmission and plastic remodeling in epileptic brain tissue are reviewed.
Cerebral mechanisms of hypoxic/ischemic postconditioning by O. V. Vetrovoy; E. A. Rybnikova; M. O. Samoilov (392-400).
This review analyzes recent data on mechanisms of cerebral hypoxia and the protective methods of hypoxic and ischemic postconditioning, as well as their interrelationship with the key mechanisms responsible for neuroprotection and neuroplasticity. Upregulation of expression of antiapoptotic factors and neurotrophins and modulation of activity of several protein kinases and transcription factors such as hypoxia-inducible factor-1 (HIF-1) are considered as the most important aspects in the neuroprotective potential of postconditioning. The presented information indicates substantial transformative promise of the noninvasive techniques of hypoxic postconditioning as well as significant similarity between the adaptive pathways activated by various postconditioning methods, which are far from being fully understood.

matches: V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V.


By ordering an in camera review, a court requires the subpoenaed party to comply with the subpoena. Thus, a reporter can be held in contempt for failing to comply with a court order for in camera review.
If a reporter or publisher does not consent to in camera review, a judge will very likely not grant the motion to quash. Disobeying a judge's order for in camera review also may result in being held in contempt.
Where CBS refused to produce notes and outtakes for in camera review by the trial court in a criminal matter on the ground that such review would impinge its First Amendment-based privilege, the Third Circuit affirmed a citation for civil contempt to the extent that CBS should have produced for in camera inspection those materials as to which the party issuing the subpoena had complied with the limitations of Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c) and had demonstrated that the information sought was not available from another source. Cuthbertson I, 630 F.2d at 148-49.
There is no statutory or case law addressing the consequences of a reporter or publisher’s refusal to consent to an in camera review.
As in any case of non-compliance with a court instruction, a reporter who refuses to consent to an in camera review of subpoenaed materials may be held in contempt, and subjected to a fine or imprisonment. In re Selcraig, 705 F.2d 789, 795 (5th Cir. 1983). In Selcraig, the trial court held a reporter in civil contempt for refusing to answer the judge's questions regarding his confidential sources in camera. Id. at 792. The Fifth Circuit reversed the contempt finding because the subpoenaing party did not demonstrate that the information was necessary to the presentation of his claim. However, it did express approval for the trial court's method of questioning the reporter in camera and suggested that it "serve as a model for any other inquiries." Id. at 799.
If a reporter or publisher does not consent to in camera review the consequences are potential contempt of court with consequent punishment.
There is no Alabama statutory or reported case law addressing the consequences of a reporter refusing to consent to an in camera review.
Alaska appellate courts have not had occasion to squarely address the existence or scope of a reporter's privilege, and the shield law does not directly require or address in camera review. Experience with trial courts addressing privilege issues does not include instances of demands for, or refusal to consent to, in camera review.
If the court orders an in camera review and the reporter or publisher does not consent, it is possible that the reporter or publisher could be subject to a contempt citation, which is appealable as a final order under the Arkansas Rules of Appellate Procedure. However, a motion to quash or for a protective order usually will protect the reporter or publisher from a finding of contempt.
No California statute or case law specifically addresses the consequences of refusing to allow in camera review, although it probably would result in entry of a finding of contempt. However, the California Supreme Court has directed trial courts to stay contempt orders pending appeal. See New York Times Co. v. Superior Court, 51 Cal. 3d 453, 460, 796 P.2d 811, 273 Cal. Rptr. 98 (1990). Consequently, it is unlikely that refusal to allow in camera review would result in immediate execution of the contempt sentence.
While it is difficult to predict how a court would react to a newsperson refusing to comply with a court order, the most likely consequence of such action is a finding of direct contempt under Colo. R. Civ. P. 107; Gordon, 9 P.3d at 1113 (lower court fine of $5,000 for failure to reveal sources overturned). Under Rule 107, penalties can include fine, a fixed prison sentence or both. Likewise, a party or non-party can be sanctioned or fined under Colo. R. Civ. P. 37 if the party seeking the information succeeds in filing a motion to compel. Rule 37(a)(3); see also Todd v. Bear Valley Apartments, 980 P.2d 973 (Colo. 1999).
Neither the Shield Law nor the case law address the consequences of refusing consent.
Failure to obey a subpoena may be deemed a contempt of court. Super. Ct. Civ. R. 45(e).
If the reporter or publisher does not consent to in camera review ordered by the judge, the judge could hold the reporter or publisher in contempt.
There is no Georgia law concerning the consequences of refusing to consent to an in camera review. Generally, in Georgia, a person protected by the privilege at O.C.G.A. § 24-5-508 can seek an immediate, direct appeal if they are ordered to testify or produce documents after invoking the privilege. See generally In re Paul, 270 Ga. 680, 684 (1999).
There is no Hawai'i law regarding the consequences of a reporter's or publisher's refusal to consent to an in camera review.
A refusal to permit an in-camera review potentially exposes the reporter or other media witness to contempt orders or other sanctions. In Idaho, the inherent right of the trial court to enforce its orders through contempt orders has been expressly recognized by the Idaho Supreme Court in many cases, including a case in which a reporter was fined and jailed for refusal to disclose a confidential source. Marks v. Vehlow, 105 Idaho 560, 671 P.2d 473 (1983).
The Statute provides a contempt provision stating that “[a] person refusing to testify or otherwise comply with the order to disclose the source of the information as specified in such order, after such order becomes final, may be adjudged in contempt of court and punished accordingly.” 735 ILCS 5/8-909. In People v. Slover, 323 Ill. App. 3d 620, 753 N.E.2d 554 (2001), the trial court allowed newspaper editor to “purge herself of the contempt finding by delivering all referenced photographs to the [c]ourt for an in camera review”; she “respectfully declined to produce unpublished photographs and requested a sentence in the trial court's discretion to enable her to appeal the trial court's order.” The trial court sentenced the editor to jail, staying the sentence pending an appeal (in which she prevailed). Id. at 622-23, 753 N.E.2d at 556.
There is no case law on this issue, but courts have broad powers to hold people in contempt for failing to obey a court order. See Ind. Code § 34-47-3-1; Ind. Tr. R. 45(F) (giving the court power to hold a person who failed to comply with a subpoena in contempt). In Matter of WTHR-TV (State v. Cline), 693 N.E.2d 1 (Ind. 1998), the media party moved for a stay of the trial court's order for in camera review. The order was stayed pending the appeal. Id. at 5.
Refusal to appear or testify constitutes contempt of court and the refusing individual may be subject to an attachment writ. An individual found in contempt is subject to fines and possibly jail time. Iowa Code § 665.4. If a journalist is found in contempt, the court may issue a mittimus directing the jailer to detain the journalist until the journalist complies with the courts order. In Lamberto, 326 N.W.2d at 306, the journalist was found in contempt and sentenced to jail until he complied with the courts order requiring disclosure of privileged information. The court delayed the mittimus to allow the journalist to seek appellate review in which the journalist succeeded. A party found in contempt may also be liable to the subpoenaing party for consequences of the failure to obey the subpoena plus $50.00 in additional damages. Iowa Code § 622.76.
If the reporter or publisher does not consent to a request for an in-camera review, the likely consequence is a denial of the motion to quash and a possible contempt ruling.
Refusal to consent to in camera review could risk loss of the motion to quash, an order to produce the documents at issue, or sanctions for contempt of court.
There is no case law documenting the consequences of a refusal to consent to an in camera review.
There is no case law on this issue, but courts have broad powers to hold people in contempt for failing to obey a court order.
There are no reported Michigan cases discussing the issue of waiver of the privilege based upon in camera review.
If a district court order is not obeyed, the alternatives are obtaining a stay pending appeal, or risking sanctions for contempt of court.
“Any order requiring an in camera disclosure ... may be appealed ... in the procedural manner provided by the Rules of Appellate Procedure.” Rule 11-514(D) NMRA. The “procedural manner provided by the Rules of Appellate Procedure” is presumably the “writ of error,” which codifies the collateral-order doctrine. Allowance of an appeal under this doctrine is purely discretionary with the appellate court. See Rule 12-503(L) NMRA.
A reporter refusing to comply with an order requiring in camera review can be (and almost certainly will be) held in contempt of court, even if the court's order was erroneously issued. Massengill v. Lee, 228 N.C. 35, 44 S.E.2d 356, 358 (N.C. 1947); Midgett v. Crystal Dawn Corp., 58 N.C. App. 734, 294 S.E.2d 386 (N.C. App. 1982); Godsey v. Poe, 36 N.C. App. 682, 245 S.E.2d 522, 524 (N.C. App. 1978). The only way to contest an order requiring in camera review, which is interlocutory in nature and not subject to direct appeal, is to seek a writ of certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition from the appellate courts under the applicable rules of appellate procedure. Otherwise, an appeal will lie from a finding of contempt.
If the reporter or publisher does not consent to an in camera review the court can still order an in camera review.
Refusal to consent to in camera review has no effect under the statute on the right to review by an appellate court, other than perhaps the impact on the good will of the court, from whom a stay pending the filing of a writ application (see ¶ VIII below) will be sought in the first instance.
No Oregon statute or case specifically addresses this, but it would probably result in a finding of contempt.
As a practical matter the consequence of refusal will likely be a denial of the motion to quash. I would argue that just as in camera review is not the norm in cases involving the assertion of attorney-client privilege, it should not be required in journalist privilege cases.
The Tennessee Court of Appeals has held that the shield law statute does not allow for in camera review. State v. Shaffer, No. 89-208-II, 1990 WL 3347,1990 Tenn. App. LEXIS 21, 17 Med. L. Rptr. 3347 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1990). Thus, the issue of refusing in camera review should not come up. Nevertheless, journalists should be aware that they may be held in contempt for violating a court order, whether or not that order is proper.
If the court orders an in camera review and the journalist does not comply, there is a possibility that the motion will be denied and the journalists will be held in contempt.
If a reporter or publisher refuses to consent to an in camera review ordered by the trial court judge or the Vermont Supreme Court, he or she could be held in contempt of court. 12 V.S.A. §§ 121-22 (2003). Judgments of contempt lie within the discretion of the trial court judge. Obolensky v. Trombley, 2015 VT 34, ¶ 42, 115 A.3d 1016 (Vt. 2015). The Vermont Supreme Court has held that requiring a person held in contempt to pay the attorneys’ fees of the other party is not usually warranted, because a “defendant’s right to compel a newsreporter’s testimony has not been clearly defined.” State v. Gundlah, 160 Vt. 193, 197, 624 A.2d 328, 370 (1993). Additionally, the use of prospective fines by trial court judges against reporters or publishers is not favored in Vermont. Id.
It is likely that a reporter or publisher that does not consent to an in camera review would be held in contempt of court.
West Virginia courts have not addressed the consequences of a reporter who refuses to consent to an in camera review of requested material. Pragmatically speaking, however, if an interlocutory appeal from an order mandating an in camera review is taken, acceptance of a Petition for Writ of Prohibition by the state Supreme Court effectively operates to stay the order.
There are no reported cases in Wyoming in which the subpoenaed party has refused to turn materials over for an in camera inspection. However, the refusing party would likely be held to be in contempt of court or face the prospect of having its motion to quash denied.


text:
Certain plants can benefit others when planted in close proximity or used as botanical pesticides. This publication discusses the scientific and traditional basis for companion planting associations including trap cropping, weed suppression, physical-spatial interactions, and other relationships. It provides a companion planting chart for common herbs, vegetables, and flowers, as well as a listing of literature resources. An appendix provides information on the Three Sisters, a traditional Native American companion planting practice.
Companion planting can be described as establishing two or more plant species in close proximity for some cultural benefit (such as pest control or higher yield). The concept embraces a number of strategies that increase the biodiversity of agroecosystems (Cunningham, 1998).
Generally, companion planting is thought of as a small-scale gardening practice. However, here the term is applied in its broadest sense to include applications to commercial horticultural and agronomic crops. ATTRA has another publication, Intercropping Principles and Practices, that provides additional information on larger-scale applications.
Although companion planting has a long history, the mechanisms of beneficial plant interaction have not always been well understood. Traditional recommendations (see Table 1) used by gardeners have evolved from an interesting combination of historical observation, horticultural science, and a few unconventional sources. For example, some of the recommendations for companion planting, made around the middle of the 20th century, were based on the results of sensitive crystallization tests (Philbrick and Gregg, 1966).
A step beyond companion planting is using botanically based pesticides. Companion planting is a passive approach, while botanical sprays are more intensive. Both rely on phytochemicals in the host plant being different from the companion plant, or the one being treated. One consideration for using a botanical spray that is different from simply planting a companion is that the botanical spray may affect the host plant's development (Tavares et al., 2011). The same can be said of synthetic pesticides (Spiers et al., 2008).
Brassica includes arugula, bok choi, broccoli, brussels sprouts, cabbage, cauliflower, collards, horseradish, kale, kohlrabi, mizuna, mustards, nasturtium, radish, and turnip.
Allium includes chives, garlic, leeks, onions, scallions, and shallots.
Science has routinely provided evidence that supports some facets of sustainable agriculture, like companion planting. While the scientists may not call their work companion planting per se, the results of their work show that there is potential for home gardeners and small farms to capitalize on the natures of plants to affect each other's growth. Whether these plants harbor beneficial insects, release nutrients advantageous to another crop's growth, or simply provide a buffer against the elements to tender seedlings, the tenets of companion planting have been shown repeatedly through rigorous scientific experimentation to be beneficial to planting systems.
Sometimes, a neighboring crop may be selected because it is more attractive to pests and serves to distract them from the main crop. An excellent example of this is the use of collards to draw the diamondback moth away from cabbage (Mitchell et al., 2000).
Trap cropping breaks into several sub-categories: Conventional, Sequential, Multiple, Push-Pull, Dead-End, Perimeter, Semiochemically Assisted, Biological Control-Assisted and Genetically Modified Trap Cropping (Shelton and Badenes- Perez, 2006). Trap crops should be as healthy as possible to ensure their desirability to their targeted pest species (Mizell et al., 2008).
Conventional Trap-Cropping is simply planting a low-value crop that is more attractive to pests than the adjacent higher value crop, as in the example of the diamondback moth, above. The classic and most economically beneficial example of this is attracting Lygus bugs away from cotton fields by planting alfalfa nearby (Godfrey and Leigh, 1994). The alfalfa must be kept physiologically young with repeated mowing in order for it to remain attractive to Lygus throughout the season. Trap crops are often destroyed as a means of pest control (Hokkanen, 1991).
Sequential Trap Cropping uses time to separate pests from valuable crops. Escape by time is already a common practice in sustainable agriculture (Feeny, 1976) so it makes sense that time is also used in trap cropping. Trap crops are planted ahead of the main crop, and the timing of these traps crops can be critical. For example, in one study, strawberry seedlings planted alone had a 43% mortality rate from wireworms, strawberry seedlings planted two weeks before being intercropped with wheat had a 27% mortality rate, and strawberry seedlings only had a 5% mortality rate when wheat was planted eight days in advance (Vernon et al., 2000). This set-up could also be considered a nurse crop in a sense. Usually nurse crops protect from climatic adversity, but in this case the nurse crop is protecting the strawberry seedlings from attack by wireworms.
Multiple Trap Cropping usually involves several different species of crops to maintain attractiveness to the pest throughout the growth cycle of the crop (Hokkanen, 1989). One such system, recommended by researchers at the University of Florida for controlling stink bugs and leaf-footed bugs, is to grow Triticale, Sorghum, Pennisetum (millet), buckwheat, and sunflowers around the perimeter of the cash crop (Mizell et al., 2008).
Push-Pull Trap Cropping combines an attractant border crop with a repellant intercrop to protect crops from pests. The most successful version of this method was developed in Kenya to reduce damage from boring insects in corn. They use a legume, Desmodium, to repel pests (and also fix more than 300 pounds of nitrogen per acre) (Whitney, 1966) and use Pennisetum as an attractant (Pickett et al., 2014). This technology has been adopted by more than 10,000 farmers (Khan et al., 2014). Also known as stimulo-deterrent trap cropping (Miller and Cowles, 1990), this idea represents a revolutionary option for organic and sustainable producers. Not only is it easily adapted, but it also has strong foundations in scientific research.
Dead-End Trap Cropping is most useful when positioned to buffer crops from adjacent pest sources, as with other trap-crop techniques (Shelton and Badenes-Perez, 2006). In Dead-Ending, the trap crop is attractive to the target pest but the larvae are unable to complete their life cycle on the trap crop. One example is the use of Crotalaria juncea to attract the pod-boring Maruca vitrata away from such crops as cowpeas, pigeon peas, and soybeans and kill 50-100% of their larvae (Jackai and Singh, 1983).
Semiochemically Assisted Trap Cropping makes use of pheromones rather than kairomones (Shelton and Badenes-Perez, 2006). Semiochemicals are chemicals that carry a message, while a kairomone is a semiochemical that may not benefit its emitter. Plants emit kairomones and insects benefit from them in some way, such as using the plant as a food source. Pheromones, on the other hand, are semiochemicals that affect members of the same species; e.g., mating semiochemicals from receptive females alerting males to their receptivity. In field applications, these chemicals can be used to draw pests away from the cash crop to be destroyed in the trap crop. For example, one experiment found that an application of Dimethyl Disulfide attracted predators of the cabbage root fly, Delia radicum, resulting in a 60% egg mortality rate (Kergunteuil et al., 2012). This research also showed potential for (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate, a kairomone released from damaged leaves that encourages pest oviposition, to be used in trap cropping. From their work, we can surmise that mechanically bruised crops will encourage females to deposit their eggs in the damaged area, which could then be sprayed or otherwise destroyed, leaving the main body of the crop relatively pest-free. The drawbacks of using semiochemicals are that they can be expensive and hard to find for specific pests. For example, none exist, as of yet, for stinkbug pests (Mizell et al., 2008). Rincon Vitova (www.rinconvitova.com) has semiochemicals for some other pests available for purchase.
Biological Control-Assisted Trap Cropping (BCATP) combines concepts of farmscaping and trap cropping. Trap cropping makes use of the verges of the fields to draw pest populations away from crops. BCATP not only draws the pests but also their natural enemies. These trap crops also serve as sources of biological controls for adjacent fields, to further reduce pest incidence. One example is cotton bollworms being controlled by predators in sorghum plots adjacent to cotton fields (Tillman and Mullinix, 2004; Virk et al., 2004).
Genetically Modified Trap Cropping makes use of GMO traits to assist in crop protection. Crops with the Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) trait can be planted earlier than conventional crops to collect migrating pests that cannot survive the toxins produced by the plants. When the conventional crops are planted, they will be under much less pest pressure due to the early generations of the pest population being wiped out by the transgenic trait (Cao et al., 2005). The erosion of Bt trait efficacy may lead to reduction in the amount of pests destroyed by this method (Tabashnik et al., 2013). For more information on GMO traits, please refer to the ATTRA publication Transgenic Crops.
Legumes - such as peas, beans, and clover - have the ability to fix atmospheric nitrogen for their own use and for the benefit of neighboring plants via symbiotic relationships with Rhizobium and Bradyrhizobium bacteria. One example of a crop benefiting from interplanted legumes is that of beans and potatoes. Potatoes are known to be heavy nitrogen feeders. In one experiment, potatoes were planted with beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) or with corn. While the corn, also being a heavy feeder, was shown to reduce potato-tuber size, beans did the opposite (Manorama and Lal, 2010). Similarly, forage legumes are commonly seeded with grasses to reduce the need for nitrogen fertilizer. Likewise, fava beans are sometimes interplanted with corn. Some research indicates that this companion-planting duo is beneficial in desert reclamation where both nitrogen and phosphorous levels are low (Mei et al., 2012).
Another use for legumes is as a green manure crop. Green manures are crops that are grown to be killed and then incorporated into the soil, or left as mulch to increase soil organic matter and, in this case of legumes, nitrogen. A Canadian study showed that by incorporating grazing sheep into the rotation, soil nitrogen could be increased, as well as the animals' weight-gain (Cicek et al., 2014).
One other benefit of legumes and other vining crops, such as cucurbits, is the suppression of weeds. A well-known example is the role squash plays in the Three Sisters Method of growing beans, corn, and squash. In this situation, the squash plants' prostrate vines form a dense canopy and smother weed competition. Other companion growing systems have also used corn but exchanged squash for Desmodium, which has a three-fold role. First, it suppresses Striga, a parasitic vine that devastatingly reduces corn yields in Africa. Inclusion of a Desmodium companion crop triples corn yield over corn planted in monocrop. It appears that Striga germination is suppressed by the presence of Desmodium. Next, the Desmodium fixes nitrates for the corn crop, which also lowers input needs. Third, the Desmodium is a forage legume that provides producers with a secondary source of income in the form of fodder once the corn crop is finished. This system has but one draw-back: it is highly labor-intensive, requiring twice the labor of corn monoculture. In short, it's twice the work yet triple the revenue per acre (Midega et al., 2014). Another unmentioned benefit could have been the manipulation of the root zone to benefit the corn plants. Although Striga is an African problem, U.S. producers can adapt the methodology that African producers use to address similar challenges here.
In a recent study, researchers failed to find conclusive results as to whether organic production reduced weed seeds through soil microbial action (Ullrich et al., 2011). From our own experiences, we have found that in organic production, weed-seed persistence is reduced by cover crops in rotation providing a dense canopy when the weed seeds are germinating. This dense canopy starves the weed seedlings from light and thus kills them. This method takes quite a while, but over the course of a few cycles, pernicious weeds like Amaranth, nutsedge, and Bermuda grass can be reduced. One must remember that organic agriculture is an intricate system that utilizes the harmonious balances in nature for human benefit. Attempting to pick it apart like a machine may not give the desired results.
Companion plants can act as living mulches. One of our favorite combinations is that of broccoli and crimson clover. Research in Hawaii showed that this combination increases the amount of spiders that patrol the broccoli plants to control pests (Hooks et al., 2007), but what we value is the way the clover protects soil moisture and keeps the soil cooler for the broccoli. In addition to cooling the soil, a companion cover crop can improve other factors-tilth, soil structure, runoff control, and water-holding capacity-and also build up soil organic matter (Hartwig and Ammon, 2002; Folorunso et al., 1992). In gardening situations where deciduous trees are nearby, the canopy provides shade for sun-tender vegetables, but more importantly the leaf litter adds potassium and carbon to the soil. The increased organic carbon content in turn increases water-holding capacities and Cationic Exchange Capacity, or CEC. Thus, trees contribute to soil carbon sequestration in two ways: first they add carbon through leaf decomposition and then protect it from volatile decomposition by shading the material, not counting the carbon the trees acquire in growth. If the tree is a nitrogen-fixing legume, then there is also an increase in soil nitrates (Tanga et al., 2014). The presence of either trees or cover crops allows mycorrhiza populations to build up in the soil as well (Augé, 2001). Mychorrhiza are soil fungi that form mutually beneficial associations with plant roots. They can harvest nutrients for plants and even water in time of drought (Kaya et al., 2003). This is particularly useful in vineyards and orchards (Linderman and Davis, 2001; Schreiner, 2004). Mychorrhizal colonization can even influence visits by pollinators (Barber and Soper Gorden, 2014). Mychorrhiza-treated tomatoes showed more total yield and more marketable yield than tomatoes without mycorrhiza treatment (Candido et al., 2015). Mycorrhiza must have plant roots to join with, so intercropping cover crops with vegetables or permanent plantings allows a grower to extend the reach of the mychorrhizal hyphae throughout the garden or farm. For more information on mycorrhiza, consult the ATTRA publication Mushroom Cultivation and Marketing.
As mentioned above, some plants exude chemicals from roots or aerial parts that suppress or repel pests and protect neighboring plants. Certain marigolds, for example, release thiophene-a nematode repellent-making marigold a good companion for a number of garden crops (Marotti et al., 2010). The manufacture and release by a plant of certain biochemicals, known as allelochemicals, can negatively impact the growth of other plants. Allelochemicals such as juglone-found in black walnut- suppress the growth of a wide range of other plants, which often creates a problem in home horticulture. The means by which this suppression occurs is mitosis inhibition, which in turn reduces meristematic activity. In short, the juglone acts as a growth retardant on other plants by interfering with the ability of the cells to divide (Babula et al., 2014).
A positive use of plant allelopathy is the use of mow-killed grain rye as a mulch. The allelochemicals that leach from rye residue prevent weed germination but do not harm transplanted tomatoes, broccoli, or many other vegetables. Rye can be flattened with a roller-crimper and crops such as melons can be transplanted into the residue. In this manner, melon yield is enhanced, weed pressures are lowered, and the soil is protected by the rye mulch from both desiccation and erosion (Ciaccia et al., 2015). Rye is known to have 16 different allelopathic chemicals (Schulz et al., 2013) and is considered one of the best crops for weed seed suppression (Jabran et al., 2015).
In one example of such an interaction, tallgrowing, sun-loving plants may share space with lower-growing, shade-tolerant species, resulting in higher total yields from the land. Spatial interaction can also yield pest-control benefits. The diverse canopy resulting when corn is companion- planted with squash or pumpkins is believed by proponents of Three Sisters planting to disorient the adult squash vine borer and protect the vining crop from this damaging pest. In turn, the presence of the prickly squash vines is widely believed to discourage raccoons from ravaging the sweet corn. Besides the classic corn example, there is also supporting research that shows that in a cowpea-sorghum companion planting, cowpeas were protected from the striped bean weevil due to the physical barrier of the tillering sorghum (Amoako-Atta, 1983).
We often think of the benefits of companion planting as limited to reducing pests, but it can also be effective in reducing plant diseases. In a pea-grain intercrop, Ascochyta blight severity was significantly reduced although there was no change in disease development. The grain intercrop modified the canopy microclimate by making it less humid, and it also reduced the raindrop splash effect, the means by which the disease spores are spread (Schoeny et al., 2008). Canopy microclimate can also influence insect development. Temperature changes due to canopy architecture caused moths to develop three days faster in a compact canopy versus a more open one (Kührt et al., 2006). More on spatial arrangement can be found in the ATTRA publication Intercropping Principles and Practices.
Tall or dense-canopied plants may protect more vulnerable species through shading or by providing a windbreak. Nurse crops such as oats have long been used to help establish alfalfa and other forages by supplanting the more competitive weeds that would otherwise grow in their place. In many instances, nurse cropping is simply another form of physical-spatial interaction. It can also be a form of inter-seeding. Our earlier example from sequential trap cropping, with the strawberries, can also be considered nurse cropping. Usually a nurse crop protects from climatic adversity, but in this case it is protecting the strawberry seedlings from insect predation (Vernon et al., 2000). Many times, nurse crops are used in association with forages, where a fast-germinating grass is used with a slower-growing legume (Weller, 2006).
Beneficial habitats-sometimes called refugia or insectary plantings, farmscaping strips, etc.-are another type of companion plant interaction that has drawn considerable attention in recent years (Philips et al., 2014). The benefit is derived when companion plants provide a desirable environment for beneficial insects and other arthropods-especially those predatory and parasitic species which help to keep pest populations in check. Predators include ladybird beetles, lacewings, hover flies, mantids, robber flies, and non-insects such as spiders and predatory mites. Parasites include a wide range of fly and wasp species including tachinid flies and Trichogramma and ichneumonid wasps. Agroecologists believe that by developing systems to include habitats that draw and sustain beneficial insects, the twin objectives of reducing both pest damage and pesticide use can be attained. Numerous (552) experiments over a ten-year period were examined to find whether Farmscaping (also known as environmental engineering) was an effective method of reducing pest populations. The answer was a resounding yes, but it was at a cost of production of the main crop (Letourneau et al., 2011). For detailed information on establishing beneficial habitats, request the ATTRA publication Farmscaping to Enhance Biological Control.
A more general mixing of various crops and varieties provides a degree of security to the grower. If pests or adverse conditions reduce or destroy a single crop or cultivar, others remain to produce some level of yield. Furthermore, the simple mixing of cultivars, as demonstrated with broccoli in University of California research, can reduce aphid infestation in a crop (Daar, 1988). Research supports the concept that diverse crops add to total biomass yield (Mousavi and Eskandari, 2011) and that risk in multi-cropping situations is inherently lower than in monocultures. This increase can be attributed to a more efficient consumption of soil nutrients per unit area (Eskandari and Ghanbari, 2009).
The great thing about botanical pesticides is that they can be made at home using common ingredients. For example, many gardeners enjoy the beauty and sometimes the flavor of nasturtiums. Others grow them for their insect-repelling properties as a companion plant, but nasturtiums have also been shown to have larvacidal effects on leafminers. A methanol extraction of finely chopped nasturtium leaves caused almost 20% reduction in coffee leaf miners (Alves et al., 2013). The same kind of extract from a four-o'clock plant killed 50% of the coffee leaf miners, and extract of high mallow and guinea-hen weed killed 60%! Nasturtium phytochemicals were found to be more or less abundant depending upon the preparation technique used. For example, using heat during the extraction lowered the available phytochemicals. Changing the extraction method also affected phytochemical content (Bazylko et al., 2013). Extracted solutions also differed from fresh-squeezed juice in amounts of flavonoids and phenols (Bazylko et al., 2014). Aside from extraction processes, secondary metabolites in plants can also be influenced by climatic conditions and even UV radiation (Rozema et al., 1997). These factors can either enhance or detract from a given plant's successful use as a source of a botanical pesticide and should be taken into account regarding efficacy. While every batch may not have the same exact effectiveness, the ability to make the botanical pesticides at home at your leisure more than compensates for any variability. You may choose to use a blender or juicer if possible, but this will also alter the antioxidant activity (Pyo et al., 2014).
A very common botanical pesticide is neem oil. Neem (Azedirachta indica), a tree in the Meliaceae, is closely related to the invasive chinaberry (Melia azedarach), native to Asia, and has been introduced to many parts of the world due to its beneficial properties (Sherley, 2000). The oil is derived from the seeds. Neem has been found to contain 99 insecticidal phytochemicals including the powerful antifeedant azadirachtin. Neem has been found to be one of the best tools for biological production systems. It works in two ways: the first is its aforementioned antifeedant property; the second is that it wreaks havoc on the insects' physiology. This latter effect prevents molting and leads to sterility. So an application of neem is both preventative and curative (Schmutterer, 1995).
Neem also has fungicidal affects and can be useful in reducing symptoms of several garden pathogens (Govindachari et al., 1998). Leaf extracts from the neem tree are also effective (Wondafrash et al., 2012), although a bit less effective than the seed extracts. In both of the previous experiments, when they tested various individual components purified from the mix, none were as effective as the crude form. This is commonly the case, since plant constituents are often synergistically active and additively effective. Neem's cousin, the chinaberry tree, contains similar phytochemicals and a few extra meliatoxins that are harmful to mammals. However, some forms of the Chinaberry tree are without those specific toxins, because the species widely varies from one area of adaptation to another.
Pyrethrum is often used in conjunction with other pesticides in biological agriculture. Pyrethrums are knock-down killers, fast acting and broad spectrum. They are effective against a range of pests: ants, soft-bodied insects, beetles, moths, leafhoppers, spider mites, stink bugs, thrips, webworms, flies, pantry pests, and mosquitoes. Pyrethrum has been used to kill insects for hundreds of years. On the other hand, there are quite a few instances of insects overcoming not only pyrethrum but also synthetic versions of the pesticide.
Many plants express insecticidal traits. The key to using them for your benefit is using them on plants that are very dissimilar and thus produce different phytochemicals. For example, nasturtiums repel many pests, but they are in the Brassica family and thus would be mostly ineffective against cabbage moths or other pests of Brassicas because their phytochemicals would attract more of the pests.
A simple botanical pesticide can be prepared from four good-sized garlic cloves blended into one quart of water. After blending, let the solution sit for 10 to 15 minutes, then strain. Straining through cheesecloth or a fine sieve is essential to remove the small particles that would clog a sprayer. The solution should all be used as soon as possible; it is not meant to have a long shelf life.
One drawback of homemade botanicals is that there is no standard for efficacy. They work for however long they will work and then need to be reapplied. It's best to have plenty of source material planted around the garden and set aside for this use. When harvesting your source material, use the same rule as for harvesting leafy vegetables: generally, pick less than 1/3 of the plant in order to give it sufficient leaf mass needed to recover.
Botanical sprays can be effective and cheap. They are truly a renewable resource that is an aid in reducing hotspots of insect pest activity in the garden or on the farm. Combining their use with the various companion planting methods can increase their effectiveness and reduce pest pressure.
Agronomists use the term "intercropping" to describe the spatial arrangements of companion planting systems. Intercropping systems range from mixed intercropping to large-scale strip intercropping. Mixed intercropping is commonly seen in traditional gardens where two or more crops are grown together without a distinct row formation. Strip intercropping is designed with two or more crops grown together in distinct rows to allow for mechanical crop production. No-till planting or transplanting into standing cover crops can be considered another form of intercropping. For more information on no-till planting, request the ATTRA publication Conservation Tillage.
Alves, D.S., D.F. Olivera, G.A. Carlvalho, D.A. Carlvalho, L.P. Souza, and O. Lasmar. 2013. Revista Brasileira de Plantas Medicinais. Vol. 15, No. 3.
Amarawardana, L., P. Bandara., V. Kumar, J. Pettersson, V. Ninkovic, and R. Glinwood. 2007. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica B Soil and Plant Science. Vol. 57. p. 87-91.
Amoako-Atta, B. 1983. International Journal of Tropical Insect Science. Vol. 11, No. 4. p. 351-356.
Augé, R.M. 2001. Mycorrhiza. Vol. 11. p. 3-42.
Babula, P., V. Vaverkova, Z. Poborilova, L. Ballova M. Masarik, and I. Provaznik. 2014. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. Vol. 84C. p. 78-86.
How do belowground organisms influence plant pollinator interactions?
Barber, N.A., and N.L. Soper Gorden. 2014. Journal of Plant Ecology. Vol. 8, No. 1. p. 1-11.
Comparison of antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial activity and chemical composition of aqueous and hydroethanolic extracts of the herb of Tropaeolum majus L.
Industrial Crops and Products, Bazylko, A., S. Granica, A. Filipek, J. Piwowarski, J. Stefánska, E. Osínska, and A.K. Kiss. 2013. Vol. 50. p. 88-94.
Bazylko, A., A. Parzonko, W. Jez, E. Osinska, and A.K. Kiss. 2014. Industrial Crops and Products. Vol. 55. p. 19-24.
Candido, V., G. Campanelli, T., D'Addabbo, D. Castronuovo, M. Perniola, and I. Camele. 2015. Scientia Horticulturae. Vol. 187. p. 35-43.
Cao, J., A.M. Shelton, and E.D. Earle. 2005. Crop Protection. Vol. 24. p.804-813.
Ciaccia, C., E. Testani, G. Campanelli, S. Sestili, F. Leteo, F. Tittarelli, F. Riva, S. Canali, and A. Trinchera. 2015. Organic Agriculture. Vol. 5, No. 3. p. 199-207.
Cicek, H., J.R. Thiessen Martens, K.C. Bamford, and M.H. Entz. 2014. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. Vol. 190. p. 27-36.
Daar, S. 1988. IPM Practitioner. May. p. 12.
Eskandari, H., and A. Ghanbari. 2009. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca. Vol. 2. p. 152- 155.
Plant apparency and Chemical Defense.
Recent Advances in Phytochemistry, Feeny, P. 1976. Vol. 10 p. 1-49.
Folorunso, O.A., D.E. Rolston, T. Prichard, and D.T. Louie. 1992. California Agriculture. Vol. 45. p.26-27.
Godfrey, L.D., and T.F. Leigh. 1994. Environmental Entomology Vol. 23. p. 1106-1118.
Govindachari, T.R., G. Suresh, G. Gopalakrishnan, B. Banumathy, S. Masilamani. 1998. Phytoparasitica. Vol. 26, No. 2. p. 1-8.
Hartwig, N.L., and H.U. Ammon. 2002. Weed Science. Vol. 50, No. 6. p. 688-699.
Hokkanen, H.M.T. 1989. Acta Entomologica Fennica. Vol. 53. p.25-30.
Hokkanen, H.M.T. 1991. Annual Review of Entomology. Vol. 36. p. 119-138.
Hollingworth R, K. Ahmmadsahib, G. Gedelhak, and J. McLaughlin. 1994. Biochemical Society Transactions. Vol. 22. p. 230- 233.
Hooks, C.R., R.R. Pandey, and M.W. Johnson. 2007. UH- CTAHR IP-27.
Jabran, K., G. Mahajan, V. Sardana, and B.S. Chauhan. 2015. Crop Protection. Vol 72. p. 57-65.
Jackai, L.E.N., and S.R. Singh. 1983. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata. Vol. 34. p. 174-178.
Kaya, C., D. Higgs, H. Kirnak, and I. Tax. 2003. Plant and Soil. Vol. 253. p. 287-292.
Kergunteuil, A., S. Dugravot, A. Mortreuil, A.L. Ralec, and A.M. Cortesero. 2012. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata. Vol. 144. p. 69-77.
Khan, Z. R., C.A.O. Midega, J.O. Pittchar, A.W. Murage, M.A. Birkett, T.J.A. Bruce, and J.A. Pickett. 2014. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. Vol. 369. p.20120284.
Kührt, U., J. Samietz, and S. Dorn. 2006. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata Vol. 118. p. 245-259.
Letourneau, D.K., I. Armbrecht, B.S. Rivera, J.M. Lerma, E.J. Carmona, M.C. Daza, S. Escobar, V. Galindo, C. Gutéirrez, S.D. López, J.L. Meíja, A.M.A. Rangel, J.H. Rangel, L. Rivera, C.A. Saavedra, A.M. Torres, and A.R. Trujillo. 2011. Ecological Applications. Vol. 21. p. 9-21.
Linderman, R.G., and A.A. Davis. 2001. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture. Vol. 52. p.8-11.
Manorama, K., and S.S. Lal. 2010. Indian Journal of Agronomy. Vol. 55, No. 3. p. 215-219.
Marotti, I., M. Marotti, R. Piccaglia, A. Nastri, S. Grandi, and G. Dinelli. 2010. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. Vol. 90. p. 1210-1217.
Martinez, R.T. 2007. University of Wisconsin. Stevens Point, Wisconsin.
Mei, P., L. Gui, P. Wang, J. Huang, H. Long, P. Christie, and L. Li. 2012. Field Crops Research. Vol. 130. p. 19-27.
Midega, C.A.O., D. Salifu, T. J. Bruce, J. Pittchar, J. A. Pickett, and Z.R. Khan. 2014. Field Crops Research. Vol. 155. p. 144-152.
Miller, J.R., and R.S. Cowles. 1990. Journal of Chemical Ecology. Vol. 16. p. 3197-3212.
Mitchell, E.R., G. Hu, and D. Johanowicz. 2000. HortScience. Vol. 35. p. 875-879.
Mizell III, R.F., T.C. Riddle, and A.S. Blount. 2008. Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society. Vol. 121. p. 377-382.
Mousavi, S.R., and H. Eskandari. 2011. Journal of Applied Environmental and Biological Sciences. Vol. 1, No.11. p. 482-486.
Current Opinion in Biotechnology, Pickett J., C.M. Woodcock, C.A.O. Midega, and Z.R. Khan. 2014. Vol. 26C. p. 125-132.
Philbrick, H. and R. Gregg. 1966. The Devin-Adair Co., Old Greenwich, CT.
Philips, C.R., M.A. Rogers, and T.P. Kuhar. 2014. Journal of Integrated Pest Management. Vol. 5, No. 3. p.1-9.
Pyo, Y-H, Y.-J. Jin, and J.-Y. Hwang. 2014. Preventive Nutrition and Food Science. Vol. 19, No. 2.p. 108-114.
Rozema J, J. van de Staaij, L.O. Björn, and M. Caldwell. 1997. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. Vol. 12. p. 22-28.
Schmutterer, H., ed. 1995. VCH Verlagsgesellschaft, Germany.
Effect of pea canopy architecture on splash dispersal of Mycosphaerella pinodes conidia.
Schoeny A., J. Menat, A. Darsonval, F. Rouault, S. Jumel, and B. Tivoli. 2008. Plant Pathology, Vol. 57. p. 1073-1085.
Schreiner, R.P. 2004. p. 49-60. In: Proceedings of the soil environment and vine mineral nutrition symposium, San Diego, CA. American Society for Enology and Viticulture.
Schulz, M., A. Marocco, V. Tabaglio, F.A. Macias, and J.M. Molinillo. 2013. Journal of Chemical Ecology. Vol. 39. p. 154-174.
Shelton, A.M., and F.R. Badenes-Perez. 2006. Annual Review of Entomology. Vol. 51. p. 285-308.
Sherley, G. 2000. SPREP, Apia, Samoa.
Do insecticides affect plant growth and development?
Spiers, J., F. Davies, C. He, K.M. Heinz, C.E. Bogran, and T.W. Starman. 2008. Greenhouse Grower. February. p. 1-4.
Tabashnik, B.E., T. Brévault and Y. Carrière. 2013. Nature Biotechnology. Vol 31. p. 510-521.
Tanga, A.A., T.F. Erenso, and B. Lemma. 2014. Journal of Soil Science and Environmental Management. Vol. 5, No. 5. p. 62-71.
Tavares, W.S., I. Cruz, F. Petacci, S.S. Freitas, J.E. Serrão, and J.C. Zanuncio. 2011. Journal of Medicinal Plants Research. Vol. 5, No. 21. p. 5301-5306.
Tillman, P.G., and B.J. Mullinix, Jr. 2004. Environmental Entomology. Vol. 33. p. 1371-1380.
Ullrich, S.D., J.S. Buyer, M.A. Cavigelli, R. Seidel, and J.R. Teasdale. 2011. Weed Science: Vol. 59, No. 2. p. 202-209.
Vernon, R.S., T. Kabaluk, and A. Behringer. 2000. The Canadian Entomologist. Vol. 132. p. 231-241.
Virk, J.S., K.S. Brar, and A.S. Sohi. 2004. Journal of Biological Control. Vol. 18. p. 61-64.
Organic Dairy Farming Technical Guide.
Weller, R.F., 2006. The experience of IGER Ty Gwyn. p. 3-17. In: Richard Weller and Andrew Jackson. Organic Centre Wales, Aberystwyth, UK.
Whitney, A.S. 1966. Herbage Abstracts. Vol. 38. p.143.
Wondafrash, M., E. Getu, and G. Terefe. 2012. Academic Journal of Entomology. Vol. 5, No. 1. p. 22- 27.
1995. By Bob Flowerdew. Kyle Cathie, London, GB.
2nd edition 1998. By Louise Riotte. Storey Communications, Pownal, VT.
2013. By J.E. Parker, W.E. Snyder, G.C. Hamilton, and C. Rodriguez- Saona. In: Agricultural and Biological Sciences: Weed and Pest Control-Conventional and New Challenges. Edited by S. Soloneski and M. Larramendy.
1966. By H. Philbrick and R. Gregg. Devin-Adair Publishers, Old Greenwich, CT.
1998. By Sally Jean Cunningham. Rodale Press, Emmaus, PA.
5th edition 1995. By John Jeavons. Ten Speed Press, Berkeley, CA.
By University of Hawaii Nif- TAL (Nitrogen Fixation by Tropical Agricultural Legumes) Center.
1993. By J. Howard Garret. Lantana Publishing Co., Dallas, TX.
A fine general guide on organic growing that features a brief table of companion herbs and the pests they repel on page 48.
1993. By Jack R. Pyle and Taylor Reese. Down Home Press, Asheboro, NC.
Contains both companion planting charts and a listing of insect repellent plants.
1994. By Susan McClure and Sally Roth. Rodale Press, Emmaus, PA.
1998. By Louise Riotte. Storey Communications, Pownal, VT.
"Border effects on yields in a strip-intercropped soybean, corn, and wheat production system."
1996. By T.K. Iragavarapu and G.W. Randall. Journal of Production Agriculture. Vol. 9, No. 1. p. 101-107.
Provides a nice literature review of research to that time on intercropping, highlighting the multitude of factors causing variability in results.
1976. ASA Special Publication No. 27. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI.
"Strip intercropping for biological control."
1993. By Joel Grossman and William Quarles. The IPM Practitioner. April. p. 1-11.
An excellent synopsis of intercropping. The IPM Practitioner, published 10 times per year, is a benefit of membership in the Bio-Integral Resource Center (BIRC). Annual membership for individuals costs $35.
For centuries, many Native American tribes throughout North America have cultivated corn, beans, and squash. The term "Three Sisters" was primarily used by the Iroquois who live in the Northeastern United States and Canada. These crops were considered to be special gifts from Great Spirit and were believed to be protected by the Three Sisters-spirits collectively called the De-o-ha-ko, meaning "our sustainers" or "those who support us" (Eames-Sheavly, 1993).
This ancient style of companion planting has played a key role in the survival of all people in North America. Grown together, these plants are able to thrive and provide high-yield, high-quality crops with a minimal environmental impact. Corn, beans, and squash have a unique symbiotic relationship in a Native American garden. Corn offers a structure for the beans to climb. The beans, in turn, help to replenish the soil with nutrients. And the large leaves of squash and pumpkin vines provide living mulch that conserves water and provides weed control.
Corn is considered the most important of all Native American crops. Originating in South America and Mexico, corn was introduced during the Mississippian Period (600 A.D. to 1450 A.D.) to North American tribes via an intricate series of trade networks. Corn, beans, and squash combine to create a nearly perfect meal loaded with essential vitamins and minerals (Erney, 1996). In addition to its nutritional values, all Native American tribes that grew corn considered it a sacred and spiritually valuable plant.
The term "Three Sisters" emerged from the Iroquois creation myth. It was said that the earth began when "Sky Woman" who lived in the upper world peered through a hole in the sky and fell through to an endless sea. The animals saw her coming, so they took the soil from the bottom of the sea and spread it onto the back of a giant turtle to provide a safe place for her to land. This "Turtle Island" is now what we call North America.
Sky Woman had become pregnant before she fell. When she landed, she gave birth to a daughter. When the daughter grew into a young woman, she also became pregnant (by the West wind). She died while giving birth to twin boys. Sky Woman buried her daughter in the "new earth." From her grave grew three sacred plants-corn, beans, and squash. These plants provided food for her sons, and later, for all of humanity. These special gifts ensured the survival of the Iroquois people (Erney, 1996).
Choosing the right varieties of corn is essential to the success of a Three Sisters garden. The tall, sturdy heirloom varieties work best because they are most capable of supporting the beans. There are a number of Native American heirloom corn varieties to choose from. Traditionally, most of the corn grown by Native Americans is dry field corn, which is used in flour production. Dry field corn is harvested late in the season when the ears have dried on the stalk.
Dry field corn is divided into three categories, dent, flint, and flour corns. Dent corns are adapted best to the Southeast and the Midwest. Dent corn has a distinctive dimple-like dent on top of the kernel when it is fully dried. A dent corn that grows well most anywhere in the United States is the Cherokee Blue and White of the Southeast. Reid's Yellow Dent is also widely adapted. Bloody Butcher produces blood-red ears of corn on stalks that can reach from 10 to 12 feet (Erney, 1996;, Rosenthal, 1993).
Flint corn grows best in the northern plains region. The kernels of flint corn do not shrink when they are dry. A popular flint corn is Indian Ornamental, with colors ranging from purple to yellow. Two other popular flint corn varieties are Fiesta and Little Jewels. Little Jewels is a unique, "mini" ornamental with four-inch-long, multi-colored ears and purple husks (Rosenthal, 1993).
Flour corns usually have thinner-shelled kernels filled with soft white starch. Flour corns were developed in the arid Southwest. They are less likely to succeed in cooler northern regions with short growing seasons and in moist, humid areas where they are susceptible to a fatal rust disease. Hopi Pink is a short, drought-resistant corn, with kernels that range in color from cranberry to light pink. This variety has plump, thin-shelled kernels that grind easily into fine flour. A flour corn that works well in northern gardens is Mandan Bride. This variety is also drought-tolerant, with red, blue, yellow, pink, and purple spotted kernels (Rosenthal, 1993).
Corn can be harvested earlier in the season when it is still "green corn." Green corn is harvested when the corn is still in the "milk" stage, when the kernels are at their sweetest and can be eaten fresh. Varieties that are sweet when young are Blue Clarage, Bloody Butcher, and Black Mexican/Iroquois. Flour corns are usually not eaten in the green corn stage. Two exceptions to this rule are Anasazi and Mandan Red (Rosenthal, 1993). See Table 1.
*Adapted from Amazing Maize! Cultivate Colorful Corns by Eric Rosenthal.
Beans provide a high-quality protein food source that combines well nutritionally with corn. Beans also play a valuable role in the Three Sisters garden. Through a symbiotic relationship with rhizobium bacteria, beans help to take nitrogen from the air and convert it into a usable form for next year's crop.
Pole beans are best adapted to directly climb the corn stalk as opposed to sending runners across the ground. The Scarlet Runner variety is a popular heirloom pole bean that is famous for its large clusters of bright red flowers. Genuine Cornfield consistently produces in the heat of Southern summers. True Cranberry, a dark red bean with a meaty texture and a nutty chestnut-like flavor, also performs well in the South and in the Northeast. Cornfield, unrelated to Genuine Cornfield, does well in the Pacific Northwest because it matures before the fall rains come. A favorite in the arid Southwest is Hopi Purple, a purple bean with black crescent-moon stripes (Erney, 1996).
Most any variety of squash will work in a Three Sisters garden. In addition to the contemporary hybrid varieties, there are still some traditional varieties available. In the North-east, the Penobscot and Abenaki still grow Long Pie (a.k.a. Indian or Golden Oblong) pumpkin.
This pumpkin looks like a fat zucchini with the texture of a pumpkin. It has a long storage life and usually doesn't turn orange until after it is harvested. A disease-resistant variety suited for the Southeast is the Connecticut Field. This very vigorous Native American heirloom yields large, bright orange pumpkins. Mayo Blusher is a very sweet, pale gray pumpkin that blushes pink when ripe. Cushaw is a gourd-like squash that has been grown in the Southwest by the Pueblo Indians for storage containers since pre-Columbian times. Other varieties of squash also grow well in the Southwest depending on the amount of moisture available (Erney, 1996).
Planting designs and cultivation practices vary according to climatic region. Garden styles were developed mainly out of practical considerations, such as moisture availability, climate, and the length of the growing season. The Wampanoag garden style works well east of the Mississippi. Hidatsa gardens were developed to thrive in the climate of the northern Plains, while the Zuni waffle garden was designed to conserve water in the arid Southwestern climate.
It was the Wampanoag gardens that enabled the early settlers of Jamestown to survive and thrive in the New World. Squanto was a Wampanoag who "taught the newcomers to plant maize in little hills and fertilize each mound with an alewife, a species of fish" (Gabarino and Sasso, 1994). With this efficient and intensive gardening style, each family could sustain their needs on about one acre of land. Many of the tribes of the Northeast, including the Iroquois, used the Wampanoag garden design.
Drawing by Mardi Dodson. Concept taken from Native American Gardening by Michael J. Caduto and Joseph Bruchac.
Planted without plowing or tilling, the traditional Wampanoag garden includes corn, beans, squash, and sunflowers. The corn and beans are planted in mounds, with squash planted between the mounds. The sunflowers are planted along the north edge of the garden, so that they do not cast a shadow on the other crops (see Figure 1). When the sunflowers have bloomed and the squash and beans have flowered, the Wampanoag Three Sisters garden becomes a stunning cluster of red, yellow, and white flowers against a textured backdrop of shimmering greens.
First, the raised corn and bean mounds must be constructed. These small mounds are laid out in rows with 4 feet between the centers of the mounds (see Figure 1). Each mound is about four inches high, with a wide base (about 18 inches in diameter) that narrows to a flattened top (about 10 inches across). To conserve moisture, a depression with a lip may be formed at the top of each mound (Caduto and Burchac, 1996). The finished mounds have a remarkable resemblance to miniature moon craters.
When the mounds are ready, plant four corn seeds about 6 inches apart and 3 inches deep in the top of each mound. Once the corn has grown to a height of 4 inches or more, plant four beans seeds halfway down the slopes on the sides of each mound (see Figure 2). Allow the bean vines to entwine themselves around the cornstalks for support. The bean vines may be pruned if they get too aggressive (Caduto and Burchac, 1996).
Squash seedlings are planted at the same time as the beans. Construct rounded mounds 3 inches high and about 1 foot across at the base. The squash mounds are staggered between the mounds of corn and beans (see Figure 1).
Corn is planted 6 inches apart in the flat top of the mound. Beans are planted halfway down the slopes on the sides of the mound. Drawing by Mardi Dodson. Concept taken from Native American Gardening by Michael J. Caduto and Joseph Bruchac.
Traditionally, four seedlings are planted in the top of each mound. The seedlings are arranged to represent each of the four sacred directions (see Figure 3). Both winter and summer varieties are planted, including pumpkins, acorn squash, and summer crookneck squash (Caduto and Burchac, 1996).
Sunflower seeds are planted at the same time as the corn. The smaller-flowering common sunflower, Helianthus annus, is traditionally grown in a Wampanoag Three Sisters garden. The sunflower mounds are located at the north edge of the garden (see Figure 1). The mounds are spaced about three feet apart from center, with three seeds planted (one seed per hole) atop each mound. The sunflowers seeds are traditionally harvested after the first frost (Caduto and Burchac, 1996).
In the northern plains, the Hidatsa, Mandan, and Arikara peoples gardened along the floodplain of the Missouri River in what is now called North Dakota. Most of the tribes in this region used the Hidatsa garden design (see Figure 4). Hidatsa gardens are designed to have alternating, staggered rows of corn and beans, with sunflowers growing along the north edge of the garden. Squash is planted after every fourth row of corn and beans and around the east, south, and west edges of the garden (Caduto and Burchac, 1996).
Sunflowers are planted as soon as the threat of frost has passed. As in the Wampanoag garden, three sunflower seeds are planted in small mounds three feet apart along the north edge of the garden. The Hidatsa garden differs from the Wampanoag garden when it comes to seed arrangement-all three seeds are planted in one hole. Hidatsa varieties of sunflower produce black, red, white, and striped seeds (Caduto and Burchac, 1996).
Plant squash indoors in peat pots or seed flats when the sunflowers are planted in the garden. Before planting in the garden, prepare the squash mounds (about 15 inches across at the base), with four feet between the centers of the mounds. The squash mounds are located along the east, west, and south edges of the garden in alignment with the rows of beans (see Figure 4). Squash seedlings are usually transplanted when they are about four inches tall and have put on their first set of true leaves (about two weeks after the corn is planted). To protect them from the heavy spring rains, four seedlings are planted on the sides of the mound in sets of two, 12 inches apart (see Figure 5) (Caduto and Burchac, 1996).
In the Hidatsa garden, there are usually four corn mounds per row of corn. Note that the rows of corn are in alignment but are staggered in comparison to the beans (see Figure 4). Hidatsa corn mounds are constructed in the same way as the Wampanoag corn and beans mound. The differences are that only corn is planted in these mounds and eight seeds, instead of four, are planted in the top of each mound (see Figure 6).
Bean seeds are planted on the south-facing slope of the mound. One seed is planted per hole, with a total of six seeds planted in each mound. Drawing by Mardi Dodson. Concept taken from Native American Gardening by Michael J. Caduto and Joseph Bruchac.
Growing corn together in bunches offers extra support and protection from wind and rain damage.
Hidatsa flint corn is planted in May in North Dakota when the leaves of the Gooseberry shrubs have emerged and fully formed. Corn is planted a week or two after the sunflowers have been planted. This flint corn is a semiarid variety with a growing season of about 70 days. It is advisable to research which corn variety works best for your zone and climatic conditions (Wilson, 1917).
Beans are planted at the same time as corn. In a Hidatsa garden, beans are planted separately from the corn in their own mounds. The bean mounds are located between the rows of corn in a staggered, alternating pattern (see Figure 4). The mounds are rounded ovals, about four inches tall by seven inches wide by 14 inches long. Traditionally, two people worked together to plant beans. The first person made six holes in the south-facing slope of the bean mound. This is done in one swift motion by thrusting both hands into the soil with the thumb and first two fingers extended to make two sets of holes spaced six inches apart (see Figure 7). The second person follows behind and plants one seed in each hole. A total of six seeds are planted in each bean mound (Wilson, 1917).
In a Hidatsa garden, eight seeds are planted atop each mound. Drawing by Mardi Dodson. Concept taken from Native American Gardening by Michael J. Caduto and Joseph Bruchac.
The Zuni live in the Four Corners area of the Southwestern United States. This arid climate at altitudes over 7,000 feet makes gardening a special challenge. The Wampanoag and Hidatsa garden designs use raised mounds to keep the root systems from being waterlogged. In contrast, the focus of this garden is water conservation. The waffles are about 12 feet by 12 feet. Each individual square is indented and surrounded by a high rim. In each square, a single crop or combinations of crops may be planted (see Figure 8). This garden design will work anywhere in the country where dry summer conditions are experienced.
Traditionally, the crops are planted intensively with five to eight corn seeds in each hole to create clumps of corn similar to those in the Hidatsa garden. Corn seeds are planted four to eight inches deep in light sandy soils and about four inches deep or less in heavier clay soil. Beans and squash have the same planting depths and spacing requirements as corn (Talavaya Center, no date). The same number of beans (four to eight seeds) are planted around each clump of corn, one seed per hole. Only one or two squash plantings (four to eight seeds in each hole) are added to each waffle (see Figure 8) (Rosenthal, 1993). As with the other two designs, sunflowers may also be planted along the edges of the Zuni Waffle garden. Helianthus maximilianii, a small sunflower with flower heads about three inches wide, is most commonly grown in the Southwest (Buchanan, 1997).
Drawing and design by Mardi Dodson.
Native American tribes of North America have made enormous contributions to the foods we eat today. The dynamic trio known as the Three Sisters not only thrive when they are planted together, they offer a well-balanced, nutritious meal. Over the centuries, many plant varieties and gardening styles were developed for each major climatic region. The Wampanoag (Northeast and South), Hidatsa (Plains), and Zuni waffle garden (Southwest) offer a range of gardening styles to accommodate most growing conditions found in North America.
Corn, beans, and squash have a unique symbiotic relationship in a Native American garden. Corn offers a structure for the beans to climb. The beans, in turn, help to replenish the soil with nutrients. And the large leaves of squash and pumpkin vines provide living mulch that conserves water and provides weed control. This ancient style of companion planting has played a key role in the survival of all people in North America. Grown together these crops are able to thrive and provide high-yield, high-quality crops with a minimal environmental impact.
Buchanan, Carol. 1997. Ten Speed Press, Berkeley, California.
Caduto, Michael J. and Burchac, Joseph. 1996. Fulcrum Publishing, Golden, Colorado. p. 70-93.
The Three Sisters: Exploring an Iroquois Garden.
Eames-Sheavly, Marcia. 1993. Cornell University Cooperative Extension. p. 7.
Long live the Three Sisters.
Erney, Diana. 1996. Organic Gardening. November. p. 37-40.
Mechanisms of Weed Suppression By Squash (Cucurbita spp.) Intercropped in Corn (Zea mays L.).
Fujiyoshi, Phillip. 1998. Dissertation University of California Santa Cruz.
Gabarino, Merwin S. and Sasso, Robert F. 1994. Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, Illinois. p. 308.
Amazing maize! Cultivate colorful corns.
Rosenthal, Eric. 1993. Organic Gardening. March. p. 30-35.
Talavaya Seed and Planting Manual.
Talavaya Center. No date. Espanola, New Mexico. p. 5-11.
Agriculture of the Hidatsa Indians.
Wilson, Gilbert L. 1917. Minnesota Historical Society Press, St. Paul, Minnesota.

matches: V. V. V. V. V. V.