---

Moth orchids (genus Phalaenopsis) have been taking the potted plant world by storm for the last decade. They are now second only in total sale value to poinsettias, yet per pot they are the most valuable crop on the market today. The advent of advanced tissue culture and production methods has brought the plant out of the elite Victorian glasshouse to the shelves of nearly every retailer, allowing them to become the most accessible orchid on the market today. Combine this accessibility with their ease of growing in the home environment and you have a wonderful, rewarding tropical orchid for the everyday home gardener.

Name, nomenclature, etymology

The genus Phalaenopsis received its name in 1825 from the Dutch botanist Blume. The common name, the moth orchid, reflects the Greek etymology behind the scientific name: phaluna, moth, and -opsis, resembling. This is in reference to the moth-like blossoms produced on long spikes. There are currently 63 distinct species, with numerous subspecies and hybrids found in nature, not to mention the countless crosses made by hobbyists and professionals world wide.

Morphology

Phalaenopsis plants are fairly easy to identify when in bloom. Flowers in the genus have a broad diversity in color among the species, with smaller variation in shape. There white and pink flowers that resemble the commercial varieties seen most often, yet there are also yellows, purples and even some green ones that are solid or decorated with stripes or bands. The distinct inflorescence is comprised of flowers borne in numbers from few to many on a stem arising from a leaf axil. In fact, when a flower stem first starts to appear, it is difficult to distinguish it from the roots of the plant, which also arise from leaf axils.

The roots are another distinguishing part of the plant. Thick green or purplish roots with a spongy white coating often protrude out of the pot and grow in the air. It is quite common for people to be worried about this when they initially start growing the plants and see these roots produced! The roots are perfectly fine growing outside the pot like this, as it is part of their natural plant habit. In their native environments Phalaenopsis plants are either epiphytes or, less commonly, lithophytes growing on plants or rocks, respectively. These roots grow out and act as anchors and attach to other plant material or rocks, while absorbing moisture and nutrients in addition to acting as photosynthetic organs!

Finally, although the leaves of these plants may not seem as attractive as the flowers, they can serve as an attractive foliage plant when out of bloom. Most species and commercial varieties in the genus have an average of five or six leaves from six to twelve inches in length and around four or five inches wide. The leaves are often shiny or leathery in appearance and plain green or purple with some white mottling. One aspect of the plant that is worth noting is the lack of pseudobulbs that many other orchids have. For this reason, Phalaenopsis were particularly prized in the 1800’s. When ships would cross oceans filled with plant material bound for Europe, plants with pseudobulbs would have greater success upon reaching their destination, while moth orchids had no storage organs and would not ship as well until advances in shipping technology were made.

Native Environment (geographic/environment)

Phalaenopsis is a genus of from tropical regions in the Old World. The range is throughout tropical Asia east to the Philippines and west to Sri Lanka. In these tropical regions the plants grow in habitats that experience either seasonal drought, seasonal periods of cooler temperatures, or constant moisture/humidity. This is one reason that the plants are quite versatile and suitable for growing in the home, as these environments are easy to recreate by combining natural changes in the season and cultural practices.

Culture and Environment

Potting

When potting moth orchids, the choices of different potting media can be staggering. There are numerous commercially-offered media, and the number of “recipes” for custom-mixed media rivals the number of dubious remedies some popular authors have for keeping plants healthy. In reality, Phalaenopsis are quite amenable to any growing medium, as long as cultural conditions are adjusted to suit the medium. I have even heard anecdotes of people growing moth orchids in shredded tires and socks! The two most common media for moth orchids are long grain Sphagnum moss or a standard bark-based mix containing bark, charcoal, peat, and perlite. When potting with a bark-based mix place the bare-root plant in the container, fill in and around the roots with the mix and press the medium in firmly around the roots. When using sphagnum, loosely place the moss around the roots while not packing or compressing the fibers.

A variety of containers may be used for potting Phalaenopsis orchids. A true classic, unglazed terra cotta or clay pots have been used many decades. Benefits include increased aeration and weight, causing increased gas exchange and a heavy base to support the plants, respectively. Drawbacks are an increase in salt accumulation, difficulty in sanitization and breakage. More commonly used today, plastic pots are perfectly suitable for orchids. While they are lighter and are not as porous, they are easier to sanitize and reuse and do not accumulate excess salts from water or fertilizers. One aspect to take into consideration when selecting plastic pots is the color. As mentioned earlier, Phalaenopsis roots may absorb water and nutrients, but they will not do this unless they are in contact with the potting medium. When clear plastic pots are used, more roots grow down into the medium, whereas when pots are used that do not transmit light the number of aerial roots will increase.

An alternative to potting, some species of Phalaenopsis with pendant inflorescences are well-suited to mounting. This may is easily done by taking a slab of tree fern or cork that has been sterilized and a layer of damp long-grain sphagnum moss on it below where the plant will be placed. Next, place a bare-root plant on top of the sphagnum topped with another thinner layer of moss. Finally, tie the plants and moss down to the mounting material using fishing line. This provides an attractive alternative to potting. However, care must be taken with these plants to not let them dry out. They will need more frequent watering as there is not much media to hold moisture over a longer period of time.

Fertilizer

Moth orchids vary in their feeding requirements. When growing species you may feed at every watering using 1/4-1/2 teaspoon of a balanced water soluble fertilizer per gallon of water applied during the active growing season. Feeding frequency and strength may be decreased to every other or every third watering with a maximum of 1/4 teaspoon fertilizer per gallon of water applied during the winter months when vegetative growth will not be as vigorous. Alternatively, the commercial hybrids may be grown with more feeding year-round without a seasonal break under optimum light and other growth conditions. Using 3/4 - 1 teaspoon of a balanced water soluble fertilizer per gallon of water applied is recommended for hybrids growing under more optimal conditions, combined with a clear-water leaching every fourth watering.

Temperature

Phalaenopsis grow fine in the temperature range experienced in the home environment. Temperatures ranging from the lower 60’s to the higher 70’sF are suitable for growing these plants. The air temperature is also key for initiating flower production. Maintaining the day and night temperatures below 80°F (preferably in the 60’s) for three or more weeks will allow flower initiation to commence. This can be easily done by having the plant placed next to a window during the winter where the temperature may be cooler than the rest of the room. After a while you will see the beginning of an inflorescence coming out of one or more of the leaf axils. This will take a while to develop, yet it will be well worth the wait. A single flower on a moth orchid may last around a month, so a stem with multiple blossoms may be blooming for months! When the plant has finished blooming, do not be in a hurry to chop the stem back. Wait a few weeks and cut the stem back about a half inch above where it turns from green (live) to brown (dead). This will result in branching and more flowers, quite an impressive sight.

Light

Light levels suitable for growing Phalaenopsis ranges from 1,000-3,000 foot candles. You can achieve these levels in the home by growing plants in north, east or shaded west windows. In the summer, plants may be placed outdoors underneath lathe or shade from trees.

Escape to the Tropics January 24 & 25, 2009

During the Saint Paul Winter Carnival, winter and all it's glory, snow, ice and frigid temperatures, are celebrated. One event stands out and gives attendees a way to escape to the tropics without even getting on a plane, the Winter Carnival Orchid Show at the Marjorie McNeely Conservatory January 24 and 25.

Hundreds of orchid plants owned by individual and commercial orchid growers transform the Marjorie McNeely Conservatory into a tropical wonderland where instead of King Boreas, orchids rule. Besides witnessing the beautiful plants and displays, vendors will be offering plants and other wares.

The Orchid Society of Minnesota and the Marjorie McNeely Conservatory work together to exhibit the largest display of privately owned orchids in the region. The Winter Carnival Orchid Show is an American Orchid Society (AOS) judged event. Orchid judges from throughout the Midwest travel to Saint Paul to bestow awards and points.

Orchids are the largest family of flowering plants. One of the oldest and best organized of plant hobbies, orchid culture now enjoys worldwide popularity. Their incredible beauty and diversity captivate men and women of every walk of life.

The Winter Carnival Orchid Show will be held on January 24 and 25 at the Marjorie McNeely Conservatory at Como Park Zoo and Conservatory in Saint Paul from 10am to 4pm. Admission is $5 for adults and $3 for children 12 years and younger.

Como Park Zoo and Conservatory Background

For over 100 years, Marjorie McNeely Conservatory and Como Zoo in Saint Paul, Minnesota has charmed, educated and entertained millions of children and adults, while fostering an appreciation of the natural world and helping to make Saint Paul the Most Livable City in America. The Como Park Zoo and Conservatory is open 365 days a year; 10am-6pm from April-September and 10am-4pm from October-March. Admission to both the Como Zoo and Marjorie McNeely Conservatory is always free and a voluntary donation is appreciated.

For more information, visit www.comozooconservatory.org.

---

All-America Selections (AAS) serves as the oldest (first award winning varieties were designated in 1933), most established, impartial international testing organization in North America. Breeders from around the world enter their best flower and vegetable seed varieties with the hope that their entries would prove themselves to be superior performers across the 46 trial gardens in the United States and Canada and earn this prestigious award. Performance of test varieties are compared with the best commercially available varieties of their class. In addition to the trial gardens, there are display gardens which feature recent and next year’s AAS winners. All together there are 176 AAS display gardens. The five AAS display gardens located in Minnesota are listed at the end of this article. Seeds and transplants of new AAS winners are widely available from leading garden centers and seed catalogs.

The four AAS winners for 2009 are:

Viola ‘Rain Blue and Purple’ All-America Selections
• Viola ‘Rain Blue and Purple’ comes in shades of purple, blue, and white. The 1.5” blooms typically open purple and white and darken as they age to a mixture of purple and blue providing a mixed tapestry of monochromatic color. While typical violas will stop flowering in the heat of summer, this one possesses above average heat tolerance and will continue to grow and bloom more reliably. Plants typically grow to 6” in height and spread 10-14” in width. It makes a great low border plant or container plant where it can spill over the edge of containers.

Melon ‘Lambkin’ All-America Selections
• Melon ‘Lambkin’ has fantastic flavor! The white flesh is juicy, sweet, and very aromatic and the rinds are thin. Compared to other gourmet melons of the “Christmas type”, this one ripens relatively early at 65-70 days. Plants are vigorous and productive. Melons are oval shaped, two to four pounds, and once mature have a yellow rind color with green mottling. They have great storage compared to other melons when kept cool in a root cellar or refrigerator as well.

Acorn squash ‘Honey Bear’ All-America Selections
• Acorn squash ‘Honey Bear’ has a deliciously sweet, honey-like flavor when cooked. Compact plants are high yielding due in part to their great tolerance to powdery mildew, a disease that can stress other acorn squash varieties and result in minimized yield and delayed maturity. Fruits are about a pound in size, a perfect size for and individual serving or sharing between two people. The rind is a very attractive dark green and the flesh is a rich deep golden color. Fruit matures in approximately 100 days.

Eggplant ‘Gretel’ All-America Selections
• Eggplant ‘Gretel’ is an exceptional early fruiting, white skinned variety. Days from transplant to first ripe fruit is 55 days under good growing conditions. Fruit are borne in small clusters and the flavor is noticeably sweet and the skin is tender. These exceptional fruit quality characteristics allows fruit to be harvested beyond the optimum size of 3-4” in length and still retain good eating quality. Plants are relatively compact, reaching a height and width of about 3’. This is a great eggplant for those that only have a small area able to devote to vegetable gardening or for container growing.

To view many new flower and vegetable varieties, visit the five AAS display garden sites in Minnesota:

U of M North Central Research and Outreach Center
1861 Hwy. 169 East
Grand Rapids, MN 55744

U of M West Central Research and Outreach Center
46352 State Highway 329
Morris, MN 56267

U of M Display and Trial Garden
Corner of Gortner and Folwell Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55108

Minnesota Landscape Arboretum
3675 Arboretum Drive
Chaska, MN 55318

Lyndale Park Gardens
4125 E. Lake Harriet Pkwy.
Minneapolis MN 55409

---

The Minnesota Green Expo is one of the largest Horticulture Expos in the nation. It is geared towards all sectors of the Horticulture/Green industry (arborists, florists, nurseries, greenhouses, landscapers, turf specialists, groundskeepers, etc.). It is a wonderful opportunity to learn through educational seminars, networking, and seeing new products at the huge tradeshow where regional, national, and international vendors are represented. Many nurseries have forced into growth and flower their new and recent cultivar releases and landscapers have beautiful displays demonstrating their products and skills.

The Minnesota Green Expo is hosted jointly by the Minnesota Turf and Grounds Foundation and the Minnesota Nursery and Landscape Association. Although geared towards conveying information and highlighting products for industry professionals, it is a great opportunity for everyone who loves horticulture and wants to learn about the latest issues and products. To learn more, please visit: http://www.minnesotagreenexpo.com There are a lot of options to come and participate. One can purchase a three day complete registration (open to educational seminars and tradeshow), single day registration (open to educational seminars and tradeshow for the particular day), or tradeshow only access. With the event soon upon us, one can take advantage of the opportunity to just register at the door. The most affordable way to participate in this event is Friday only tradeshow access for $5.

---

Mark your calendars for the 2009 Tree Care Advisor Core Course in St. Paul, Minnesota! Training includes education on several topics including: tree identification, plant selection, basic physiology and morphology, soils, site analysis, firewood identification, diagnosis of disease and insect problems, pruning, planting and more. These trainings are geared towards individuals who may not know much about trees but do know they want to learn.

The Minnesota Tree Care Advisor program has been training tree stewards (TCAs) for communities since 1993 and since that time TCAs have contributed over 50,000 volunteer hours to Minnesota communities.

Who should attend?

Green industry professionals, Master Gardeners and those folks who have the desire to learn about trees and take that learned information and share it with others in their community.

When are the trainings?

March 14, 8:30- 3:30,
March 21, 8:30-3:30,
March 28, 8:30-3:30
April 4, 8:30-3:30,
April 18, 8:30-3:30.

Where are the trainings taught?

Green Hall, Room 230,
University Of Minnesota, St. Paul Campus,
1530 Cleveland Ave. N, Saint Paul, MN 55108

How much does the training cost?

For volunteers, $95 (with an expectation of 50 hours of volunteering).
For professional track, $375 (with no volunteer requirement).
Includes 5 days of speakers, training manual, coffee and good conversation…

How do I apply?

Print and mail-in application form found at:
http://www.mntca.org/advisors/advi_join.html

Who can I contact for more information?

Dave Hanson,
Phone: 612-624-1226,
E-mail: hanso355@umn.edu.

---

In the spring of 2007 the Northern EarthKind™ Rose Trials began. There are literally dozens of old and new roses touted as being superior low-maintenance landscape performers for our region, but many do not routinely live up to these claims. As we read the advertisements, it is hard for us as consumers to find landscape roses at the garden centers not being described as hardy and disease resistant. The goal of this effort is to identify the most consistently beautiful, low-care, pest tolerant roses for our region through putting them through multi-year, multi-site trials under a typical landscape environment.

When I started as an Extension Educator in 2006, I knew a little bit about the EarthKind™ program started at Texas A&M and their work with roses in the South. The EarthKind™ program combines both research and extension/education. I was impressed with their program and called to see if there was a way we could begin a branch of EarthKind™ following similar principles in the north. To my delight, they were just as excited about the possibility as I was. In January 2007 the EarthKind™ team invited me down for a day long EarthKind™ symposium in Houston. I joined a group of about 100 Master Gardeners, rosarians, and people just passionate about plants for this wonderful series of educational sessions devoted to all aspects of EarthKind™ (it includes multiple components to support environmental stewardship of the ornamental landscape) and toured some of the research sites. Conveying this experience with the University of Minnesota Extension Horticulture team, we knew this was something we wanted/needed to be a part of. They had a strong foundation and growing national recognition, and partnering with them in this important research instead of trying to start a completely independent effort would be the best use of limited resources. Before going into specific details about the Northern EarthKind™ Rose Trials and other exciting opportunities we have to expand into herbaceous perennial and shrub trials, I would love to share with you highlights of the history of EarthKind™ and a general overview of the program.

Background of EarthKind™

In the early 1990’s scientists at Texas A&M University initiated EarthKind™, a program serving as an umbrella for research-based information regarding sound environmental stewardship of the ornamental landscape. At this time the need for tested information to help answer questions of people interested in more sustainable practices were growing and there was limited data on which to base recommendations. Dr. Steve George, the founder of EarthKind™, and a handful of colleagues began this huge task with their limited resources to begin to address these questions for those they served in the state of Texas. Rose cultivar trials, soil health and nutrition, and turf management were some of the areas they initially focused their attention on.

They recognized there was a need for this kind of information in context of regional environmental conditions beyond the citizens of Texas and the program expanded. The program has since expanded throughout the United States and some additional countries (Canada, Bermuda, India, and New Zealand). The mission is to provide all sectors of the horticulture industry (i.e. consumers, nurseries, landscapers, municipalities, retailers, etc.) with regionally appropriate, trustworthy, cutting-edge, research-based information regarding environmental stewardship of the ornamental landscape. With all the connotations, contention, and diversity in definitions surrounding recognizable terms like sustainable and organic, the new and straightforward term EarthKind™ was coined by Dr. Steve George. The goal is to use the most kind practices to the earth as possible as we identify plants and management systems that still preserves the general vision of what people deem as an acceptable landscape so it will be implemented and have impact. The EarthKind™ approach can be applied to all facets of the landscape: ornamentals, turf, vegetables, and fruit. Areas of emphasis that started the program and continue strongly include 1). identifying soil and nutrition management strategies which are low input, effective, and recycle nutrients from municipal yard waste thus reducing pressure on overcrowded landfills, 2). identifying regionally-adapted plant materials which perform well under local climatic conditions, and 3). increasingly methods and plant materials that help to conserve limited water resources.

Plants in cultivar trials are trialed using low maintenance principles and the knowledge gained from what has been learned through nutrition management studies (compost added initially and organic mulch maintained at a 3” layer), water saving practicies (watering during the establishment phase and then only in cases of extreme drought afterwards), no fertilizers (beyond the initial compost and maintained mulch layer), no deadheading or pruning, and no pesticides. In addition, it was confirmed early on that own-root roses (propagated from cuttings and not grafted) tend to be longer lived and more adaptable. Therefore, all EarthKind™ rose trials use only own-root roses and for winning EarthKind™ rose cultivars to be EarthKind™ they need to be sold as own-root plants as well.

Roses have become the model landscape shrub for EarthKind™ cultivar evaluation for some very good reasons. Roses are our national flower and have long been a favorite for many gardeners and landscapers due to their extended season of flowering, diversity of flower color, fragrance, form, plant size, and growth habits. In addition, with the great diversity among them in performance, cultivar trials are very useful to highlight the best performing roses for a typical landscape. By using the EarthKind™ approach, regionally adapted cultivars can be identified that demonstrate consistently superior performance well-suited to particular climates. Roses that are EarthKind™ for one region may or may not prove adapted enough to be EarthKind™ in another region. EarthKind™ winning cultivars can be endorsed with confidence to the general public, landscapers, nurseries, and municipalities. With some basic attention given to soil preparation, site selection, mulch, and irrigation during establishment, these roses are highly likely to succeed. This results in many positive benefits including:

• Greater satisfaction and people more likely to continue gardening.
• A greater positive impact on the environmental with less need of pesticides and over application of fertilizers to try to make poorly adapted plants succeed.
• Greater financial savings for especially municipalities and others managing large landscapes due to more efficient use of limited financial and human resources.
• An open door to provide those interested with more information about other components of EarthKind™ to support environmentally sound landscape stewardship.

Status of EarthKind™ rose research before the Northern EarthKind™ Rose trials began

Scientists at Texas A&M University identified 17 rose cultivars that have earned EarthKind™ status for the South (two more have been added since for a total of 19). For a rose to become EarthKind™ it must: Perform well in an initial large, university trial making the first cut and then perform consistently well regionally across multiple sites hosted by Master Gardeners, parks, botanical gardens, interested individuals, and/or community gardens. The roses that are included in the large phase one university trials are very carefully chosen taking into account any previous trial data from within and outside the region and recommendations from horticultural leaders including nursery professionals and rose societies. The goal is to use the limited resources available for these trials very wisely. By clearly eliminating roses that do not possess the level of pest tolerance or general adaptability necessary to merit EarthKind™ from the start, there will be more resources to devote to those that are more likely to prove themselves as EarthKind™. Although antidotal evidence helps to focus in on roses to initially include in the trials, to earn the prestigious EarthKind™ status, roses need to have supporting data behind them from the full EarthKind™ trial protocol confidently supporting their inclusion among this very elite group of cultivars.

For the larger, initial university trial where a hundred or more cultivars are trialed, the duration of the trials is four years. Data is taken monthly during the second through fourth growing seasons with no data taken during year one to allow for plant establishment and any residual pesticides to dissipate. The monthly data is taken on traits assessing pest tolerance, flowering characteristics, and overall plant habit and landscape impact. The very best of these roses in the phase one university trial, along with a reference or standard cultivar for comparison, are then planted at several additional sites across the region. These roses are monitored for three years with data taken years two and three. After this point there is enough data to understand the cultivar’s performance throughout the region and designate winners with confidence. Those roses that are on the fence may be put in additional secondary trials until enough data on their overall performance is gathered to confidently decide if they have earned EarthKind™ recognition or not. Although this extended timeframe slows down the evaluation process in comparison to typical rose evaluation programs that typically grow roses only two years, it elevates the value of roses earning EarthKind™ designation. With variable climatic conditions over years, the extended trial period also helps to expose the plants to more environmental factors and allow them to mature and assess their long term landscape adaptability. The priority isn’t to have newly designated cultivars each season to fuel marketing efforts, but to have those that are designated as EarthKind™ to truly possess superior performance in a typical landscape in the region of designation.

Besides the previously mentioned components of EarthKind™ trialing (number of years under evaluation; nutrition, water, and pest management components; regional adaptation; and monthly data collection that is generally a higher frequency of data collection during the growing season than other rose evaluation programs), the EarthKind™ rose program has a number of other features that set it apart from the leading rose evaluation programs. This includes attention to blocking, check or reference cultivars, and more of an independent consumer-based perspective and driving force. Although EarthKind™ works with nurseries to learn about new roses and obtain plants, nurseries are not a primary funding source for the work and all rose cultivars, no matter who bred them or when they were bred, can be included if they have the characteristics that suggest they have the potential to earn EarthKind™ status.

Blocking and check or reference cultivars are critical elements to cultivar trials of most crops and are employed in EarthKind™ trialing. Blocking (we use a randomized complete block design) involves separating out the replicates of a particular cultivar across the trial site. They are separated in different complete subsections of the garden with representatives of all the cultivars randomized when planted for more statistical power when analyzing the data. When, for instance, all four plants of a particular cultivar are planted by each other in a trial, like done in many of the leading rose trials, one does not know for sure to what extent the rose’s performance (good or bad) can be attributed to the cultivar itself or if the particular region of the garden they are all planted in is more or less suitable than another location. For instance, when all four plants of a cultivar with generally above average disease tolerance are planted next to a very susceptible cultivar, the true resistance of the above average cultivar may be difficult to see with all of the innoculum being spilled onto it from its neighbor. If blocking with randomization was used, the cultivar with above average resistance would be planted across the garden next to various other roses and the variation in disease incidence on the cultivar can be better documented and overall it should be possible to determine it has above average disease resistance. Having a reference or check cultivar common throughout all the trials is also important. The performance of this cultivar relative to the others can provide useful information for comparisons, especially when all trial cultivars for secondary EarthKind™ trials cannot be accommodated in a single garden.

Besides the continuing EarthKind™ rose trials going on in the South through the support of many partners including significant support from the Houston Rose Society, there is a collection of 30 rose cultivars, known as the EarthKind™ Brigade, that are being evaluated across the mid section of the United States. These 30 roses have enough cold tolerance to survive the winters in a large part of the nation, but most of these cultivars are not reliably winter hardy in USDA cold hardiness zones 3 and 4. There is a need to identify EarthKind™ worthy roses for zones 3 and 4 and the initiation of the Northern EarthKind™ Rose Trials.

Initiation of the Northern EarthKind™ Rose Trials

Fortunately, there are disease-tolerant roses which will reliably survive our zones 3 and 4 winters without protection. Information gathered on the performance of such roses from nursery professionals, rose societies, and observations in our regional landscapes and public rose gardens formed the foundation with which we developed this first collection of 20 rose cultivars to trial. At this time, part of the criteria for cultivar consideration is that cultivars need to rebloom during the growing season and also rugosa roses are not being evaluated due to their susceptibility to iron chlorosis in higher pH soils. These criteria may be changed for future trials.

In addition, there is a modification to the pruning criteria and evaluation model compared to the South. Since most landscape roses encounter dieback in our climate, pruning will be allowed to remove winterkilled tissue in the spring. In addition, due to the growing reputation of EarthKind™ and wanting to provide information for northern gardeners, the trial will start with multiple sites across the north initially. This is also possible as there is a relatively small number of cultivars that have reputations of being reliably cold hardy and pest resistant for the north to begin with.

As of now there are 8 complete Northern EarthKind™ trial sites and one Northern EarthKind™ demonstration site at Muriel Sahlin Arboretum in Central Park in Roseville (a demonstration garden has one each of the cultivars planted with signage to promote the program and provide conformational data as to the performance of the different cultivars in the full sites). Three of these trial sites are in Minnesota (University of Minnesota Outreach, Research, and Education Park in Rosemount, zone 4; Centennial Park in Moorehead, zone 3; and The Sisters of St. Benedict in Crookston; zone 3), one in Iowa (The Horticulture Research Farm outside of Ames, border of zones 4 and 5), one in Nebraska (Haworth Park in Bellevue, border of zones 4 and 5), and Colorado (outside of Fort Collins, zone 3). The additional two are located in Kansas (John C. Pair Horticultural Center, Haysville, KS) and Texas (Texas A&M Commerce, Commerce, TX) to see how far south these roses perform well for possible inclusion in future EarthKind™ trials in those regions. Key collaborators for this effort and hosts of these sites include: Dr. Steve George, Dr. Derald Harp, Dr. Jason Griffin, Kathleen Cue, Anita and Mike Eckley, Joanne and Bob Langabee, Tamla Blunt, Randy Nelson, Nick Howell, Eric Castle, Mike Klawitter, and Patti Sullivan.

The twenty rose cultivars included in the current Northern EarthKind™ Rose Trials.
Cultivara	Horticultural class	Flower color	Approx. height in feet
Radbrite (Brite Eyes)	Large flowered climber	Pink Blend	6
RADramblin (Ramblin' Red)	Large flowered climber	Red	8
John Cabot	Hybrid kordesii	Deep magenta	10
John Davis	Hybrid kordesii	Light Pink	6
Quadra	Hybrid kordesii	Red	6
William Baffin	Hybrid kordesii	Pink	10
Alexander Mackenzie	Shrub	Light Red	6
BAIine (Yellow Submarine)	Shrub	Yellow	3
BAIlena (Lena)	Shrub	Light Pink	2.5
BAIole (Ole)	Shrub	Blush white	2.5
BAIore (Polar Joy)	Shrub	Pink	5
BAIset (Sunrise Sunset)	Shrub	Pink Blend	3
BAIsven (Sven)	Shrub	Purple	3
Bucbi (Carefree Beauty)	Shrub	Pink	4
Frontenac	Shrub	Pink	3
George Vancouver	Shrub	Light Red	5
Morden Blush	Shrub	Blush white	4
Prairie Joy	Shrub	Light pink	4
Seafoam	Shrub	White	2.5
Summer Wind	Shrub	Orange-pink	4
a Trademark or exhibition name, if different from cultivar name, is listed in parenthesis.

Planting occurred in spring of 2007 for the UMore Park site and late 2007 or 2008 for the other sites. The first year of data was collected at UMore Park in 2008 and will begin at the other sites in 2009. By the end of 2011, the data for all of these sites should be complete with the first possible Northern EarthKind™ winners announced in 2012. All the sites, excect for the Colorado site, are located within public gardens or research facilities. All of the Minnesota sites are easily accessible to the public for viewing.

Complementary EarthKind™ Work and New EarthKind™ Trials on the Horizon

In addition to working with collaborators to initiate the Northern EarthKind™ Rose Trials, the University of Minnesota is serving a key role for the EarthKind™ team in surveying roses for their tolerance to multiple races of the fungus (Diplocarpon rosae) that causes black spot, a very problematic disease in roses. The roses currently being characterized are the ones that have won EarthKind™ in the South, the 30 roses in the EarthKind™ Brigade, the 20 in the Northern EarthKind™ Rose Trials, and some recent promising cultivars touted as having extreme blackspot resistance. Vance Whitaker studied isolates of the fungus for his Masters from collections made all over Eastern North America for his Masters with his advisor Dr. Stan Hokanson. These isolates fell into three different races or forms. These races are well preserved and available to use to challenge these roses to ascertain their resistance under laboratory conditions. These results will be compared to field resistance ratings for the predictability of this lab assay in characterizing the performance of these cultivars in the landscape. If it proves to be predictive, this relatively quick assay can prove to be very useful in objectively helping narrow down which cultivars merit inclusion in future trials. We may be able to determine a minimum threshold of resistance a cultivar needs to have in these assays to include in the trials and be able to hold up in the landscape to this very destructive disease and have the potential to earn EarthKind™. With the variability in this pathogen, being able to assess resistance to the different forms out there is a tremendous advantage. Variable reports for resistance of a cultivar often stem from which form(s) of blackspot happen to be present in a particular garden.

The next set of Northern EarthKind™ trials are on the horizon. In order to best get an idea of the performance of some of the newer landscape roses in our climate under lower input conditions, over 20 such cultivars have been planted in preliminary trials at UMore Park, Lyndale Park Rose Garden (Minneapolis), Virginia Clemons Rose Garden (St. Cloud), and the Leif Erikson Rose Garden (Duluth). Observations on their general disease tolerance and winter hardiness will be very helpful in determining which merit inclusion in the next Northern EarthKind™ Rose Trial. In the near future there are plans to initiate regional EarthKind™ herbaceous perennial trials and shrub trials. Members of the EarthKind™ team met this past October to brainstorm how to get this work off the ground. Dr. Ann Marie Vanderzanten from Iowa State University will lead the national effort for EarthKind™ Perennials and our own Kathy Zuzek, University of Minnesota Extension Educator, will lead the national effort for EarthKind™ Shrubs.

Efforts are also underway to continue to expand EarthKind™ internationally (EarthKind™ work is currently underway in the United States, Canada, Bermuda, India, and New Zealand) and to initiate more work in turf and soil management. Part of the goal of international EarthKind™ rose research is to help people identify the most adapted roses for their regions and then eventually share and trial such roses across regions to see how widespread these roses are adapted. This will lead to a growing collection of the world’s most adapted landscape roses that will not only serve those that want to grow adapted roses in their region, but also breeders as they can use this information to narrow in on parents that will hopefully transmit superior characteristics to new roses. More information about EarthKind™ resources can be found at: http://earthkind.tamu.edu/ and http://earthkindroses.tamu.edu/ . In addition, a review article documenting the EarthKind™ rose research has been accepted and will be coming out in a special issue of the scientific journal Floriculture and Ornamental Biotechnology devoted to rose research slated for release in February 2009. (http://www.globalsciencebooks.info/Journals/FOB.html) Please look for periodic updates about EarthKind™ research in the Yard and Garden News and other publications.

---

If you are a gardener, or a nature enthusiast at any level, you already know the healing power of plants. Anecdotal evidence, personal experience and common sense support the fact that being around natural environments helps most people feel better. But what does science tell us about the healing power of gardens and landscapes?

Healing Garden and Therapeutic Landscape: Defined

According to Clare Cooper-Marcus (1999, 2002) a healing garden is a general term referring to an over-all sense of well-being in a comfortable and appealing outdoor space. It is a green space that provides relief from physical symptoms and provides stress reduction. It is a secure, visible, and accessible space with ample, well-maintained greenery. A healing garden incorporates unambiguous positive design features with places for people to sit alone or in groups.

Diane Relf (2005) a leading scientist in the field of Human Horticulture defines a healing garden as a “term more frequently applied to a garden at a healthcare facility that is intended for use by staff, visitors, and clients at their discretion, rather than as a part of a treatment plan”(p. 236). She goes on to say how research “has indicated that these types of gardens (healing gardens) are more effective in creating a restoration effect if the various users are directly involved in all aspects of the design, installation and maintenance of the garden”(p. 236).

Becke Davis (2007) tells us a therapeutic landscape is a supportive design that is used as part of a treatment intervention. The landscape is designed to address a particular aspect of the healing process for a patient/individual. Therapeutic landscape design is more specific and “is used towards a measurable outcome upon a disease process within a given patient and/or group of patients. The therapeutic landscape is less focused on healing in the spiritual context and more kin to the disease model of illness as practiced in most allopathic medical systems” (p. 32).

Cooper-Marcus (2005) suggests that a therapeutic landscape is a green space for passive or quasi-passive activities. Adding that a therapeutic landscape needs to provide a measurable degree of relief from physical symptoms, stress reduction and improvement in overall sense of well-being. Similarly, Elisabeth Palka (1999) defines a therapeutic landscape as a place that promotes wellness by facilitating relaxation and restoration and enhancing some combination of physical, mental and spiritual healing.

Diane Relf (2005) describes a therapeutic landscape as a “garden that is used as part of a treatment program by various members of the medical staff” (p. 236). For example, it may include “walkways and steps or grassed raised bed to use as an outdoor exercise mat designed with the physical therapist as an outdoor exercise room” (p. 236).

Healing Garden and Therapeutic Landscape: Similarities and Differences

A healing garden and a therapeutic landscape share two things in common:

1. green space
2. both seek to improve a patient’s health, quality of life and well-being.

The essential differences are found in the garden and/or landscape design purposes and how that garden/landscape design is utilized.

While a well designed healing garden could also act as a therapeutic landscape, it is generally conceived as a green space set apart at the hospital or healthcare facility where all people – staff, patients, family, and visitors – can find a sense of restoration and relief.

The therapeutic landscape by distinction has an intentional, purposeful and measurable means to bring about health and well-being, often designed to meet the needs of specific patient populations. The therapeutic landscape is a space designed for a therapeutic treatment to bring about a certain measurable outcome. It can be thought of as similar to a medication taken for a specific disease or illness.

Clare Cooper-Marcus (2006) explains in The Garden as a Treatment Milieu how two gardens at the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences in Alnarp, Sweden have been designed to observe the healing effects of gardens as part of the treatment intervention for people with a variety of stress-related diseases. There are two groups in the experiment: one group being treated with gardens with the choice to either work (therapeutic landscapes) or relax (healing gardens) under the care of professional staff (occupational therapy, horticultural therapy, physical therapy, psychotherapy), for one half day to four half days a week over a period of twelve weeks. The other group, a control group, is being treated in a more traditional manner including a long period of rest at-home plus typical anti-depressant drugs (Prozac and Zoloft) and five or six sessions of physical therapy or psychotherapy.

The results of the study are yet to be determined but as one of the staff remarked “I’ve been working with stressed and sick people for 25 years and the changes we see here in the garden in three months are faster and deeper than anything I’ve seen before” (Cooper-Marcus, 2006, p.26).

Cooper-Marcus (2006) summarizes with “these gardens are in the vanguard of a whole new movement – the treatment of physical and psychological problems through non-drug interventions”(p.36). She encourages Landscape Architects “to be aware of this movement to design healing gardens and therapeutic landscape nature experiences that serve as treatments for a variety of psychological and physical symptoms. They may well become the ‘pharmacists’ of the future” (p.37).

Healing Garden and Therapeutic Landscapes: History

Healing gardens and therapeutic landscapes have a similar historical tradition in healthcare over time. For example, the healing powers of plants found in pharmacopeia can be traced as far back as ancient China and the Ayurvedic traditions of India (Gesler, 1992) while the Asclepieia of ancient Greece are considered to be the first healthcare facilities of Europe designed with the healing powers of nature in mind (van den Berg, 2005).

The middle ages brought two important features which helped pave the way for healing gardens and therapeutic landscapes – the “doctrine of signatures” (Potterton, 1983) and monastic infirmaries. During this time medical care was often carried out by religious institutions, administered by nuns and monks, where the standard treatment was to heal patients with medicinal plants, ritual and prayer. The design of these monastic infirmaries adhered to important aspects of monastic life, including a garden for medicinal plants, and patient rooms designed to be facing the south, adjacent to a central courtyard or garden.

The garden for medicinal plants was used by the monks and nuns for medical treatments. The medical treatments at the time were systematized based on a practice known as the “doctrine of signatures.” The “doctrine of signatures” is based on the belief that objects in nature which looked similar to human organs were thought to be divinely given, and could be used for cures (Gesler, 1992, Potterton, 1983).

Patient rooms were placed adjacent to a central courtyard or garden to encourage the patient’s contemplation of and spiritual connection with God. The rooms faced south so patients could be warmed by the sunlight and to keep them in a well-ventilated environment. The courtyard was often designed to symbolize the Garden of Eden (van den Berg, 2005).

The monastic tradition gave way to the pavilion style hospitals in the late 17th early 18th century hospitals. The pavilion style was developed in France and included design features similar to monastic infirmaries in that the design made use of the natural environment as a therapeutic instrument for patient healing. The natural environment was used for its three characteristics: sunlight, fresh air and peaceful green surroundings (Cooper-Marcus & Barnes, 1999).

Florence Nightingale became an internationally renowned advocate for healing environments that took full advantage of nature’s three elements: sunlight, air, and green space (Dossey, 2000). Dossey writes how Florence witnessed the poor conditions of British military hospitals and mandated the introduction of hygienic standards that saved the lives of thousands of patients around the world. She ingeniously used statistics to calculate mortality rates and learned the disparity was largely due to differing physical environments. Dossey describes how in Notes on Hospitals, Nightingale asserts how important it is to maintain low patient densities in hospital wards, circulation of fresh air, adequate light, good drainage, clean kitchens and laundry rooms, and gardens for contemplation and restoration (Dossey, 2000).

During the late 19th and early 20th century there was a movement to reform psychiatry which sought to shift treatment of people with mental illness from the institution out into the community. This movement was called moral treatment and was begun in reaction to the dehumanizing methods of care commonly applied to people with mental illness (Gesler et. al., 2004). At this time in the United States, Dr. Benjamin Rush, a physician with training in psychiatry, used the agrarian fields of Pennsylvania for his patients with mental illness. The farm setting was thought to be a calming place and a curative setting for patients with mental illness (Simon & Straus, 2003).

By the early to mid-20th century, after World Wars I and II, gardens designed for rehabilitation and therapeutic purpose came about as a result of the many people with physical disabilities returning from combat. The expansion of rehabilitation hospitals in the 1940’s and 1950’s did much to expand and improve the practice of healing gardens and therapeutic landscapes (Simon & Straus, 2003).

Healing Gardens and Therapeutic Landscapes: Present

Today, healing gardens and therapeutic landscapes base their conceptual framework on the work of Roger Ulrich (Ulrich 1999, Gesler et. al., 2004). Both the literature for healing gardens and therapeutic landscapes cite Ulrich’s seminal work “A Room with a View” as the preeminent research study supporting the potential for nature to heal.

In this study, Ulrich (1984) conducted an experiment with matched groups of patients recovering from gall bladder surgery. Of the 46 patients, 23 looked out a hospital room into nature while the other 23 looked at a brick wall. The group that looked out their hospital window into nature had shorter hospital stays, received fewer analgesic medications, received fewer negative comments in nursing notes, and had a shorter length of stay then the other 23 people who looked at a brick wall.

Even though therapeutic landscape and healing gardens come from similar but different principles, both base their conceptual framework on Ulrich’s theory of supportive design (Gesler et. al, 2004, Ulrich,1999, 2000, 2002). While speaking at the Investigating the Relationship between Health and the Landscape conference (2000) Ulrich said:

“What is the theory of supportive garden design? It is a garden that is supportive of patients coping with the major stress that always accompanies illness. Supportive garden design helps patients reduce stress and its negative effect and hence, improve patient outcomes” (p.34).

Ulrich’s Theory of Supportive Design (see Figure 2) proposes the following four stress coping mechanisms must be in a garden design to support the goal of stress reduction:

1. Control
2. Social Support
3. Movement and exercise
4. Access to Nature and/or other distractions

Figure 2: Ulrich’s Theory of Supportive Design (1999)

Control: According to Roger Ulrich (1999, 2000, 2002) people have a strong need for a sense of control with respect to their surroundings. Ulrich cites a textbook by Gatchel et.al. (1989) as an essential resource for understanding how control refers to a person’s real or perceived need to influence their situation and have a voice in determining what others may do to them. In general, when a person is engaged in a situation with uncontrollable conditions, stress is increased, which may lead to an increase in negative effects (i.e. depression, high blood pressure, reduced immune function), which then may potentially worsen patient outcomes.

Ulrich (2000) explains:

“Have you ever considered the loss of control the patient feels when going to the hospital? From giving up what you wear to when you wake-up or retire-to bed, all the things a patient is required to do are processed according to bureaucratic methods and procedures; a depersonalization that takes away a sense of control” (p.42).

Improved health outcomes that come from experiencing a sense of control may include better health and a reduction in feelings of helplessness (Haller & Kramer, 2006). A garden designed to increase a patients sense of control can help to reduce patient stress. For example, Ulrich asserts these specific design elements as essential to addressing patient sense of control: way-finding signs and hospital maps, convenient accessibility for people using wheelchairs or other medical devices, easy access to dining or staff lounges, a variety of garden spaces that enable users to choose privacy and/or adequate space to prevent crowding for large group gatherings (Ulrich, 1999).

Social Support: Ulrich et. al. (2004) says social support is well documented in the mind/body medicine literature at improving health outcomes. Generally the mind/body literature shows that contact with caring, emotionally supportive and instrumentally helpful people are good for improving health outcomes and overall wellness. While few studies have focused on features of social support in gardens, Ulrich asserts garden designs that foster social support will improve patient outcomes. Garden features necessary for the enhancement of social support include: a variety of spaces for sitting with comfortable moveable chairs, garden location close to and accessible to waiting areas for family/visitors and patient rooms, and garden spaces that consider the cultural/ethnic issues associated with patients served (Ulrich,1999).

Movement and Exercise: Ulrich (2000b) further explains the theory of supportive design include garden areas for exercise and movement. Research shows that even a few minutes of mild exercise improves mood, reduces stress and how regular exercise is known to lower levels of depression. A garden serves as a pleasant place for patients/family to move in their wheelchairs or walk. In particular, gardens which promote patient accessibility and independence through a well-designed pathway system will help to motivate a patient to get up and out to move their body.

Nature: Lastly, positive distractions refer to a small set of environmental features or conditions that has been found to effectively reduce stress (Ulrich, 2004). As Ulrich (2000b) explains:

“…humans have evolved features that effectively and quickly produce restoration from stress. Most phenomena that have been important to humans throughout evolution are distractions such as laughter, art, music, companion animals and nature all feature effective and quick restoration from stress. The focus here is on nature” (p.54).

Conclusion:

Many studies have found that even a brief encounter with nature will reduce stress within three to five minutes (Ulrich, 2004). Research scientists have been reporting the stress-reduction and restorative benefits of viewing nature contribute to a cluster of positive emotional and physiological changes (Ulrich, 2004). Laboratory and clinical studies have shown that viewing nature reduces stress and is made evident in reduced blood pressure and heart activity (Ulrich, 1999).

References:

Copper-Marcus, C. (2005). What is the difference between a Healing Garden and a Therapeutic Landscape? Slide notes from the conference, Healing by Design: the health benefits through landscape, garden and interior design. Chaska, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum, 30 – 58.

Cooper-Marcus, C. (2002). Great Greenery. Health Facilities Management,15(5), 20.

Cooper-Marcus, C. (2006). The Garden as a treatment milieu. Landscape Architecture, 96(5), 26-37.

Cooper-Marcus, C., & Barnes, M. (Eds.). (1999). Healing gardens: Therapeutic benefits and design recommendations. New York: John Wiley, 27-86.

Davis, B. (2007). Healing and therapeutic gardens. The Landscape Contractor, August, 32-35.

Dossey, B. (2000). Florence Nightingale: Mystic, visionary, healer. Pennsylvania: Springhouse Press Corp.

Gatchel, R., Braum, A., & Krantz, D. (1989). An introduction to health psychology (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

Gesler, W. (1992). Therapeutic landscapes: Medical issues in light of the new cultural geography. Social Science & Medicine. 34(7), 735-746.

Gesler, W., Bell, M., Curtis, S., Hubbard, P., & Francis, S. (2004). Therapy by design: evaluating the UK hospital building program. Health and Place, 10,117-128.

Haller, R., & Kramer, C. (2006). Horticultural therapy methods. New York: Haworth Press, Inc.

Potterton, D. (Ed.). (1983). Culpepper’s Colorful Herbal. New York: Sterling Publishing Co.

Relf, D. (2005). The therapeutic value of plants, Sweden. Pediatric Rehabilitation, 8(3), 235-237.

Simon, S., & Straus, M. (Eds.). (2003). Horticulture as therapy: Principles and practice. New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.

Ulrich, R. (1984). A view through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science, 224, 420-421.

Ulrich, R. (1999). Effects of gardens on health outcomes: theory and research. In C. C. Marcus & M. Barnes (Eds.). Healing gardens: Therapeutic benefits and design recommendations (27-86). New York: John Wiley.

Ulrich, R. (2000). Evidence-based garden design for improving health outcomes. Proceedings of the conference, Investigating the Relationship between Health and the Landscape. Chaska, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum, 30 – 58.

Ulrich, R. (2000b). Effects of Healthcare Environmental Design on Medical Outcomes, Proceedings of the conference, International Academy for Design and Health. Canada: 49 – 59.

Ulrich, R. (2002). Health benefits of gardens in hospitals. Paper for conference. Plants for People International Exhibition Florida.

Ulrich, R., Quan, X., Zimrin, C., Joseph, A., & Choudhary, R. (2004). The role of the physical environment in the hospital of the 21st century: A once in a lifetime opportunity. Report to the Center for Health design for the Designing the 21st Century Hosptial Project. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Van Den Berg, A. (2005). Health impacts of Healing Environments. Groningen, Netherlands: University Hospital of Groningen.

---

You figure once you bring your houseplants in from the outside for the winter, especially if you don’t see any pests on the leaves, you are probably pest free. However, that was not the case for a homeowner that had brought in some potted geraniums during fall. In November, she noticed some chewed leaves and droppings on the foliage one of the plants (the others were uninfested). This prompted a closer inspection of the plant which led to the discovery of a caterpillar.

After some investigation, the caterpillar appears to be a tobacco budworm. These insects are not native to Minnesota but are occasionally found in gardens during late summer after they have ridden air currents up from the south. (see Yard and Garden News, September 1, 2007, http://www.extension.umn.edu/projects/yardandgarden/YGLNews/YGLNewsSept12007.html#tobaccobudworms). They would not survive our winters outdoors but this individual received a reprieve when it was brought indoors. It presumably was hiding in the soil escaping detection.

Further investigation did not turn up any additional caterpillars. Physical control was the only necessary action that was needed in this case. This is not a common insect in Minnesota and the amount of injury it caused was minor. The lesson here is to continue to monitor your houseplants for pests not only in the fall after you have brought them indoors, but periodically throughout the winter for any problems that may have been missed.

 

 

---

Although spring seems far off with all the cold, snow, and ice, now is a great time to think about our gardens and what supplies we need. January is a great time to visit local garden centers and start perusing seed racks and getting our orders in for seeds and nursery stock from mail order suppliers. With the tightening economy, many of the mail order seed supplier have reported an almost doubling in their vegetable seed sales in 2008. Many gardeners that wanted to purchase more seed of quick growing vegetables like lettuce and radishes last fall ended up being disappointed because many suppliers were sold out. The trend for a higher demand for especially vegetable seeds is likely to continue. Getting our seed orders in early and purchasing seeds locally early this year will help ensure we get what we want.

Now is a great time of year to repot our houseplants that need it. Their growth has generally been slowed due to the shortening day length, which will help reduce the amount of stress they are subjected to during the process. Some reasons to repot include: the plant is becoming relatively large for the container, excessively pot bound, and needs very frequent watering to keep up with moisture needs; there may be problems with white crusty minerals, soluble salts, and increasing pH leading to reduced plant growth due to poor water quality; or one just has a more attractive pot. During repotting gently tease apart the excessively pot bound roots. If you suspect poor water quality over time has led to changes in soil pH or other properties, gently shake out some of the old soil and replace it with new soil during repotting.

January is the best time of year to start stem cuttings of many evergreens. Those within the Cupressaceae family (Cypress family) root especially well compared to other evergreens and includes junipers and arborvitae. Yews are also relatively easy to root too. Take stem cuttings that are a few to several inches long and remove foliage that would be under the soil surface (typically an inch or two of stem under the soil surface is optimum as this helps to stabilize the cutting). Rooting hormone will help hasten root initiation, but cuttings can eventually root without it as well. Sand or a mixture of three parts perlite:one part peat tends to work well. Multiple cuttings can be placed in a pot and transplanted to individual pots later. A clear plastic baggie over the pot will help to increase humidity and reduce moisture loss from the cuttings. Place pots in bright indirect light or under florescent lights. Be patient as rooting can take several weeks. To learn more about rooting stem cuttings, please refer to: Starting Stem Cuttings to Keep Tender Perennial Favorites through the Winter.

---

For larger views of most images, just click on the image.

Back issues Yard & Garden Line News for the past nine years are online.

For plant and insect questions, visit Ask a Master Gardener. Thousands of questions have been answered, so try the search option in the black bar at the top left of the board for the fastest answer.

Receive an e-mail reminder when the next issue of the Yard and Garden News is posted to the web:

Name

Email

unsubscribe

Happy gardening!

David C. Zlesak, Ph.D.
Editor
Extension Educator