Using Science to Inform Gardening Decisions

Photo by Daniel Mosquin

Gardening has long been an activity where science has informed its practitioners. Consider the decisions about what plant might thrive in a particular place, or how to manage a particular pest in as benign a way as possible. Using science at some level, whether observational or through experimental findings, (hopefully) has helped you to be a more successful gardener by helping to answer these and other questions.

But what about the big decisions that go beyond the day-to-day? For example, with awareness of the climate crisis, should I plan a garden around long-lived plants or short-lived plants? With biodiversity loss and the climate crisis combined, would native plant species be better for supporting current local wildlife or should I choose climate-resilient plants that foster the future community of wildlife as animals shift their ranges? Indeed, with all the crises facing the world (the polycrisis), should I bother gardening at all?

These and other weighty questions were asked of the Friends of the Garden in an early January presentation on “Using Science to Inform Gardening Decisions” by UBC Botanical Garden’s Research and Biodiversity Informatics Manager, Daniel Mosquin.

Drawing upon recent scientific findings and discussions in ecology, conservation biology, environmental horticulture, and human behavioural science, Daniel asserted that science can help with these big picture decisions as well, imperfect though the science may sometimes currently be. In answer to the few questions above:

Regarding long-lived or short-lived plants, lean short-lived. With environmental variability increasing due to the climate crisis, evidence points to plants which can reside dormant as seeds through unfavourable conditions ultimately becoming a greater proportion of all individual plants in the world. Notably, though not scientific, this also seems to be reflected in modern gardening design trends with their emphases on herbaceous perennials, annual food plants, and xeriscaping.

With respect to native plants: lean native-ish. While it does seem that native plants at times support a broader range of wildlife compared to non-natives, the science remains unclear if that is true for all situations. Combined with range shifts in wildlife distributions, it seems like a bioregional approach is prudent (though not yet proven); imagine what the landscape vegetation will look like a century hence, and begin to provision those plants now. For us in Vancouver, this could mean plants from Oregon and northern California that are not native to British Columbia, but already grow in association with Douglas-fir and western red-cedar.

Lastly, should I bother gardening at all? The science offers an unqualified “yes”. Not only has it been proven many times that it is psychologically and physically beneficial to you as an individual, but what you share in your community by fostering beauty in the landscape can inspire awe and wonder (even in phone-addicted young adults, according to one paper!). The science suggests that this not only translates into pro-conservation behaviour and decisions, but pro-social ones. Your acts of gardening are a political stance of optimism; to paraphrase Caecilius Statius, “We plant trees to benefit another generation.”

Written by Daniel Mosquin
Research Manager at UBC Botanical Garden