At a minimum, they are examples of environmental technologies that predate the rise of sustainability and widespread environmental awareness in landscape architecture. They also suggest a rich legacy of technological innovation born from the same environmental pragmatism and innovation that define contemporary landscape architecture. It is humbling to think that 30-plus years before the word “sustainability” found its current usage in environmental fields and the language more broadly, a tinkerer in New Jersey invented a permeable turf paver in 1940 through which the “roots of seedlings may take root, and thereby provide an interlocking connection between adjoining blocks.” Or that an inventor in Mahopac, New York, had the prescience in 1932 to devise a technique for anchoring trees to buildings and structures 80 years before they adorned the Bosco Verticale in Milan . Or that an early innovator in the geotechnical arts integrated the process of decomposition into a slope stabilization system in 1933, many years before ideas of weathering became common to landscape practice. These inventions provide us with important antecedents to the word “sustainability” and challenge landscape architects to reevaluate the relationship among innovation, early adoption of technology, professional practice, academic research, and implementation in the built environment. One of the most important figures in the history of innovation in landscape-related technologies is Stanley Hart White, a professor of landscape architecture at the University of Illinois from 1922 to 1959. White patented the first known vertical garden in 1938, roll bench yet the idea emerged in his writings and sketches as far back as 1931 .

His technology integrated a steel structural framework with hydroponic substrate, internal irrigation, and vegetation to provide fine sheets of greenery as a background and camouflage for the modern garden. White prototyped the “Vegetation-Bearing Architectonic Structure and System” in his Urbana garden shed more than 60 years before the emergence of the vertical garden in the contemporary built environment.The merits of this invention may ultimately pale in comparison to the precedent he established for a landscape architect-cum-inventor and technological innovator. White translated modern landscape theory, advances in building sciences, and emergent hydroponics into patent legalese, formulating the origins of vegetation-bearing architecture and pioneering green modernism. At that moment, landscape theory and technology converged at a 1:1 scale. It is hard to recall an instance in the annals of history when the vanguard of landscape thinking intersected so narrowly with the reification of technology, making White’s simultaneous commitment to theory and technology important beyond the invention of the vertical garden. What is the relationship between landscape architecture and technology? Are we simply purveyors and consumers legally chartered to select and specify the next best ready-made in construction documents? Is our use of computers for drawing, mapping, or rendering of future scenarios akin to true invention? Do we have a legacy of inventors and tinkerers who reify, curate, and improve the technologies that materialize our future sustainable and ecological cities? These questions are existential, as progress toward sustainable, ecological, and equitable future landscapes is in part technological determinism at work . Whoever develops the technology that leads us forward in these realms determines, in part, the future configuration of our cities and broader society. Currently, innovation in landscape-related technology is primarily the task of disciplines tangentially oriented to landscape architecture such as material sciences, industrial design, computer science, geotechnical and civil engineering, horticulture, furniture manufacturing, fabrication, and others concerned with the technical, material, and tectonic dimensions of landscape systems. Isn’t this the scope of landscape architecture? I believe it is! The patent archive now boasts thousands of landscape-related technologies, from Subsurface Upflow Wetland Systems to Reinforced Slope Planting Structures and Segmental Bio-retention Basin Systems .

Innovation in this sector will continue to thrive; the question is whether or not landscape architects will lead the way. P. vulgaris is characterized by a particular evolutionary history. Recent analyses based on sequence data presented clear evidence of the Mesoamerican origin of common bean, which was most likely located in México . The expansion of this species to South America resulted in the development of two ecogeographic distinct genetic pools with partial reproductive isolation . After the formation of these genetic pools -between 500,000 and 100,000 years ago – domestication took place, independently in the Mesoamerican and the southern Andean regions of the American continent . Genome analysis of BAT93 and G19833 , P. vulgaris sequenced model genotypes, has initially revealed interesting differences, for example between their genome size and number of annotated genes . The common bean is the most important legume for human consumption. In less favored countries from Latin America and Africa, common bean are staple crops serving as the primary source of protein in the diet. Soil acidity in these tropical regions is a major constraint for crop productivity, usually resulting in a combination of nutrient deficiency and metal toxicity . In acidic soils, aluminum toxicity is the primary factor of growth restriction, resulting in the inhibition of root growth and function, as well as in the increased risk of plants to perish of drought and mineral deficiencies, thus decreasing crop production.In Arabidopsis, the regulation of root growth is modulated by an ABC transporter‐like protein, annotated as ALUMINUM SENSITIVE PROTEIN 3 , which is localized in the tonoplast, suggesting a role in Al vacuolar sequestration . The LOW PHOSPHATE ROOT 1 ferroxidase, an ALS3– downstream protein of the phosphate-deficiency signaling pathway, is involved in root growth inhibition, by modulating iron homeostasis and ROS accumulation in root apical meristem and elongation zone . In root cells, AlT can affect multiple areas, as the plasma membrane, the cell wall and symplastic components . Common bean is known to be highly sensitive to AlT but this sensitivity is genotype-dependent .

In 2010, the evaluation of the root morphological traits related to AlT of 36 P. vulgaris genotypes revealed that Andean genotypes were more resistant to Al than Mesoamerican ones . Mendoza-Soto et al. reported that Mesoamerican common-bean plants subjected to high Al levels for short periods showed decreased root length as well as characteristic symptoms of AlT, such as ROS accumulation, callose deposition, lipoperoxidation and cell death in roots. Along other regulators, plant response to metal toxicity involves also microRNAs as part of the regulatory mechanisms. These molecules are a class of non-coding small RNAs of about 21 nucleotides in length, regulating gene expression at post-transcriptional level, guided by sequence complementarity, inducing cleavage or translational inhibition of the corresponding target transcript . The relevance of miRNA regulation in heavy metal tolerance is well documented; it has been demonstrated that heavy metal-responsive miRNAs show differential expression according to the toxicity level. Target genes of these miRNAs generally encode transcription factors that transcriptionally regulate networks relevant for the response to heavy metals. Additionally these encode transcripts for proteins that participate in metal absorption and transport, protein folding, antioxidant system, phytohormone signaling, or miRNA biogenesis and feedback regulation . High-throughput small RNA sequencing analyses have identified miRNAs that respond to AlT in roots of different plants species, however their function in response to AlT is largely unknown. Some of the target genes cleaved by AlT-responsive miRNAs encode disease resistance proteins, transcription factors or auxin signaling proteins . Our previous research indicated that P. vulgaris is no exception to this phenomenon. We identified common-bean miRNAs that respond to Al,commercial greenhouse supplies these include conserved miRNAs that are Al-responsive in other plant species -i.e. miR319, miR390, miR393- and also miR1511 . miRNAs from the miR1511 family have been identified in non-legume plants like strawberry  and poplar tree , although in the latter its nature as a miRNA has been discussed as it has been considered as part of a retrotransposon . Regarding legumes, miR1511 has been identified in Medicago truncatula and soybean . Also, miR1511 was identified in Mesoamerican common-bean cultivars, being more abundant in flowers and roots . However, this miRNA was not identified when analyzing the Andean G19833 reference genome . Genetic variation in MIR1511 has been reported in a comparative genotyping analysis of different Asian accession of domesticated soybean as well as its wild type progenitor Glycine soja. While sequences of mature miR1511 and miR1511* were found in G. max accessions, the sequences of annual wild G. soja showed insertion/deletion in the stem-loop region of MIR1511 that included complete or partial deletions of mature miR1511 sequence . Updated research indicates that the miR1511 target gene is not conserved in the different plants where it has been identified. In strawberry, the miR1511 targets an LTR retrotransposon gene . Inconsistencies about the nature of miR1511 target gene also hold for legume species. For instance, different targets have been proposed for soybean ranging from genes coding for proteins involved in the regulation of nitrogen metabolism to proteins relevant in plant cell development .

While in other species such as M. truncatula target genes have been searched but have not been identified. The SP1L1 transcript has been proposed as the common-bean miR1511 target , however despite several efforts from our and other groups this prediction could not be experimentally validated. These results suggested a species-specific selection of the corresponding target thus it was essential to experimentally validate the nature and possible function of the miR1511 target gene in common bean. Recent analyses led us to predict an ABC-2-type transporter-related gene, annotated as Aluminum Sensitive Protein 3 , as the target for miR1511. In this work we present its experimental validation. In addition, we genotyped MIR1511 in ecogeographically different common-bean cultivars and investigated the role of miR1511 and its corresponding target in the regulation of plant response to AlT. The comparison of MIR1511 sequence from BAT93 vs. G19833 P. vulgaris reference sequences showed a 58-bp deletion in the G19833 genotype. Such deletion comprised around 57% of pre-miR1511 sequence and included 7-bp and 10-bp of mature and star miR1511, respectively . To explore this phenomenon at a larger scale within the Phaseolus genus, we analyzed Genotyping-By-Sequencing data from 87 genotypes originated from a single genetic population , called non-admixed genotypes. These included genotypes from three Phaseolus species and different populations of wild P. vulgaris: three populations from the Mesoamerican , one from the Andean , and one from the Northern Peru–Ecuador gene pools . All the genotypes belonging to the Andean gene pool and part of the Mesoamerican genotypes displayed a truncated MIR1511, in contrast to the Northern Peru– Ecuador genotypes and the other Phaseolus species that presented a complete version of the MIR1511 in their genome. A population clustering of P. vulgaris genotypes confirmed these results and showed that in the three Mesoamerican populations only a part of the MW1 cluster presented the MIR1511 deletion . Predicted target genes for P. vulgaris miR1511 include SP1L1-like  and isopentyl-diphosphate delta-isomerase , previously reported , and a protein with unknown function and the Aluminum Sensitive Protein 3 , from our recent bio-informatic analysis. From these predicted targets, ALS3 is the only one possibly related to AlT, as reported for Arabidopsis , and showing an adequate binding-site penalty score , thus the 5’RLM-RACE assay was used to experimentally validate the ALS3 mRNA cleavage site. As shown in Figure 3a, a significant number independently cloned transcripts mapped to the predicted site of cleavage, between the nucleotides at positions 457 and 458 of the transcript, which corresponds to position 9 and 10 of the predicted miR1511 binding site, thus confirming a miR1511-induced degradation. The other two degradation events mapped to 7 nucleotides upstream and 17 nucleotides downstream of the miRNA-associated degradation site, suggesting random degradation. An additional action of miR1511 to induce translation inhibition of ALS3 mRNA in common bean, cannot be excluded. miR1511 target genes differ among plant species . In order to evaluate the specificity of the miR1511/ALS3 regulatory node in common bean, we analyzed the miR1511/ALS3 binding site sequence alignment from eight model plant species, including five legumes, which contain a precursor gene of miR1511 in their genome . Because of the deletion in MIR1511 from the G19833 genotype, we used the mature miR1511 and the corresponding ALS3 binding site sequences from the BAT93 Mesoamerican genotype, as representative of P. vulgaris.