DOCSLIB.ORG

Engler and Prantl System of Classification Adolf Engler (1844

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Engler and Prantl System of Classification Adolf Engler (1844 Engler and Prantl System of Classification Adolf Engler (1844-1938), a German botanist and Professor in Botany at University of Berlin for thirty years proposed a phylogenetic system of classification based on evolutionary relationship which was first published as a guide to the Botanical Garden of Breslau in a book entitled ‘Syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien’ in 1892. He was also Director of Botanical Gardens from1889 to1921. Later on, Engler in collaboration with other German botanist Karl E. Prantl elaborated his study on classification of plants and monumental work was published in details in a book entitled ‘Die Nuturlichen Pflanzenfamilien’ in 23 volumes (1887-1915). Engler and Prantl system of classification of seed plants is based on complexity of flower, fruit and development of seed. Salient features of Engler and Prantl’s system of classification is mentioned below: The wind pollinated flowers are primitive whereas insect-pollinated flowers are advanced. Unisexuals plants are primitive and bisexual plants are advanced. They further assumed that bisexual flowers was been evolved from unisexual flowers. Flowers with free flowers parts such as free sepals, free petals, free stamen and free carpel is more primitive over united flower parts. Among united flowers, if only sepal united, condition is primitive, sepals and petals united more advanced and if all flower parts are in united condition is said to be most advanced. They further assumed that angiosperms evolved from gymnosperms. Monocots evolved first from angiosperms and dicots from monocots. Hence, they consider monocots as primitive and dicots as advanced. They combined Monochlamydae and Polypetalae in a separate group called Archichlamydae (with free sepals and petals). Archichlamydae gives rise to Metachlamydae. Megasporophyll give rise to female flowers and microsporophyll give rise to male flowers. Engler and Prantl divided plant kingdom into 13 divisions. Out of which, 12 divisions describes the bacteria, algae, fungi, bryophyta and pteridophyta and 13th divison describe seed bearing plants i.e. Embryophyta. The outline of Embryophyta proposed by Engler and Prantl has been mentioned below: Embryophyta was divided into two sub-divisions on the basis of seed viz. Gymnospermae and Angiospermae. o Gymnospermae – all plants with naked seeds or ovules. o Angiospermae – All plants with covered or enclosed seeds or ovules. Gymnospermae was further divided into seven orders which has been mentioned below: I. Cycadofilicales II. Cycadales III. Bennetitales IV. Ginkgoales V. Coniferales VI. Cordaitales VII. Gnetales They divided Angiospermae into two classes viz. I. I. Monocotyledonae II. Dicotyledonae I. Monocotyledonae They classified plants of monocotyledonae into 11 orders (Pandanales, ) and 45 families. This group of plants starts with order Pandanales and ends with Microspermae. Family starts with Typhaceae of Pandanales and ends with Orchidaceae of order Microspermae. II. Dicotyledonae They classified dicotyledonae into 2 subclasses viz. I. Archichlamydae – plants with free petals was grouped under this subclass and was further divided into 33 orders. This group of plants starts with order Verticillatae and ends with order Umbelliflorae. Starting family of this subclass Archichlamydae begins with Casuarinaceae and ends with Cornaceae of Umbelliflorae. II. Metachlamydeae (Sympetalae) – plants with fused petals was grouped under this subclass and was further classified into 11 orders. This subclass starts with order Ericales with family Clethraceae and ends with order Campanulales with family Asteraceae or Compositae. Merits System proposed considers all group of plant kingdom starting from bacteria to Angiosperms. Sympetalae is equivalent to Gamopetalae of Bentham and Hooker system of classification. Gymnosperm has been considered separately and is justified. Plants with inferior ovary have been placed at the end of the subclasses. Plants have been arranged in order of advancement from hypogyny to epigyny. Like others, they also placed Orchidaceae at the end of Microspermae considering them most advanced. Placement of Asteraceae or Compositae at the end of Dicots is justified. Demerits Monocots are considered primitive over dicots. Grouping of Apetalous and Polypetalous families together is not justified. System proposed does not deserve much more practical applications. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter-3 Plant Kingdom 1. the System of Plant Classification
    NEET Questions- Chapter-3 Plant Kingdom 1. The system of plant classification proposed by Carolus Linnaeus was artificial because a) It was based on evolutionary relationship of plants b) It was based on similarities and differences in floral and other morphological characters only c) It took into account the physiological facts along with the morphological characters d) None of the above 2. Linnaeus is credited with introducing a) The concept of inheritance b) Law of limiting factor c) Theory of heredity d) Binomial nomenclature 3. Out of the 4 widely known systems of classification one remains less phylogenetic and more natural and that is of a) Engler and Prantl b) Hutchinson c) Bentham and Hooker d) Rendle 4. The chief merit of Bentham and Hookers classification is that a) it is a natural system of classification of all group of plants b) a system based on evolutionary concept c) it also considered the phylogenetic aspect d) The description of taxa are based on actual examination of the specimens 5. ‘SystemaNaturae’ written by Linnaeus contains a list of a) 4000 species of plants b) 2000 species of plants c) 4200 species of plants d) 4200 species of animals 6. Natural system of classification of plants differs from artificial system of classification in a) taking into account only one vegetative character b) taking into account only one floral character c) taking into account all the similarities between plants d) all of these 7. One of the best methods for understanding general relationships of plants is a) Cytotaxonomy b) Experimental Taxonomy c) Numerical Taxonomy d) Chemotaxonomy 8.
    [Show full text]
  • The Botanical Exploration of Angola by Germans During the 19Th and 20Th Centuries, with Biographical Sketches and Notes on Collections and Herbaria
    Blumea 65, 2020: 126–161 www.ingentaconnect.com/content/nhn/blumea RESEARCH ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.3767/blumea.2020.65.02.06 The botanical exploration of Angola by Germans during the 19th and 20th centuries, with biographical sketches and notes on collections and herbaria E. Figueiredo1, *, G.F. Smith1, S. Dressler 2 Key words Abstract A catalogue of 29 German individuals who were active in the botanical exploration of Angola during the 19th and 20th centuries is presented. One of these is likely of Swiss nationality but with significant links to German Angola settlers in Angola. The catalogue includes information on the places of collecting activity, dates on which locations botanical exploration were visited, the whereabouts of preserved exsiccata, maps with itineraries, and biographical information on the German explorers collectors. Initial botanical exploration in Angola by Germans was linked to efforts to establish and expand Germany’s plant collections colonies in Africa. Later exploration followed after some Germans had settled in the country. However, Angola was never under German control. The most intense period of German collecting activity in this south-tropical African country took place from the early-1870s to 1900. Twenty-four Germans collected plant specimens in Angola for deposition in herbaria in continental Europe, mostly in Germany. Five other naturalists or explorers were active in Angola but collections have not been located under their names or were made by someone else. A further three col- lectors, who are sometimes cited as having collected material in Angola but did not do so, are also briefly discussed. Citation: Figueiredo E, Smith GF, Dressler S.
    [Show full text]
  • History and Current Status of Systematic Research with Araceae
    HISTORY AND CURRENT STATUS OF SYSTEMATIC RESEARCH WITH ARACEAE Thomas B. Croat Missouri Botanical Garden P. O. Box 299 St. Louis, MO 63166 U.S.A. Note: This paper, originally published in Aroideana Vol. 21, pp. 26–145 in 1998, is periodically updated onto the IAS web page with current additions. Any mistakes, proposed changes, or new publications that deal with the systematics of Araceae should be brought to my attention. Mail to me at the address listed above, or e-mail me at [email protected]. Last revised November 2004 INTRODUCTION The history of systematic work with Araceae has been previously covered by Nicolson (1987b), and was the subject of a chapter in the Genera of Araceae by Mayo, Bogner & Boyce (1997) and in Curtis's Botanical Magazine new series (Mayo et al., 1995). In addition to covering many of the principal players in the field of aroid research, Nicolson's paper dealt with the evolution of family concepts and gave a comparison of the then current modern systems of classification. The papers by Mayo, Bogner and Boyce were more comprehensive in scope than that of Nicolson, but still did not cover in great detail many of the participants in Araceae research. In contrast, this paper will cover all systematic and floristic work that deals with Araceae, which is known to me. It will not, in general, deal with agronomic papers on Araceae such as the rich literature on taro and its cultivation, nor will it deal with smaller papers of a technical nature or those dealing with pollination biology.
    [Show full text]
  • History and Theory
    Landscape Research Record No.2 HISTORY AND THEORY Edited by Elizabeth Brabec Landscape Research Record No.2 ROBERTO BURLE MARX AND THE BOTANICAL GARDEN SEAVITT NORDENSON, CATHERINE The City College of New York, Spitzer School of Architecture, 141 Convent Avenue, Room 2M24A, New York, NY 10031, [email protected] 1 ABSTRACT 2 A BRAZILIAN GARDEN FROM A Rio de Janeiro’s colonial and imperial gardens BERLIN GLASSHOUSE played an influential role on the work of 2.1 The Berlin-Dahlem Botanical modernist Latin American landscape architect Gardens: Myths and Lessons Roberto Burle Marx (1909-1994). Burle Marx At the age of nineteen, while studying music and mythologizes the influence of his visit as a young painting in Berlin, Roberto Burle Marx (1909- man to the Berlin-Dahlem Botanical Garden’s 1994) visited a beautiful glasshouse filled with greenhouses, which displayed the tropical plants of plants from his native Brazil at the Berlin- his native Brazil in the ecological tableaux Dahlem Botanical Gardens. He describes being developed by the botanist Adolf Engler (1844- astounded by the richness of this tropical flora, 1930). Engler had collaborated with Carl Friedrich which included collections of plants that he had not Philipp von Martius (1794-1868) on his monumental seen in the gardens and parks of Rio de Janeiro. work Flora Brasiliensis, and developed the field of phytogeography, emphasizing the importance of “When, in 1928, I lived for two years in Germany, geology on biodiversity. Burle Marx, credited as a brought there by my father, one of my fascinations pioneer in the use of native Brazilian flora in his was, in the Botanical Garden of Berlin, to see the designs, often cites his rejection of a significant Brazilian flora growing and flourishing in the preference for the use of imported European greenhouses of that institution.
    [Show full text]
  • T I I T ! T E a 4 3
    3 S t 1 s PATNA UNIVERSITY {' J t $ T t Courses of Study for .t I B.Sc. (Honours) and Subsidiary Examinations in Botany I I Three Year Degree Course l 2015-2018 .l u a t a t I I t ! t e a 4 3 B.Sc. Botany (Honours) Three Year Degree Course Three shall be two theoretical and one practical paper each in the I year and ll year examinations carrying 75 marks in each theory paper and 50 marks in each practical paper. ln the lll year, there shall be three theory and one practical paper carrying 100 marks each. B.Sc. (H) Part-l Paper l: General Biology, Microbiology, Mycology and Plant Pathology 3Hrs. 75 marks Paper ll : Plant DiversitY 3Hrs. 75 marks Practical based on Paper I and lll 4 Hrs. 50 marks B.Sc. (H) Part-ll Paper lll : Angiosperms and Economic Botany 3 Hrs 75 marks Paper lV : Cell Biology, Cytogenetics and Plant Breeding 3 Hrs. 75 marks Practical based on Paper lll & lV 4 Hrs. 75 marks B.Sc. (H) Part- lll s Paper V : Molecular Biology and Biotechnology 3 Hrs. 100 marks 3 Paper Vl : Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 3 Hrs. 100 marks $ Paper Vll: Biodiversity and Environmental Biology 3 Hrs. l-00 marks Paper Vlll : 4 Hrs. 100 marks (r Practical based on Papers V, Vl and Vll ,il o ffi-'-- o o o t o : f3 i3 \Ja. i; \.t B.Sc. part_l Botany Honours paper l: General Biology, Microbiology, Mycology and plant Pathology ;o Time :3 Hours Full Marks: 75 ro Ten questions are to be set' three each from group A and group B and fourfrom group c.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetic System of Classification.Pdf
    Course- Botany (Honours )Part II (continued topic) Systems of Classification Phylogenetic system of classification This system is based on the evolutionary parameters. The term phylogeny was proposed by E.H.Haeckel in 1866, who described it as the science of genealogical development in phyla or in other plant or animal group. The theory of evolution in organisms was given by Charles Darwin with the publication of Origin of Species in 1859, the outlook of taxonomy was changed and evolutionary trends were taken into consideration in taxonomy. Systems based on evolutionary trends gained much reliability and popularity. In general, all classifications given on Phylogenetic basis have classified plants according to increasing complexity, i.e. beginning with the simplest forms and proceeding to the complex ones. The most widely known Phylogenetic systems are those of Engler and Prantl (1887-1899), Hutchinson (1926, 1934, 1948, 1959, 1969, 1973), Takhtajan (1969), and Cronquist (1068, 1981). Many Phylogenetic systems have been given but none of them clearly accounts for the true relationships between the species. Julius von Sachs (1832-1897) was the first botanist who proposed first Phylogenetic classification in 1868 substituting the old systems by his new plan, but that could not be accepted. The most popular Phylogenetic system for plants classification was given by H.G. Adolf Engler (1844-1930) and Karl Anton Eugene Prantl (1849-1893). Adolf Engler was Professor of Botany at Berlin University and Director of Berlin Botanical Gardens from 1889-1921. He gave his classification based on classification given by Eichler (1883). This system was published in 1887, and later on expanded in a monumental work named as Die naturlichen Pflanzenfamilien.
    [Show full text]
  • Humboldts Grüne Erben Der Botanische Garten Und Das Botanische Museum in Dahlem 1910 Bis 2010
    Botanisches Museum Berlin-Dahlem H. Walter Lack (Hrsg.) Humboldts Grüne Erben Der Botanische Garten und das Botanische Museum in Dahlem 1910 bis 2010 Mit Texten von Kathrin Grotz, Anton Güntsch, Marina Heilmeyer und H. Walter Lack Englische Übersetzung von Sarah Kane Berlin 2010 Inhalt · Content 3 Vorwort · Preface. 5 Unser Grünes Erbe · Our Green Inheritance . 7 Berliner Pflanzen ·Berlin Plants . 8 Biodiversität und Biomasse · Biodiversity and Biomass . 10 Humboldts Grüne Erben · Humboldt’s Green Heirs . 11 Systematische Botanik in Berlin · Systematic Botany in Berlin . 11 Carl Ludwig Willdenow · 1765–1812 . 12, 28 Heinrich Friedrich Link · 1767–1851 . 13, 29 Alexander von Humboldt · 1769–1859 . 14 Adelbert von Chamisso · 1781–1838 . 15 Carl Sigismund Kunth · 1788–1850 . 16, 30 Alexander Braun · 1805–1877 . 18, 31 Paul Ascherson · 1834–1913 . 19, 32 Paul Graebner 1871–1933. 19, 37 Georg Schweinfurth · 1836–1925 . 20, 33 August Wilhelm Eichler · 1839–1887 . 21, 34 Adolf Engler · 1844–1930 . 22, 35 Ignatius Urban · 1848–1931 . 23, 36 Ludwig Diels · 1874–1945 . 24, 38 Robert Pilger · 1876–1953 . 26, 39 Standorte · Locations . 40 Standort Schöneberg · Schöneberg . 40 Standortwechsel · Relocation . 42 Standort Dahlem · Dahlem . 44 Vernetzung · Networking . 47 Herbartausch und Herbarausleihe · Herbarium Exchange and Herbarium Loan . 49 Samentausch · Seed Exchange . 51 Schriftentausch · Publications Exchange . 53 Koautorenschaft · Co-authorship . 55 Chronik 1910–2010 · Chronicle 1910–2010 . 56 Der lange Umzug · The long move . 56 1910–1919 . 58 1920–1932 . 60 1933–1945 . 63 1946–1959 . 67 1960–1969 . 72 1970–1979 . 74 1980–1989 . 77 1990–1999 . 79 2000–2010 . 82 4 Inhalt · Content Sammeln 1910–2010 · Collecting 1910–2010 .
    [Show full text]
  • The European Aroid Community New Interest in the Age of Social Media Tom Croat Thomas B
    The IAS Newsletter Vol. 42 No. 4 – December, 2020 ISSN 2330-295X A Quarterly Publication for Members of the International Aroid Society Table of Contents The European Aroid Community New Interest in the Age of Social Media Tom Croat Thomas B. Croat, P. A. Schulze Curator The European Aroid Community Missouri Botanical Garden Traveling to Germany .................. Page 1 Meeting with European Aroiders . Page 2 Traveling to Germany Established Aroiders ..................... Page 7 On the 5th of September 2019 I flew to Germany on the invitation ofAlex Pollen and Pollination Experts ... Page 12 Portilla of Ecuagenera. Alex was planning an aroid sales event at the Röllke Aroid Growers ........................... Page 14 Orchideen, a greenhouse complex in Schloss Holte-Stukenbrock and wanted Aquatic Aroid Specialists ............ Page 15 me to present information on Araceae to the participants at his sale. Alex is Index to European Aroiders ....... Page 17 the company’s representative in Europe and had received good responses from people all over northern Europe and thought that it would be good to solidify Sappasiri Chaovanich & Rahul Thampi relationships with a number of new potential members for the International Thailand Best Aroid Show 2020 ... Page18 Aroid Society. I was eager to help by meeting these new European aroid enthu- siasts, talk about aroids and try to find some new young members for the IAS. Dmitry A. Loginov Easy Solution for Difficult Things did not go well from the outset with my flight to Stockholm leaving 3 Cryptocoryne Species .................. Page 20 hours late out of Washington Dulles Airport. When I arrived in Copenhagen at 10:00 AM the next day on Friday, I learned that there was a baggage han- Zach DuFran dler’s strike and that my now rescheduled connecting flight to Hannover was Mid America Chapter likely to not leave.
    [Show full text]
  • Dioscorides the Greek
    THE HERBAL OF DIOSCORIDES THE GREEK DIOSCORIDES i COPYRIGHT NOTICE As this version essentially constitutes a new work, the editor/translator hereby asserts copyright. Permission of the publisher is required for any excerpts or copies made from the text. The illustrations are deemed in good faith to be in the public domain. © Tess Anne Osbaldeston First published in 2000 ISBN 0-620-23435-0 Printed in 12/14 Zapf Calligraphic [Palatino] Published by IBIDIS PRESS cc PO Box 81169 Parkhurst Johannesburg South Africa 2120 +27 11 788 2270 international paper fax +27 82 771 7130 international messages [email protected] e-mail ISBN 0-620-23435-0 9 780620 234351 0 0> Bursera gummifera after FAGUET— 1888 [opposite] ii THE HERBAL OF DIOSCORIDES THE GREEK DIOSCORIDES DE MATERIA MEDICA BEING AN HERBAL WITH MANY OTHER MEDICINAL MATERIALS WRITTEN IN GREEK IN THE FIRST CENTURY OF THE COMMON ERA A NEW INDEXED VERSION IN MODERN ENGLISH BY TA OSBALDESTON AND RPA WOOD iii Cucumis turcicus - Cucurbita pepo from FUCHS — 1542 iv THE HERBAL OF DIOSCORIDES THE GREEK CONTENTS EDITORIAL PREFACE — vii ORIGINAL DEDICATION — viii BIBLIOGRAPHY — xiii INTRODUCTION — xx ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS — xl THE BOTANICAL ILLUSTRATIONS — xlii PRINTED BOOKS — il GAZETTEER OF DIOSCORIDES’ WORLD — lxviii BOOK ONE: AROMATICS — 1 OILS — 34 OINTMENTS — 48 GUMS from TREES — 78 FRUIT from TREES — 149 FRUIT TREES — 153 BOOK TWO — 183 LIVING CREATURES — 184 FATS — 212 FRUMENTACEA: CEREALS — 229 LACHANA: VEGETABLES — 243 HERBS WITH A SHARP QUALITY — 304 BOOK THREE: ROOTS — 363 ROOTS OF AKANTHODA or PRICKLY PLANTS — 377 BOOK FOUR: OTHER HERBS & ROOTS — 541 BOOK FIVE: VINES & WINES — 741 WINES — 747 OTHER WINES — 759 METALLIC STONES — 781 INDEXES ALTERNATE NAMES — 832 ILLUSTRATIONS — 847 LATINISED GREEK NAMES — 851 MEDICINAL USES etc.
    [Show full text]
  • An Annotated Catalogue of the Generic Names of The
    AN ANNOTATED CATALOGUE OF THE GENERIC NAMES OF THE BROMELIACEAE Jason R. Grant1 University of Alaska Museum, 907 Yukon Drive Fairbanks, Alaska 99775 U.S.A. Gea Zijlstra Department of Plant Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Herbarium, University of Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 2 NL-3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands 1 Author for correspondence 2 ABSTRACT An annotated catalogue of the known generic names of the Bromeliaceae is presented. It accounts for 187 names in six lists: I. Generic names (133), II. Invalid names (7), III. A synonymized checklist of the genera of the Bromeliaceae (56 accepted genera, and 77 synonyms), IV. Nothogenera (bigeneric hybrids) (41), V. Invalid nothogenus (1), and VI. Putative fossil genera (5). Comments on nomenclature or taxonomy are given when necessary to explain problematic issues, and notes on important researchers of the family are intercalated throughout. The etymological derivation of each name is given, including if named after a person, brief remarks on their identity. Appended is a chronological list of monographs of the Bromeliaceae and other works significant to the taxonomy of the family. 3 INTRODUCTION This paper catalogues all the known generic names of the Bromeliaceae. These names have appeared in the literature since the starting-point of binomial nomenclature in Linnaeus’ ‘Species plantarum’ (1753). The catalogue accounts for 187 names in six lists: I. Generic names (133), II. Invalid names, i.e. names without description or status, listed here merely for historical documentation (7), III. A synonymized checklist of the genera of the Bromeliaceae (56 accepted genera, and 77 synonyms), IV. Nothogenera (bigeneric hybrids) (41), V.
    [Show full text]
  • Angiosperms in Being Exalbuminous, the Embryo Itself Filling Almost All the Seed Cavity, and Nutritive Tissue Being Entirely Absent Or Very Scanty
    1 ANGIOSPERMS Angiosperms: Origin And Evolution T. Pullaiah Professor Sri Krishnadevaraya University Anantapur – 515 003 A.P 2 Angiosperms form the most dominant group of plants with atleast 2,34,000 species (Thorne, 1992), a number much greater than all other groups of plants combined together. Not only in numbers, Angiosperms are also found in a far greater range of habitats than any other group of land plants. Ancestors of Angiosperms The identity of the ancestors of the flowering plants is a most difficult problem which is as yet far from being solved. Several groups of plants have been considered as ancestral stock for angiosperms. Bennettilean ancestry Since Saporta (Saporta and Marion, 1885) Bennettitales have often been proposed as possible ancestors of angiosperms, and in this connection the resemblance in structure between the strobili of the Mesozoic genus Cycadeodea and the flower of Magnolia has often been pointed out. But this resemblance is wholly superficial, they are alike only in that both are bisexual and both consist of an elongated axis on which are arranged successively and in the same order, protective bracts (perianth members in Magnolia), microsporophylls and megasporophylls. But along with these few similarities there are profound differences. The microsporophylls (stamens) of Magnolia (as in other primitive angiosperms) are free and arranged spirally on the axis, but in Bennettitales they are whorled and mostly connate. The megasporophylls of the Bennettitales are very reduced, simplified stalk-like structures, sometimes very abbreviated, each bearing at its apex a solitary erect ovule. Between these stalk-like megasporophylls and alternating with them, are sterile organs (interseminal scales) which appear to be modified sterilized megasporophylls.
    [Show full text]
  • Herbarium Tour of European Herbaria April, 2016 Thomas B
    OPUS Herbarium Tour of European Herbaria April, 2016 Thomas B. Croat, P. A. Schulze Curator of Botany Missouri Botanical Garden This was the second of three extensive herbarium tours. In contrast to Asian or African Institutions which largely house regional collections, many European herbaria have large numbers of important collections of Araceae. I embarked on the European trip on April 1st flying first to Italy. I had made a side trip on a weeklong visit to Israel and Jordan so I arrived in Italy via Athens. From Rome, I took a train north to Florence, a city which has some of the oldest and most important herbaria in Europe. I was mostly staying in hostels while in Europe because they were inexpensive and at this off-season time, I often was alone in a room with several beds. Florence, Italy I had arranged for a place to stay in Florence near the main station and was met by, Lia Pignotti, Curator of the FT Herbarium. Lia soon arrived on Florence Herbarium her bicycle and she walked me to the 1 herbarium about a kilometer away. I memorized the route and returned by the same path later that day. The route led by an old castle wall and through a big park then past a small community surrounding a local church. The FT Herbarium is the Centro Studi Erbario Tropicale of the Department of Biology-University of Florence with about 5 million, 230.000 collections. It was founded in 1904 in Rome by, Romualdo Pirotta and later moved to Florence in 1914.
    [Show full text]