New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Early 20th Century Botanist Gave Us Domesticated Blueberries

Botanist Fred Coville figured out that blueberries needed very acidic soil to become a crop and not just a wild plant. Steve Mirsky reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Mmmm, blueberries. It’s the height of the season, and I’ve been tossing a handful onto cereal, into pancakes or just straight into my mouth. Many of our crops were cultivated thousands of years ago, and we don’t know the individuals responsible. Not so for blueberries. Because the blueberry wasn’t domesticated until just about a century ago. And we have a botanist named Fred Coville to thank.

In 1912 if you wanted blueberries, you picked the wild variety. And it was devilishly difficult to get the plants to grow anywhere but where they were naturally found. Coville figured out after many dead ends that blueberries need exceedingly acidic soil: most plants like the soil at a neutral pH of about 7. Blueberries do best when the pH is about 4.5.

Colville also determined that blueberries can’t self-fertilize, so the grower must make sure the crop can be cross-pollinated. His research efforts are described in an article in the U.S. Department of Agriculture magazine Agricultural Research. [Kim Kaplan, Blueberry Growing Comes to the National Agricultural Library]


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


So next time you pop a blueberry, don’t forget to thank Fred.

—Steve Mirsky

[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe