Pumpkins’ journey from ancient food staple to spicy fall obsession spans thousands of years

Shelley Mitchell, Oklahoma State University October in much of the U.S. brings cooler weather, vibrant fall colors and, of course, pumpkin-spiced everything. This is peak pumpkin season, with most of the American pumpkin crop harvested in October. With the pumpkin spice craze fully underway, I find myself thinking more about pumpkins. As an extension specialist working at Oklahoma State University’s botanic garden, I educate the people pouring in to buy pumpkins at our annual sale about the plant’s storied history and its prominence today. While people often picture pumpkins as bright orange, they actually come in a wide range of colors, including red, yellow, white, blue and even green. They vary in size and texture too: Some are smooth, others warty. They can even be miniature or giant. The word “pumpkin” comes from the Greek word “peopon,” meaning “large melon.” Botanically, pumpkins are fruits because they contain seeds, and they belong to the squash family, Cucurbitaceae. This family also includes cucumbers, zucchini and gourds. Pumpkins are grown for many purposes: food, seasonal decorating, carving for Halloween and even giant pumpkin contests.

All 50 states produce some pumpkins, with Illinois harvesting the most. In 2023, Illinois grew 15,400 acres of pumpkins. The next largest amount was grown in Indiana, with about 6,500 acres. Pumpkin yields vary each year, depending on the varieties grown and the growing conditions in each area. The top six pumpkin-producing states are California, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Washington.

Early pumpkin history

Pumpkins originated in Central and South America, ending up in North America as Native Americans migrated north and carried the seeds with them. The oldest pumpkin seeds discovered were found in Mexico and date back about 9,000 years. Pumpkins were grown as a crop even before corn or beans, the other two sisters in a traditional Native American “three sisters” garden. The three sister crops – corn, beans and squash – are planted together, and each has a role in helping the others grow. Native Americans planted corn in the spring, and once the plants were a few inches tall, they planted beans. The beans vine around the corn as it grows, giving them a natural trellis. Beans also have the ability to take nitrogen from the atmosphere, and with the help of bacteria they convert it into forms that plants can use, such as ammonia, for fertilizer. After the beans started growing, it was time to plant squash, such as pumpkin. Squash leaves covered the ground, shading the soil and helping keep it moist. The giant leaves also helped reduce the number of weeds that would compete with the corn, bean and squash growth. Every part of the pumpkin plant is edible, even the flowers. Some Native American groups would dry pumpkins’ tough outer shells, cut them into strips and weave them into mats. Pumpkins were introduced to Europe from North America through the Columbian Exchange. Europeans found that the pumpkins grown in the New World were easier to grow and sweeter than the ones in 1600s England or France, likely due to the weather and soil conditions in the Americas.

Baking American pumpkins

Native Americans introduced early settlers to pumpkins, and the colonists eagerly incorporated them into their diet, even making pies with them. Early settlers’ pumpkin pies were hollowed-out pumpkins filled with milk, honey and spices, cooked over an open fire or in hot ashes. Others followed English traditions, combining pumpkin and apple with sugar and spices between two crusts. The custard-style pumpkin pie we know today first appeared in 1796 as part of the first cookbook written and published in the United States, “American Cookery,” by Amelia Simmons. There were actually two pumpkin pie recipes: one used mace, nutmeg and ginger, the other just allspice and ginger.

The pumpkin spice craze

Pumpkin spice as one mixed ingredient was sold beginning in the early 1930s for convenience. The spice mix typically includes a blend of cinnamon, nutmeg, ginger, allspice and cloves. Pumpkins and pumpkin spice are now synonymous with fall in America. Pumpkin spice flavoring is used in candles, marshmallows, coffees, lotions, yogurts, pretzels, cookies, milk and many other products.

While pumpkin spice is available in one form or another all year long, sales of pumpkin-spiced products increase exponentially in the fall. The pumpkin spice craze is so popular that the start of the pumpkin spice season is a couple of months before the pumpkins themselves are even ready to harvest in October.

Pumpkin excursions

Americans continue to wholeheartedly embrace pumpkins today. Pumpkins in production are typically hand-harvested as soon as they mature, when the skins are hard enough to not be dented when you press it with your thumb. Children often take field trips to pumpkin patches to pick their own. With the growing popularity of agritourism, many farmers are letting the customers go into the field and pick their own, getting more dollars per pumpkin than farmers could get by selling through the markets. Customer harvesting also reduces labor costs, produces immediate profits and builds community relationships. In addition, farmers often combine the you-pick experience with other sources of income: corn mazes, hay rides, petting zoos and more. The customers get fresher fruit, enjoy a fun and educational activity and support the local economy. This year you could get pumpkin spice flavors across the United States by late August, and the industry started promoting pumpkin spice season in July. Because fall has the right conditions for pumpkin picking, the season will keep its hold on pumpkin spice flavor, and consumers will continue to eagerly await its return each year. Shelley Mitchell, Senior Extension Specialist, Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, Oklahoma State University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Even before they can read, young children are visualizing letters and other objects with the same strategies adults use

Shannon Pruden, Florida International University and Karinna Rodriguez, Florida International University What do puzzles, gymnastics, writing and using maps all have in common? They all rely on people’s ability to visualize objects as they spin, flip or turn in space, without physically moving them. This is a spatial skill that developmental psychologists call mental rotation. Whether a person is navigating a new city or doing a cartwheel, they must use mental rotation skills to move shapes or objects in their mind and make sense of where their bodies are going and what surrounds them. When children play with puzzles, building blocks or pattern games, they are also practicing mental rotation. Over time, these skills support learning in math, science and reading. This can look like visualizing pulley systems in physics or seeing the differences between similar-looking letters such as b and d, which young children often confuse. Strong mental rotation skills also lay the foundation for doing well in school and developing interest in careers in science, technology, engineering and math. Most preschool-age children are not yet learning to read – but it turns out they are still using some of these same spatial reasoning skills as they think about the world around them. We are scholars of, developmental science and were curious to find out how children as young as 3 years old mentally rotate objects. While there is research on the age at which children can mentally rotate objects, less is understood about how children are solving mental rotation problems. We found in our research, conducted from 2022 to 2023, that young children are using the same problem-solving strategies as adults when they solve a mental rotation task.

Children think visually, just like adults

We used eye-tracking technology to understand how a sample of 148 children, all between 3 and 7 years old, solved different mental rotation problems. Eye-trackers use harmless infrared light to capture eye movements. This technology lets us observe how children solve these problems in real time. As part of our study, we showed each child a large picture of items such as a fire truck, as well as two smaller pictures of the same truck, one placed above the other and positioned slightly differently. Children were asked to say which small picture on the right matched the large one on the left. In this example, the correct answer is the top picture, because that top fire truck can be rotated to match the large fire truck. The bottom fire truck was a mirrored image, and no matter how much you rotate it, it will never match the large fire truck.

While the children thought about their response, the eye-tracker, mounted right below the computer screen, recorded their eye movements. By looking at where and for how long children looked at each image, we figured out what kind of strategy they were using. Some children focused on fewer parts of the object and spent less time studying its details. This suggests they used a holistic strategy, meaning they took in the whole image at once, instead of breaking it into pieces. These children mentally rotated the entire object to solve the task. Other children focused on parts of the object and spent more time studying its details. This suggests they broke the image down into pieces instead of visualizing the image as a whole, known as a piecemeal strategy. Our findings support prior work showing that children generally use these two visual approaches to solve mental rotation problems. This study helped us learn where children look while solving puzzles and identify how they solve these problems – without ever having to ask the child, who might be too young to explain, about their process. Children were more likely to turn the whole image instead of breaking it down into pieces, a pattern of problem solving adults typically also use. This means that even very young children are already thinking about how objects move and turn in space in ways that are more advanced than expected.

Supporting children’s visual skills

Knowing how young children mentally rotate objects may help researchers, teachers and parents understand why some children struggle with learning to read. Children who break an image down into pieces, instead of visualizing it as a whole, to solve mental rotation problems may be the very same children who struggle with discriminating similar-looking letters such as p and q and may later be diagnosed with dyslexia. Parents can play an important role in building their child’s mental rotation skills. Parents can help children by offering them opportunities to practice rotating real objects with toys such as three-dimensional puzzles or building blocks. Tangrams – flat, colorful puzzles that come in different shapes – can be used to practice breaking down shapes of animals into pieces. Parents can encourage their child to look for shapes that match parts of the animal or object they are building. Nov. 8 is International STEM Day, a celebration of all things science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Research like ours provides valuable guidance for designing early STEM activities and educational tools. By directly observing children’s problem solving in real time, we can develop better ways for educators and toy makers to support strong spatial thinking from an early age. To celebrate, we encourage people to engage in activities that test their spatial skills, such as ditching the GPS for the day or playing a game of Tetris. Mental rotation is a powerful skill that helps us understand and interact with the surrounding physical world. From solving puzzles to reading maps, mental rotation plays a role in many everyday activities. Building mental rotation abilities can improve children’s performance in subjects such as reading, math and science and may inspire future careers in STEM fields. Shannon Pruden, Professor of psychology, Florida International University and Karinna Rodriguez, PhD candidate in psychology, Florida International University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Gender is not an ideology – but conservative groups know learning about it empowers people to think for themselves

Victoria Pitts-Taylor, Wesleyan University and Elizabeth Anne Wood, Nassau Community College Political attacks on teaching about gender in colleges and universities are about more than just gender: They are part of a grander project of eroding civil and human rights, limiting personal freedoms and undermining democracy in the name of “traditional” values. On the first day of his second term, President Donald Trump issued an executive order declaring there are two sexes determined solely by the kind of reproductive cells the body makes, and that the federal government would recognize nothing else. The order claims to protect the “freedom to express the binary nature of sex” and bans the use of federal funds to “promote gender ideology.” Legal experts have criticized the directive as unconstitutional and are challenging it in the courts. Yet the order has provided fuel for conservatives, right-wing politicians and activists trying to remove so-called gender ideology from many places in American society, including classrooms. Right-wing activists are pushing for censorship of educational curricula in K-12 schools and in colleges and universities, and they have succeeded in Texas, Florida and other red states. Why are conservative politicians so determined to control how Americans define sex and understand gender? As sociologists who research and teach about gender, we know that gender across disciplines is understood to be a complex topic of study, not an ideology. The study of gender represents the kind of free inquiry that allows people to decide for themselves how to live, free of coercion or government control.

What is ‘gender ideology’?

“Gender ideology” is a catch-all term conservative Catholics initially promoted in the 1990s in response to the United Nations’ promotion of women’s equality. In 2004, pushing back on the global women’s and gay rights movements, the Vatican declared in a letter to bishops that men and women are different by nature “not only on the physical level, but also on the psychological and spiritual.” The letter stated that the idea of gender “inspired ideologies” that sanction alternatives to the traditional two-parent family headed by men and treated homosexuality on par with heterosexuality. Over the following decades, evangelical groups and far-right parties across the globe – from Hungary and Russia to Peru, Brazil and Ghana – have used the language of combating “gender ideology” to counter a host of social policies, including sex education in schools, the legalization of gay marriage and same-sex adoption, reproductive rights and transgender rights.

The anti-gender movement is no longer fringe but rather well funded, organized and transnational. For example, 40 countries have signed the Geneva Consensus Declaration, an international pact proposed by the first Trump administration and supported by anti-gender campaigners as a way to deny abortion rights internationally. In the U.S., where the majority of Americans support gay marriage and abortion rights, targeting trans rights has become one of the conservative movement’s galvanizing issues. A flood of state bills not only ban books and discussions of gender, sexuality and race in schools but also criminalize abortion, ban gender-affirming health care and legalize discrimination in housing and employment on religious grounds.

What we talk about when we talk about gender

How gender is researched and taught in universities has become a key target of anti-gender campaigns across the globe, in part because the study of gender raises questions about the universality of traditional social roles and the inequalities that can result from them. Gender is a focus of inquiry not only in gender studies classes but in literature, sociology, law, government, history, anthropology and cultural geography, among many other fields. Anti-gender campaigners argue there is nothing to understand about it because gender is given by nature or God. For them, gender is equivalent to sex, which is taken to be straightforward and without exception male or female. Scientific evidence suggests, however, that sex is not always binary. In biology, sex refers to genes, reproductive organs, hormone systems and observable physical characteristics; different combinations of these lead to variations in sex. Far from straightforward, then, sex is complicated. And a person’s assigned sex at birth does not always align with their deeply held sense of self – their gender identity. Gender is both a feature of individual people and a mode of organizing social life. At the individual level, people have a subjective sense of and embody their gender by dressing and behaving in ways that encourage other people to see them as they want to be seen. A man might wear a tie at the office to convey masculinity. People will interact differently with a woman when she is wearing high heels and makeup than when she goes barefaced or dons a swimsuit. Someone who is gender fluid may appear more masculine or feminine at different times and experience prejudice and discrimination.

Gender shapes societies through norms and rules on everything from what you wear to how families operate, whom you are allowed to partner with and what jobs you are likely to hold. Whether in the spheres of culture, family, economic or civic life, gender roles and norms intersect with class, race and other social differences and shift across cultures and historical eras. Indigenous societies across the globe have long recognized more than two gender categories, and historical and contemporary examples of gender diversity abound. A ban on learning about gender would sweep aside all this variation in favor of a homogeneous worldview that deliberately ignores biology, history and lived experience. Denying the diversity of gender makes it easier to impose a conservative worldview and roll back rights.

Education as a political target

Anti-gender campaigners view education as a major battleground in the fight over societal values. In the U.S., conservative efforts to ban the study of gender and sexuality initially centered on K-12 education, exemplified in bills such as Florida’s 2022 “Don’t Say Gay” law. But the movement has also affected colleges and universities. Texas A&M’s president fired a professor in September 2025 after a student recorded her confrontation with her for discussing gender diversity in a literature course. The student alleged the course was “not legal” because it contradicted “our president’s laws” and her own religious beliefs. The university president also later resigned under pressure. The same month, the chancellor of the Texas Tech University system, citing Trump’s executive order on “gender ideology,” banned all faculty members across its five universities from recognizing “more than two sexes” in any course or classroom.

As the Texas chapter of the American Association of University Professors reminds its members, faculty have a constitutional right to teach and discuss “all matters related to the subject matter of a class” without interference from administrators, politicians or government officials. Despite this, states led by conservative lawmakers have used a range of tactics to eliminate gender studies programs or curriculum from colleges. These attacks on universities are attempts to control thought, subdue social movements advocating for change and promote an orthodoxy that upholds those in power.

Restricting rights, eroding democracy

These attacks on education are not only academic matters. They disempower women and marginalized groups that have achieved some legal protection or rights in recent decades. And they contribute to the erosion of democracy. Authoritarian approaches to governing rely on scapegoating people, policing thought and speech, and punishing dissent. This is true whether it’s Viktor Orban’s Hungary, Vladimir Putin’s Russia or Donald Trump’s United States. By prohibiting questions and challenges, autocrats gain the power to limit how people think and control their bodies. Victoria Pitts-Taylor, Professor of Feminist, Gender, and Sexuality Studies; Sociology; Science and Technology Studies, Wesleyan University and Elizabeth Anne Wood, Professor of Sociology, Nassau Community College This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.