A good argument can be made for planting the same kind of beans in the same location year after year. The bacteria which make the nitrogen fixing nodules on the roots becomes established in the soil. When you remove the favas leave the roots in the soil. They have the nodules on them and will return it to the soil. The roots also contribute organic material to the soil. Beans don't harbor diseases which would necessitate crop rotation as some vegetables do. Jim

Technically, plants do produce cholesterol...but practically, it's a rather insignificant amount when it comes to human consumption and humans can't uptake them efficiently. Long story short...technically, yes...realistically to human consumption and intake, too insignificant to even count it as a source. Plant cholesterol is rather ignorable compared to the good they do, especially the role of some other plant compounds in blocking uptake or otherwise helping the body pass other "bad" cholesterol from meat sources. Just a fyi...

If you have ever looked up the nutrient content of compost it is very low. Much lower than the total of what was in the raw organic matter. I suspect this is due to rain leeching a lot of the good stuff out and probably other factors so to me composting in place makes a lot of sense. I've always noticed that if I dig in my half finished compost into the soil, the worms go nuts over it. Hundreds of them find their way to it. If I dig in finished compost, there's not a large difference in the worms. I assume the same goes for all the other decomposers too. Because of this, I prefer unfinished materials, or trench composting. I've just become aware of using grain and seed meals as a fertilizer, so I want to try it but all I have access to is corn gluten meal and I don't want to mess with seed germination.

BofB: I looked at the article you cited, and have a couple of problems with it. The most important of which is that it doesn't even address your contention, let alone demonstrate it. On top of that, the article is badly written, confusing, and, most of all, _lacks any citations_. I have never heard any reliable nutritional source make the claim that mixed pulses would provide all the essential amino acids. And, despite your smugness, it is an established fact that soy is the only bean that does. Which is precisely why soy is such an important part of the vegan diet. From your linked article, here is a chart showing which essential amino acids are missing from various foods: Protein source/ Limiting amino acid Wheat/ lysine Rice /lysine Maize /lysine and tryptophan Pulses /methionine (or cysteine) Beef/ phenylalanine (or tyrosine) Egg, chicken none; the reference for absorbable protein Milk or Whey,/ bovine methionine (or cysteine) In terms of RDAs, methionine is one of the highest. And that's precisely what's missing from most beans. But look at the wheat, rice, and maize (corn) just above them and you see how a bean with a grain provides all that you need. It doesn't take much to achieve balance. As Chaman points out, a couple of slices of bread, or a handful of crackers with a bowl of lentil soup will provide it. In much of the world, meat is either absent from the diet or is used more as a flavoring agent than as a main component of the diet. Look at how those peoples eat and you'll always find a combination of beans & grains in their diets; sometimes combined, as in the ubiquitous beans & rice, and sometimes in separate dishes served at the same time, as in Chaman's lentil soup and bread. In tems of human health, the man who said "bread is the staff of life," was wrong. What he should have said was "bread and beans are the staff of life."