+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## goldenseal {#goldenseal .Title-Header}                             |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| *Hydrastis canadensis* L.                                             |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Plant Symbol = HYCA                                                   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

*Contributed by: USDA NRCS National Plant Data Center*

![](media/image2.png){width="2.291732283464567in"
height="3.4374015748031495in"}

##### Alternate Names

orangeroo, yellow-puccoon, fard inolien, hydrastis du Canada, racirie
jaunisse, sceau d\'or, kanadische Orangewurz, hidrastis, raíz de oro

##### Status

Please consult the PLANTS Web site and your State Department of Natural
Resources for this plant's current status (e.g. threatened or endangered
species, state noxious status, and wetland indicator values).

The following topics are addressed in the publication, [Cultivating the
increasingly popular medicinal plant, goldenseal: Review and
update]{.underline} by Adrianne Sinclair and Paul M. Catling, which is
reproduced below.

This publication was reproduced from the American Journal of Alternative
Agriculture, volume 16 (3), with permission from the authors and the
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture.

Cultivating the increasingly popular medicinal plant, goldenseal: Review
and update

Adrianne Sinclair and Paul M. Catling

Abstract. *Interest in the cultivation of* *goldenseal is increasing and
this may have* *benefits for agriculture, human health, and
conservation. To enable a better understanding of growing conditions,
cultivation methods reported in the literature were reviewed, 21
natural* *goldenseal populations in the northern portion of its natural
range in North America were described and analyzed in terms of
population size and health, and 15 successful growers were interviewed
on requirements for optimal cultivation. Growing conditions in the wild
were compared to those reported in the cultivation literature. Summary
of data from natural populations suggests* *goldenseal grows best in
mixed hardwood forests, under 60‑65% shade, in moist sandy loam soils
high in organic matter, with pH 5.7 to 6.3. Similarly, review of the
literature suggests that* *goldenseal grows best in moist, well‑drained*
*loams high in organic matter, with pH 5.5 to 6.5. Reported shade
requirements vary but 47‑80% shade is considered optimal. Growing
conditions reported by growers were also consistent with the cultivation
literature and* *similar to conditions of wild populations. Although
optimal growing conditions are similar to those for many crops,*
*goldenseal is relatively robust and can grow well in a variety of
conditions including wet, predominantly sandy or clay soils with pH as
low as 4.8 and as high as 7.8. Cultivation can utilize a ginseng crop
infrastructure and* *goldenseal has been recommended as a rotation*
*crop for ginseng.* *Commercial production of* *goldenseal is
potentially advantageous because (1) it is an environmentally friendly
crop; (2) it has been grown successfully far outside its natural range,
is easy to grow, and is considered potentially profitable; and (3) it is
relatively inexpensive, having low energy, land area, and fertilization
requirements. Development of a sustainable crop may contribute to the
protection of native wild* *gennplasm, which can provide valuable
material for crop improvement.*

**Key words**: ginseng, natural resource conservation, plant ecology,
propagation, soil characteristics, sustainable agriculture, wild
germplasm

######### **Introduction**

Goldenseal *(Hydrastis* *canadensis* L*.*) is a North American woodland
herb with a yellow perennial rhizome. A new stem grows each year about
30 cm high. The leaves are large (up to 30 cm wide), usually with five
lobes. A single white flower, a mass of stamens with no petals, is
produced from late April to May, depending on latitude and altitude,
followed in July by a bright red berry with 10 to 30 black seeds. The
natural range of the plant extends from southern New England west
through the extreme southwestern portion of southern Ontario, to
southern Wisconsin, and south to Arkansas and northern Georgia.

Goldenseal is highly valued for its rhizome and roots that contain
medicinal alkaloids (Small and Catling, 1999). The roots have antibiotic
properties, suppressing certain bacteria, protozoans, and fungi, and are
used to treat AIDS and other severe chronic diseases, and digestive
disorders, and to enhance the immune system (Davis and Bit, 1998).
Commercial formulations prepared from the plant are widely used to treat
colds and nasal congestion, as well as certain infections and parasites
(Small and Calling, 1999).

**Increasing popularity**

Previously available only in specialty health and natural foods stores,
goldenseal and other medicinal herbs became part of the general
marketplace during the 1990s, and since then the demand has been
increasing dramatically (Foster, 2000). Between 1991 and 1996, the
wholesale value of goldenseal in the U.S. increased by as much as 600%
(Robbins, 1996). Since 1994 goldenseal has been one of the top six
best‑selling medicinal herbs in the U.S. (Robbins, 1996; Small and
Catling, 1999), and remains so today (Foster, 2000). Between 1995 and
1997, the medicinal plant market as a whole, as well as demand for
goldenseal, experienced in excess of a 30% growth rate (USFWS, 1997).
Goldenseal is also available in numerous drug products (Small and
Catling, 1999) and in a wide array of herbal products on international
markets, e.g., in France, Australia, Germany, United Kingdom, Italy, and
other European countries (IUCN, 1997; Robbins, 1996). Since demand has
increased greatly, and supplies have declined, the price of goldenseal
has increased dramatically. In the early 1990s, the price of goldenseal
ranged from \$18 to \$24 per kg (Foster, 2000). In 1999, the price
ranged from \$66 to \$110 per kg (Davis, 1999c; Foster, 2000). In 2000,
the price of goldenseal was over \$110 per kg, with some companies
charging over \$220 per kg (Foster, 2000; Price lists on World Wide
Web). The current goldenseal shortage and the large increase in its
demand appear to highlight the need for cultivated supplies to satisfy a
growing domestic and international market (Foster, 2000).

**Cultivation and conservation**

Goldenseal is perceived to be at high risk of extinction due to
excessive harvesting of wild populations to supply the market. The
Nature Conservancy (U.S.) has assigned the plant a national rank of N4
and a global rank of G4, indicating that it is not susceptible to
immediate threat; however, goldenseal is considered endangered,
critically imperiled, imperiled, rare, or uncommon in all 27 U.S. states
having native populations (USFWS, 1997). In Canada, goldenseal is
considered threatened due to increasing potential for unrestrained wild
harvest, as well as habitat loss (Sinclair and Catling, 2000a; White,
1991). Globally, goldenseal was added to Appendix 11 of CITES
(Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species) in 1997
(CITES, 2000), which requires that goldenseal be artificially propagated
for export (Environment Canada, 1999) and that national and
international trade in roots, rhizomes, rootstocks, and bulk powdered
herb will become more tightly regulated.

The actual risk of over‑harvest eliminating wild populations is
dependent on market conditions, as well as ecological characteristics.
Increased cultivation may soon reduce the price of goldenseal to the
point where collection of wild plants is not a threat to survival;
however, this point is best reached before wild germplasm is lost.
Results from a 1999 American Herbal Products Association survey
(McGuffin, 1999) are encouraging in suggesting that the goldenseal
market is in transition from wild to cultivated sources. Projections
suggest that 37 Mg will come from cultivated sources in 2000 and reach
90 Mg or more after 2003. In terms of goldenseal ecology, the long‑term
effects of digging wild roots are unknown. Although there are abundant
anecdotal references to a decline after digging (e.g., USFWS, 1997),
there is also evidence for a beneficial effect of some level of soil
disturbance (Sinclair and Catling, 2000b). While removal of large plants
may reduce seed production, soil disturbance may allow increases in
patch size in the long run, since goldenseal can produce new plants from
root pieces and tips.

**Objectives**

Until the late 1990s, there was very little detailed information
available on cultivation methods of goldenseal. Davis (1996a) summarized
information from available literature (Foster, 1991; Haage and Ballard,
1989; Hardacre et al., 1962; Lloyd, 1912; Van Fleet, 1914; Veninga and
Zaricor, 1976), and from farm and research station demonstrations,
growers, and collectors. Davis (1999a) noted that many of the current
recommendations for goldenseal cultivation are surprisingly consistent
with those found in a 1914 USDA Farmers\' Bulletin (Van Fleet, 1914),
which was updated and released again in 1949 (Sievers, 1949). Over the
past few years there has been a surge in research and interest in the
cultivation of goldenseal, which has resulted in numerous publications
from a wide range of sources, including universities, government
agencies, commercial growers, public conferences, associations, and
private researchers.

Our objectives are to (1) review information on goldenseal growth, from
the literature and from a survey of goldenseal growers, and (2) present
new information on natural populations. We hope this will increase
interest in cultivation of goldenseal, and thus reduce the actual and
perceived threat of over‑harvest.

######### **Methods**

To gather information on optimal conditions for goldenseal growth, a
literature search was conducted, using the keyword \"goldenseal\" alone
and in combination with \"cultivation,\" \"farming,\" \"propagation,\"
and others, in five major sources: (1) AGRICOLA (bibliographic database
for the National Agricultural Library and other institutions in
agricultural and related sciences); (2) AGRIS (International System for
the Agricultural Sciences and Technology); (3) BIOSIS (International
Bibliographic Database for the Life Sciences); (4) CUBE (Carleton
University and University of Ottawa collections, databases of the Center
for Research Libraries in Chicago, Canada Institute for Scientific and
Technical Information \[CISTI\], Norman Paterson School of International
Affairs/The Institute of European and Russian Studies Resource Centre);
and (5) the World Wide Web.

To further characterize growing conditions, data were collected in May
1998 from 21 natural goldenseal populations occurring in the northern
portion of the range in Ontario, i.e., the northern part of the plant\'s
range in North America. At each of the sites, population size
(determined by number of stems) was estimated by direct count; plant
species within goldenseal patches and tree species within a 10 m radius
around a patch were recorded; and the amount of shade, soil type, and
topography were noted. A \"patch\" constitutes a cluster of plants
spaced within approximately 0.3 m from other plants and \"sites\" are at
least 0.5 km apart. Patches give a very rough idea of genetic diversity
because different patches are likely to be genetically different whereas
plants within a patch could be identical due to clonal reproduction.

Shade was estimated based on a percentage scale indicating amount of
canopy through which direct light was penetrating. A soil sample, one
per site, was collected from 14 of the 21 sites, by pushing a metal
cylinder \[10 cm (3.9 inches) in diameter\] to 9.5 cm (3.7 inches) depth
into the soil within a patch of goldenseal. Soil samples were
transported in plastic bags to ACUTEST laboratories in Ottawa for
standard soil analysis (OMAFRA, 1988). Each sample was analyzed for pH,
organic matter (percentage dry weight lost on ignition), P (extracted
with sodium bicarbonate), K, Mg, Na, Ca (extracted with ammonium
acetate), Mn (extracted with phosphoric acid), and Zn (extracted with
DTPA, diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid). For the 21 populations, soil
texture (percentage sand, silt, and clay) was based on estimates from
the soil sample or on local soil survey data. Data on natural conditions
are valuable because in nature many stresses operate and the plant
habitat may be restricted to optimal conditions.

Fifteen major goldenseal producers throughout North America were
interviewed by telephone to help to further establish the requirements
for optimal cultivation. Well known, reliable growers with established
businesses and 5 to 18 years of first‑hand experience were selected
based on their identification in horticultural publications (Adam, 2000;
Davis, 2000b), recognition by researchers and other growers, and their
records of producing successful crops. Information obtained from the
interviews included farm location, cultivation method, and soil
moisture, texture, pH, and organic matter. Some growers did not want to
be identified, and therefore, contributors to Table 3 are not named.

A method developed by Montford and Small (1999a, 1999b) was employed to
estimate the \"biodiversity friendliness\" of goldenseal, compared to
other crops, based on 26 criteria related to the predominant manner of
cultivation (e.g., forest conservation; use of irrigation, biocides, and
fertilizers; energy consumption; proportion of plant utilized; and
others). The 26 criteria are assigned values of ‑1, 0, or 1, where ‑1
indicates the crop is relatively undesirable with respect to the
biodiversity criterion, 0 indicates the crop has an average or
undetermined impact, and 1 indicates the crop is relatively desirable
with respect to the criterion. Simple averaging was used to calculate
mean score (the more positive the score, the more \"ecologically
friendly\" the crop). Information was obtained on other benefits of
growing goldenseal, but no particular procedures were necessary to
summarize these data.

######### **Results and Discussion**

Selection of forest site or artificial shade structure

Goldenseal can be grown successfully under an artificial shade structure
consisting of steel or wood posts covered with polypropylene shade cloth
or wood planks (wood lath structure) (Davis, 1996a, 1996b, 1999b;
Konsler, 1987). The structure should be at least 2 to 3 m (6.6 to 9.8
ft) high and open on the sides, or with a maximum of two side curtains,
to allow for adequate air circulation and to prevent overheating (Davis,
1999b).

Although goldenseal can be grown successfully under an artificial
structure, some authors (Beyfuss, 1999; Davis, 1999b) and growers have
suggested that a forest site is better than an artificial shade
structure

because the natural diversity and air circulation in the forest system
help prevent major problems with disease and insects. Large populations
of natural goldenseal thrive in mixed woods with oaks *(Quercus* spp.),
maples *(Acer* *spp.),* hawthorns *(Crataegus* spp.), walnut *(Juglans*
*nigra* L.), hickories *(Carya* spp.), ironwood *\[Ostrya* *virginiana*
(Miller) K. Koch\], basswood *(Tilia* *americana* L.), and ash
*(Fraxinus* spp.) (Tables 1, 2). Similarly, optimal sites for
cultivating goldenseal are within stands of mixed, deeply rooted
hardwood trees such as oak, poplar (*Populus* spp.), walnut, and
basswood (Cech, 1995,

2000; Davis, 1996b, 1999a, 1999b, 1999c; Konsler, 1987).

Plant species most frequently found associated directly with goldenseal
in natural populations, and thus helpful in characterizing a goldenseal
site, were wooly blue violet (*Viola* *sororia* Willd.), cut‑leaved
cranesbill (*Geranium* *maculatum* L.), false Solomon\'s seal
\[*Maianthemum* *racemosum* (L.) Link ssp. *racemosum*\], white trillium
\[*Trillium* *grandiflorum* (Michx.) Salisb.\], wild yam‑root
(*Dioscorea* *quaternata J.* Gemel.), enchanter\'s nightshade *(Circaea*
spp.), inserted virginia creeper \[*Parthenocissus* *inserta (A.* Kern.)
Fritsch.\], wild leek (*Allium* *triccocum* *Ai*ton), spotted
touch‑me‑not (*Impatiens* *ca**pensis* L.), snakeroot (*Sanicula* spp.),
false mermaid (*Floerkea* *proserpinacoides* Willd.), trout lily
*Erythronium* spp.), and wood anemone (*Anemone* *quinquefolia* L. var.
*quinquefolia*)*.* Patches of bloodroot (*Sanguinaria* *canadensis* L.),
mayapple (*Podophyllumpeltatum* L.), white trillium, and blue cohosh
\[*Caulophyllum* *thalic**troides* (L.) Michx\] were often common and
scattered throughout the woods where goldenseal occurred (pers. obs.;
Davis, 1996b, 1999a, 1999b, 1999c; Konsler, 1987). The presence of these
woodland herbs indicates appropriate woodland sites for cultivation.
These authors suggest avoiding sites where undergrowth is very thick
because of competition for resources and reduced air circulation.
However, the most vigorous naturally occurring plants (i.e., largest and
darkest green) grew in a woodland edge where undergrowth was thick, and
raspberry *(Rubus* spp.), spice bush *\[Lindera* *benzoin* (L.) Blume\],
and various introduced woody shrubs were common.

**Cultivation requirements**

**Soil texture.** Of the natural populations surveyed, 13 grew in sandy
loam, 6 in clay loam, and 2 in loam soils.

Fourteen of the 15 interviewed growers were successfully growing
goldenseal in loam soils (7 growers specified sandy or clay loam, 1
specified sandy or silty loam; Table 3). Similar preferred soil type has
been reported by researchers and experienced growers (Cech, 1995, 2000;
Davis, 1996a, 1996b, 1999a, 1999b, 1999c; Konsler, 1987). Konsler (1987)
and Davis (1996b) state that goldenseal tolerates any soil type except
heavy clay or light sand, but some growers reported successful growth in
predominantly clay or predominantly gravelly soils (Table 3). In so far
as soil texture contributes to a large population, the largest natural
populations grew in loam soils (Table 1). The healthiest natural
population, based on number of stems, number of patches, leaf size, and
leaf color (i.e., health defined in terms of size of the population,
size of plants in the population, and absence of stress as suggested by
color), occurred in clay loam soil.

**Moisture.** Natural populations of goldenseal occur on uplands in
mesic woods, as well as on lowlands near rivers in dry mesic to mesic
woods (Sinclair and Catling, 2000a). Many sources allude to a preference
for moist but well‑drained soils (Davis, 1996a, 1996b, 1999a, 1999b,
1999c; Hardacre et al., 1962; Li and Oliver, 1995; Maskewich, 2000;
McLellan and Felton, 1998; Merwin, 2000; Reeleder, 2000). All 15 growers
indicated that moist but well‑drained soils are optimal for goldenseal
growth; however, one grower grew one plot of plants successfully in what
was referred to as \"sloppy, muddy\" conditions (Table 3).

According to Konsler (1987), goldenseal grows best on slopes that
provide good surface drainage; however, 6 growers reported excellent
growth on level (or slightly sloping) terrain without raised beds, and
12 of 21 natural populations (60%) occurred on level land. Davis (1999a,
1999c) states that, under cultivation, raised beds should be constructed
to promote good water drainage. Eight of the interviewed growers had
success with raised beds, but seven also had success without them. Davis
(1996a) suggests mulching with shredded leaves, chopped straw, and
similar materials, to reduce moisture loss and weed growth, and increase
winter protection. Seven growers reported the use of mulch

to increase soil organic matter content rather than to protect the
plants during winter. Disadvantages of surface mulch include its removal
to allow emergence of seedlings and its provision of cover for certain
pests such as slugs. Current research is directed at optimal mulch
selection and it appears so far that plants perform best with hardwood
and pine bark mulches (J.M. Davis, North Carolina State University,
pers. comm., 2000). Bryant (1977), an experienced grower, emphasized the
importance of preventing the beds from drying out in summer.

When grown under a forest canopy, goldenseal usually does not require
irrigation, unless subject to

drought conditions, which cause plants to drop foliage and become
dormant earlier (Davis, 1999c). While some interviewed growers irrigate
during periods of plant stress, many reported that irrigation is not
necessary, and a few emphasized \"no irrigation\" (Table 3).

*(Continued on next page*

**pH.** The naturally occurring goldenseal populations occur in soil
with pH ranging from 5.4 to 7.8. The largest populations were observed
in soil with pH 6.3 to 7.8. Other large populations (\>1000 stems)
occurred within a soil pH range of 5.7 to 6.3. Three of the five smaller
populations (≤ 241 stems) grew in soil with pH \> 7.4 (Table 1). The
healthiest population grew in soil with pH 6.4. Davis (1996a, 1998,
1999b) found optimal growth (100% survival, larger and healthier plant
tops, higher fresh root weight) between pH 5.5 to 6.5, based primarily
on experiments with goldenseal grown in pots with forest soil under a
wood lath structure. Almost all interviewed growers reported optimal
growth within the same pH range. However, one grower in New York State
(listed in Table 3) reported successful woodland cultivation in soil
with pH 4.8. Davis and Bir (1998) emphasize the importance of
maintaining pH at 5.5 to 6.5 because of the sensitive relationship
between pH and growth.

**Soil fertility.** Soil fertility (nutrients and organic matter) data
for 14 naturally occurring goldenseal populations are presented in
Table 1. According to fertility guidelines for native ornamentals
(OMAFRA, 2000), all populations occurred in soil with high organic
matter; adequate Mg, Mn, and Zn; but low P. Although population size and
health are generally attributed to soil fertility, two of the largest
populations (\>1000 stems) occurred in soils with low K, and two with
medium K levels. Of the smallest populations (≤ 241 stems), two grew in
soils with low K, two with medium K, and one with very high K levels.
The healthiest populations, based on number of stems, number of patches,
leaf size, and leaf color, occurred in soils with medium K levels.
Goldenseal is widely reported to prefer rich or fertile soils (Beyfuss,
1999; Davis, 1996a, 1999a, 1999b, 1999c; Kelly, 1977; Maskewich, 2000;
Reeleder, 2000) high in organic matter (Beyfuss, 1999; Bryant, 1977;
Davis, 1996b, 1999b; Hardacre, 1977; Konsler, 1987; McLellan and Felton,
1998). All 15 growers indicated that goldenseal grows best in very
fertile soil high in organic matter. Most did not quantify the amount of
organic matter in the soil, but merely indicated that it was \"high.\"
Other growers stated that, based on visual observations, organic matter
content of their soils ranged between 15 and 70% (Table 3).

Before planting goldenseal, it is generally recommended that the soil be
tested and fertility recommendations for native ornamentals be followed,
if the soil testing laboratory does not provide any specific guidelines
for goldenseal (Davis, 1996a, 1999a, 1999c). If tests indicate low
fertility levels, addition of organic matter, such as composted manure,
composted leaves, bone meal or cottonseed meal, is recommended (Bryant,
1977; Davis, 1996a, 1999c). Goldenseal does not benefit from addition of
inorganic N or P, based on a 3‑year experiment with application rates of
0 to 0.3 kg/m^3^ N and 0 to 0.3 kg/m^3^ P (Davis, 1998, 1999a, 1999b;
Davis and Bir, 1998). None of the interviewed growers used chemical
fertilizers, but instead added organic material such as leaf mold or
composted manure (Table 3). Davis (1996a, 1999c) and Li and Oliver
(1995) stress the importance of avoiding over fertilization as it can
promote plant disease. According to Davis (1999c), goldenseal growing on
high organic matter soils should be only lightly fertilized with an
organic source of nutrients. Furthermore, Davis (1999c) suggests
application of a balanced fertilizer at a low rate each spring, and Cech
(1995), a grower with over 15 years of experience, suggests addition of
compost each summer.

One interviewed grower reported that goldenseal \"grows prolifically in
\[the\] lime belt between North Carolina and Tennessee\" (Table 3).
However, T. Blakley (pers. comm., 2000) at the National Center for the
Preservation of Medicinal Herbs in Rutland, Ohio, pointed out that there
is no proof yet that goldenseal will produce more with higher Ca levels.
In fact, preliminary results from an ongoing calcium study show that
application of 2.2 to 5.6 Mg of Ca ha^-1^ (2,000 to 5,000 lb ac^-1^)
reduced leaf number and plant height, increased disease incidence, and
caused earlier dieback (J.M. Davis, pers. comm., 2000).

**Shade.** Natural populations in the northern range limit of goldenseal
were subject to 30 to 90% shade. Shade requirements reported by
interviewed growers and in the cultivation literature fall within the
upper portion of this range. Interviewed growers reported 70 to 87%
shade as optimal for growth, except for one Ontario grower who reported
optimal growth under 50% shade. Hardacre (1977) successfully grew
goldenseal under 66% shade; other researchers and farm managers report
75 to 80% shade for optimal growth (Beyfuss, 1999; Davis, 1996a, 1999b;
Li and Oliver, 1995; Merwin, 2000). Konsler (1987) reported 65 % shade
as minimum tolerance. Conversely, natural populations thrived with as
little as 30% shade. The healthiest natural population grew under 30%
shade in a woodland edge, and one grower also found that goldenseal grew
well at the forest edge (Table 3). The largest natural populations
(\>1000 stems) grew under conditions of 60 to 65% shade (Tablet).
Although studies are not complete, Davis (1999a) reported that optimal
plant growth occurred between 63 and 80% shade, and the highest plant
stand counts and survival occurred under conditions of 47 to 63% shade.
T. Blakley (pers. comm., 2000) suggested that 50% shade may be adequate
in the northern U.S. states and southern Canada, but in the warmer
south, 70% would likely produce better results. Davis (1996b, 1999a,
1999b, 1999c) and Konsler (1987) suggest avoiding cultivation sites in
forests with no undergrowth (possibly it is too dark or dry). In natural
populations, plant vigor was low (i.e., wilted, discolored, and shorter
plants) with 90% shade and sparse undergrowth, but high (larger, greener
plants) in sites with an even undergrowth and up to 70% shade.

**Propagation.** Goldenseal can be propagated from rhizome pieces, seed,
buds, one‑year‑old seedlings, and/or root cuttings (Bryant, 1977; Davis,
1996a, 1998, 1999a, 1999b; Konsler, 1987; Li and Oliver, 1995; Merwin,
2000). It takes 3 to 5 years to grow harvestable roots from rhizome
pieces, 5 to 7 years from seed (Cech, 2000; Davis, 1996a, 1999a; Merwin,
2000), and 4 to 6 years from root cuttings or seedlings (Davis, 1999a).
Literature sources indicate that goldenseal is most easily and reliably
propagated by dividing rhizomes in 2.5 cm (1 inch) or larger pieces,
each with a bud and roots (Davis, 1996a, 1999a, 1999b, 1999c; Konsler,
1987).

From 24 to 27 August, 1999, at the start of senescence, the authors
planted 100 rhizome pieces, each with at least 1 bud and numerous
rootlets, at each of 5 sites where goldenseal grows naturally in
Ontario. Based on analysis of variance, no significant difference in
growth (leaf width and plant height) was found in either spring (4 to 6
May, 2000), summer (19 to 21 June, 2000), or fall (21 to 23 August,
2000) between small rhizome pieces \[\<2.5 cm (1 inch)\] and larger
pieces \[\<5 cm (2 inches), \<7.5 cm (3 inches), and \> 7.5 cm (3
inches)\]. Studies on rhizome size (primarily its length) and rootlets,
with or without buds, show that numerous healthy rootlets on a rhizome
are important (i.e., little or no growth without) and latent buds
produce plants when buds are not obvious or broken off (Davis, 1998).
One of the interviewed growers stressed that bud size, rhizome size, and
number of rootlets affect growth rate (Table 3). Ease of propagation was
emphasized by many of the interviewed growers, and most prefer to use
rhizome pieces that allow earlier harvest.

One grower reported positive results from passing goldenseal roots
through a wood chipper, scattering the pieces over prepared beds, and
raking them into the soil. Another grower claimed it was impossible for
a goldenseal bed to be completely dug out because root fragments left in
the soil will start a new population. Davis (1998) also reports that
small root pieces left in the soil after harvest produce new plants the
next year. Some have had success by simply layering rootlet cuttings in
a bed, letting them grow for a year, and transplanting them (Davis,
1998, 1999a).

Literature on cultivation (Davis, 1996a, 1999c) and information from
interviewed growers (Table 3) indicates that propagation of goldenseal
by seed is difficult and unpredictable. Cech (2000) places cultivation
of goldenseal by seed in the \"extra care\" category (compared to
\"challenging\" or \"easy\"). Germination rates of purchased seed range
from 0 to 90% (Davis, 1999c). Davis (1999b) reports that many growers
achieve only 30 to 40% germination the first spring after sowing. She
obtained about 33% germination the first year, but up to 94% the second
year after sowing. Through experimentation, Davis (1998) found no effect
of extraction method or disinfecting treatment on germination, but that
sowing time and temperature were critical. The highest germination
percentage was with seeds held at room temperature (21°C) for 2 weeks
before planting, and the highest germination (up to 88%) was with seeds
sown in August (shortly after extraction), compared to late fall or
spring. Interestingly, one interviewed grower emphasized that
propagation by seed was not difficult (Table 3).

**Diseases and pests.** None of the 21 wild populations of goldenseal
showed evidence of disease or pest problems. Similarly, cultivated
goldenseal rarely suffers from disease or pests when grown in small
plots in the woods (Davis, 1999a, 1999c). Some plantings may be affected
by botrytis leaf spot and/or slugs (Davis, 1999c; Li and Oliver, 1995).
Removal of affected foliage and mulch provides reasonable control for
botrytis (Davis, 1999a), and successful methods of control for slugs
have been documented (Davis, 1999a, 1999c). However, as goldenseal has
been increasingly cultivated, there are now more reports of diseases
(caused by *Al**ternaria,* *Rhizoctonia,* and *Fusarium*) occurring
under artificial shade structures, but not in the forest (Beyfuss, 1999;
Davis, 1999a, 1999c). The more intensive the production system used, the
greater incidence of disease (Davis, 1999b). The chance of diseases can
be reduced by proper sanitation practices, adequate air and water
circulation, and avoiding over fertilization (J.M. Davis, North Carolina
State University, pers. comm., 2000). None of the interviewed growers
reported any diseases or pests associated with their production
practices.

**Commercial production**

Some ginseng farmers have taken advantage of goldenseal\'s potential as
a rotation crop (Merwin, 2000). Its value results from the perception
that ginseng cannot be grown continuously due to deterioration of soil
quality. However, this may be overstated since soil quality adequate for
ginseng production can be maintained (T.S.C. Li, Agriculture and
Agri‑Food Canada, pers. comm., 2000). Ginseng farmers have noted that
goldenseal has similar cultural requirements and, consequently, there is
substantial potential profit in taking advantage of an existing ginseng
plantation to grow goldenseal. The raised beds, forest site, or shade
apparatus is already in place and similar equipment can be used in crop
management and harvesting. It is generally conceded that goldenseal is
less difficult to grow than ginseng because of the greater tolerance of
the former crop to higher light intensity, wetter conditions, and
diseases and pests (Beyfuss, 1999; Bryant, 1977; Cech, 1995; Davis,
1996a, 1996b; Konsler, 1987; Table 3). Two growers indicated that
goldenseal is more tolerant of drying out and grows well in much wetter
conditions, compared to ginseng, and goldenseal roots are less likely to
rot (Table 3). Goldenseal is not affected by the most serious diseases
of ginseng, e.g., leaf and stem blight caused by *Alternaria* *panax*
and root rot caused by *Phy**tophthora* *cactorum* (Beyfuss, 1999;
Davis, 1999a). In fact, goldenseal may be grown successfully in
locations where ginseng crops have failed due to root rot caused by *P*.
*cactorum* (Davis, 1999a). Davis (1998) found that by the second year
after planting old ginseng beds half with goldenseal and half with
ginseng, 28% of the ginseng remained compared to 80% of the goldenseal,
at one site, and 83% of the goldenseal was left, but none of the
ginseng, at another site. Cech (1995) reports that some growers mix
goldenseal plants in with their ginseng to \"purify\" the soil. One of
the growers reported use of this strategy (not recorded in Table 3). One
farmer growing both ginseng and goldenseal referred to them as \"the
king and the queen,\" the \"queen\" (goldenseal) being more robust and
reliable.

**Current research**

Several cultivation studies under the direction of J.M. Davis are
underway at North Carolina State University (Davis, 2000a). Included are
studies on factors influencing quality grades (based on alkaloid
content), propagation methods (rhizome pieces and rootlets), seed
germination, spacing of seedlings and rhizome pieces (5 cm x 5 cm to 30
cm x 30 cm), mulches (seven types), and shade (four levels). She is also
investigating the potential of goldenseal as a rotation crop for ginseng
in terms of soil improvement (Davis, 1998). J. Simon at Purdue
University is testing whether goldenseal is more subject to diseases
under a shade structure compared to a forest canopy (Davis, 1998).
Research on the cultivation requirements of goldenseal is also being
conducted at the National Center for the Preservation of Medicinal Herbs
in Rutland, Ohio. Studies include identification of diseases and pests;
importance of solar direction; comparison of yield from seed vs.
rootstock and from raised beds vs. planting in ground; light, fertility,
and pH requirements; mulches; seed stratification techniques; drying
methods; and storage methods (McNeill et al., 2000; T. Blakley, National
Center for the Preservation of Medicinal Herbs, pers. comm., 2000).
Research currently being conducted by R.D. Reeleder at Agriculture and
Agri‑Food Canada\'s Southern Crop Protection and Food Research Centre
features alternative methods of generating planting stock to ensure that
crops are not established from wild‑collected roots, to halt decline of
natural populations. Longer‑term goals at this Centre involve remedies
for pest control (Reeleder, 2000). A. Sinclair (Catling and Sinclair,
1998; Sinclair and Catling, 2000a, 2000b; Sinclair et al., 2000) is
studying habitat requirements and effects of disturbance that relate to
growing conditions and cultivation. Two recent conferences (Louisville,
Kentucky, 9‑11 May 2000, and Leeds, New York, 7‑9 Septem­ber 2000) have
raised awareness of the potential of ginseng and goldenseal crops. The
Louisville conference, organized by T. Jones, University of Kentucky
Extension Horticulture Specialist, featured workshops to teach growers
how to produce ginseng and goldenseal under semi-natural and organic
conditions, resulting in higher cash value.

**Other considerations**

The demand for goldenseal may not reach the point of allowing it to
become a significant crop or even a significant rotational crop in
ginseng cultivation, in terms of hectarage, but there is little doubt
that it will become much more widely grown on a commercial basis.
Considering this possibility, there are several benefits of growing
goldenseal to bear in mind.

**Environmental friendliness.** Goldenseal has an approximate
\"biodiversity‑ friendly\" score of 17, making it one of the crops that
contributes most to biodiversity protection. Its very high score is a
consequence of various characteristics such as: (1) it requires
relatively little agricultural input (i.e., fertilizers and pesticides);
(2) it contributes to protection of wild species; (3) it requires
relatively low energy for maintenance and harvest; (4) it has a high
value per ha and relatively low hectarage requirement; (5) it can be
grown in rotation thus reducing the need for agrichemicals; and (6) its
flowers produce food for pollinators.

**Sustainability and** **germplasm protection.** Reduction of the
increasing threat to natural populations as a result of cultivation
could decrease the likelihood of loss of goldenseal germplasm. The
germplasm may prove valuable in crop development if goldenseal gains
popularity as a crop.

**Low fertilization and energy requirements.** Davis (1998, 1999a,
1999b) found that addition of inorganic N (ammonium nitrate) and P
either reduced growth or had little effect, indicating that fertilizer
requirements are generally low. Minimizing fertilization reduces both
actual and environmental costs. Less expensive organic sources of
fertilizer, such as leaf compost, manure compost, bone meal, or
cottonseed meal, have been recommended by researchers and growers as
more effective for goldenseal production (Bryant, 1977; Davis, 1996a;
Hardacre, 1977; McNeill et al., 2000; Reeleder, 2000).

**Availability of planting stock**

Suppliers of plant propagation material are readily available on the
World Wide Web; however, a survey by the American Herbal Products
Association indicates that most material is obtained from wild sources
(McGuffin, 1999). Suppliers and/ or local natural resource departments
may be able to ensure that source material has originated from
cultivation. Current research is directed at alternative methods of
generating planting stock (Reeleder, 2000) and optimizing cultivation
techniques (McNeill et al., 2000), to reduce collection from wild
populations. Suppliers are also encouraging growing the plant from seed
(Cech, 2000). Regional natural populations contain characteristics,
including local climate and pest adaptation, and possibly genetic
variation in blight and drought resistance, alkaloid content, and other
characteristics, necessary to develop and maintain a viable crop in
local areas.

**Summary and Conclusions**

There has recently been much increased interest in goldenseal
cultivation. It is relatively easy to grow and may provide a useful
diversification crop. At the same time cultivation may increase
availability of this medicinal herb and contribute to the protection of
natural populations. As a crop, goldenseal is considered relatively
inexpensive, can be grown throughout a large region of North America,
and contributes in a number of ways to the goals of sustainable
agriculture.

**Acknowledgements.** J.M. Davis, North Carolina State University;
T.S.C. Li., Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Summerland Research
Centre; T. Blakley, National Center for the Preservation of Medicinal
Herbs; and R. Cech, Horizon Herbs, were particularly helpful in
providing information. The goldenseal growers provided a wealth of
information and encouragement for development of this manuscript.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

A. Sinclair is Biology Student, Biology Department, University of
Ottawa, Ontario KIN 6N5, Canada; P.M. Catling is Research Scientist,
Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food
Canada, Research Branch, Wm. Saunders Building, Central Experimental
Farm, Ottawa, Ontario KIA OC6, Canada. Corresponding author is P.M.
Catling (<catlingp@em.agr.ca)>.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

######### **References**

Adam, K. 2000. Ginseng, goldenseal, and other native roots. Hort. Tech.
Note. Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas, Fayetteville, AR.
Web site
[http://www.attra.org/attra‑pub/ginsgold.html](http://www.attra.org/attra%1Epub/ginsgold.html)
(viewed January 2001).

Beyfuss, R.L. 1999. Growing ginseng and goldenseal in your forest. New
York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Division of Lands and
Forests. Web site
[http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dlf/privland/forprot/ginseng/growing_guide.html](http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dlf/privland/forprot/ginseng/growing%1Eguide.html)
(viewed January 2001).

Bryant, G. 1977. Ginseng and goldenseal. In J. Kelly (ed.). Herb
Collector\'s Manual and Marketing Guide: Ginseng Growers and Collectors
Handbook. 5th ed. Wildcrafters, Looneyville, WV. p. 26‑30.

Catling, P., and A. Sinclair. 1998. The history of the golden seal.
Recovery: An Endangered Species Newsl. (Spring): 12. Environment Canada,
Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. Web site
[http://www.cws‑scf.ec.gc.ca/es/recovery/spring98/eng/9801seal.html](../www.cws%1Escf.ee.gc.ca/es/recovery/spring)
(verified April 2001).

Cech, R. 1995. Forest Roots (Cultivation of the Medicinal Roots: Black
Cohosh, Ginseng, Goldenseal and Cild Yam). Horizon Herbs, Williams, OR.

Cech, R. 2000. Horizon Herbs Strictly Medicinal Growing Guide and
Catalog (Fall). Horizon Herbs, Williams, OR.

CITES. 2000. CITES‑listed Species Database: Flora. Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora,
Geneva, Switzerland. Web site [http://www.cites.org/]() (viewed January
2001).

Davis, J.M. 1996a. Advances in goldenseal cultivation. Hort. Info.
Leaflet 131. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service, Raleigh.

Davis, J.M. 1996b. Cultivation of native woodland botanicals. Medicines
from the Earth, Protocols for Botanical Healing. 1996 Official
Proceedings of the Gaia Herb Conference, Black Mountain, NC. p. 35‑39.

Davis, J.M. 1998. Goldenseal. Transcripts from the Second Annual
Richters Commercial Herb Growing Conference, October 25‑26, 1997.
Richters, Goodwood, Ontario. p. 133‑143.

Davis, J.M. 1999a. Commercial goldenseal cultivation. Hort. Info.
Leaflet 131. Rev. ed. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service,
Raleigh. Web site
[http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/hort/hil/hil-131.html](http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/bort/hil/hil131.html)
(viewed January 2001).

Davis, J.M. 1999b. Goldenseal and ginseng production. Proc. 4th Annual
Herb Business Getaway Conference, January 28‑31, Palm Coast, Florida.
Herb Growing and Marketing Network, Silver Spring, PA. p. 75‑80.

Davis, J.M. 1999c. Forest production of goldenseal. Agroforestry Note
16. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, National Agroforestry Center, Lincoln,
NE. Web site
[http://www.unl.edu/nac/afnotes/ff‑5/ff‑5.pdf](http://www.unl.edu/nac/afnotes/ff%1E5/ff%1E5.pdf)
(verified April 2001).

Davis, J.M. 2000a. Home page. North Carolina State University, Dept. of
Horticultural Science, Fletcher, NC. Web site
<http://fletcher.ces.state.nc.us/staff/jmdavis/home.html> (verified
April 2001).

Davis, J.M. 2000b. Sources of goldenseal seeds, plants or roots. Hort.
Info. Leaflet 123. Revised March North Carolina Cooperative Extension
Service, Raleigh. Web site
[http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/t/hil/hil‑123.html](http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/)
(viewed January 2001).

Davis, J.M., and R.E. Bir. 1998. Medicinal plants with a potential niche
market for propagators. Combined Proc. Intemational Plant Propagators\'
Society 1997, 47:39‑41. Seattle, WA.

Environment Canada. 1999. CITES (Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) Information Notes.
Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. Web site
<http://www.cites.ec.gc.ca/cites/html/index.htm> (viewed January 2001).

Foster, S. 1991. Goldenseal: *Hydrastis canadensis.* Botanical Series
309. American Botanical Council, Austin, TX.

Foster, S. 2000. Goldenseal, *Hydrastis canadensis:* Goldenseal\'s
future. Steven Foster Group, Fayetteville, AR. Web site
<http://www.herbphoto.com/education/monograph/goldenseal.html> (viewed
January 2001).

Haage, L.J., and L.J. Ballard. 1989. A Grower\'s Guide to Goldenseal.
Nature\'s Cathedral, Norway, IA.

Hardacre, J.V. 1977. Cultural hints on ginseng and goldenseal. In J.
Kelly (ed.). Herb Collector\'s Manual and Marketing Guide: Ginseng
Growers and Collectors Handbook, 5^th^ ed. Wildcrafters, Looneyville,
WV. p. 22-25.

Hardacre, J.V., G. Henderson, F.B. Collins, E.L. Andersen, V.M. Harris,
B. Fewster, R. Beck, D. Bowman, and E.L.Donzelot. 1962. The Wildcrafters
Goldenseal Manual. Wildcrafters Publications, Rockville, IN.

IUCN. 1997. Inclusion of Goldenseal *Hydrastis canadensis* in Appendix
11 (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora), U.S.A. April. International Union on the Conservation
of Nature, Gland, Switzerland.

Kelly, J. (ed.). 1977. Herb Collector\'s Manual and Marketing Guide:
Ginseng Growers and Collectors Handbook. 5th ed. Wildcrafters,
Looneyville, WV.

Konsler, T.R. 1987. Woodland production of ginseng and goldenseal.
Station Bull. 518:175‑178. Purdue University Agricultural Experiment
Station, West Lafayette, IN.

Li, T.S.C., and A. Oliver. 1995. Specialty crops infosheet: Goldenseal.
British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Victoria.

Lloyd, J.U. 1912. The cultivation of bydrastis. J. Amer. Pharmaceut.
Assoc. 1:5‑12.

Maskewich, L. 2000. Medicinal, culinary and aromatic crops: Goldenseal.
March. Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Edmonton. Web
site <http://www.agric.gov.ab.ca/crops/special/goldenseal.html> (viewed
January 2001).

McGuffin, M. 1999. Having our goldenseal, and growing it too. United
Plant Savers Newsl. (Summer). Web site
<http://www.plantsavers.org/newsletter/summer1999/gs.html> (viewed May
2000).

McLellan, T., and K. Felton. 1998. Goldenseal‑Plant in peril? Wild Notes
WN398 (Ver. 2). U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Morgantown,
WV. Web site
[http://www.fs.fed.us/na/morgantown/fhp/wildlife/gseal.htm](http://www.fs.fed.us/na/morgantown/)
(viewed January 2001).

McNeill, H., E. Renaud, and T. Blakley. 2000. Summary of goldenseal
research projects for 1998 and 1999. National Center for the
Preservation of Medicinal Herbs, Rutland, OH. Web site
[http://www.ncpmh.org/GoldenSeal.html](../www.ncpmh.org/GoldenSeal.html)
(viewed January 2001).

Merwin, M. 2000. Medicinal herb crops can earn extra income for forest
farmers. Temperate Agroforester 8(2):1, 8‑9.

Montford, S., and E. Small. 1999a. Measuring harm and benefit: The
biodiversity friendliness of *Cannabis sativa:* Preliminary criteria for
comparing biodiversity friendliness of crops make for first step towards
including ecological impacts in analysis of what crops to grow. Global
Biodiversity 8(4):2‑13.

Montford, S., and E. Small. 1999b. A companson of the biodiversity
friendliness of crops with special reference to hemp *(Cannabis sativa*
L.). J. Intern. Hemp Assoc. 6(2):53‑63.

OMAFRA. 1988. Soil Testing Methods Approved for Use in Ontario. Ontario
Soil Management Committee. Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and
Rural Affairs, Ottawa.

OMAFRA. 2000. Nursery and landscape plant production recommendations.
Publ. 383. Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs,
Ottawa.

Reeleder, R.D. 2000. Goldenseal: *Hydrastis canadensis.* Agriculture and
Agri‑Food Canada, Southern Crop Protection and Food Research Centre,
London, Ontario. Web site
<http://res2.agr.ca/london/pmrc/english/study/newcrops/goldseal.html>
(viewed January 2001).

Robbins, C. 1996. Goldenseal‑A candidate for CITES (Convention on
Intemational Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora)
Appendix 11? TRAFFIC USA 15:5‑6. World Wildlife Fund; World Conservation
Union.

Sievers, A.F. 1949. Goldenseal under cultivation. USDA Farmer\'s Bull.
613. Rev. ed. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, DC.

Sinclair, A., and P.M. Catling. 2000a. Status of goldenseal, *Hydrastis
canadensis* (Ranunculaceae), in Canada. Canadian Field‑Naturalist
114:111‑120.

Sinclair, A., and P.M. Catling. 2000b. Ontario goldenseal, *Hydrastis
canadensis,* populations in relation to habitat size, paths, and
woodland edges. Canadian Field‑Naturalist 114:381‑384.

Sinclair, A., P.M. Catling, and L. Dumouchel. 2000. Notes on the
pollination and dispersal of goldenseal, *Hydrastis canadensis* L., in
southwestern Ontario. Canadian Field‑Naturalist 114:499‑501.

Small, E., and P.M. Catling. 1999. Canadian Medicinal Crops. National
Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.

USFWS. 1997. Amendment to Appendix 11 of CITES (Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora),
U.S.A.‑Proposal to Include *Hydrastis canadensis* in Appendix 11, in
Accordance with Article 2, Paragraph 2A. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Washington, DC.

Van Fleet, W. 1914. Goldenseal under cultivation. USDA Farmers\' Bull.
613. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, DC.

Veninga, L., and B.R. Zaricor. 1976. Goldenseal/Etc.: A Pharmacognosy of
Wild Herbs. Ruka Publications, Santa Cruz, CA.

White, D.J. 1991. Status Report on the Golden Seal, *Hydrastis
canadensis,* in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife
in Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.

##### Prepared By & Species Coordinator: 

##### *James F. Henson*, Plant Physiologist

##### USDA NRCS National Plant Data Center

##### Baton Rouge, Louisiana 

##### 

##### Edited: 06Dec2001 JFH; 060801 jsp

For more information about this and other plants, please contact your
local NRCS field office or Conservation District, and visit the PLANTS
Web site\<[http://plants.usda.gov](http://plants.usda.gov/)\> or the
Plant Materials Program Web site
\<[http://Plant-Materials.nrcs.usda.gov](http://Plant-Materials.nrcs.usda.gov/)\>

*The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in
all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national
origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual
orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases
apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille,
large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA\'s [TARGET
Center](http://www.usda.gov/oo/target.htm) at 202-720-2600 (voice and
TDD).*

*To file a complaint of discrimination write USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence
Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call 202-720-5964 (voice or
TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.*

*Read about [Civil Rights at the Natural Resources Convervation
Service](http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/about/civilrights/).*