DOCSLIB.ORG

Integrative Biology 335 Historical Systematics University of Illinois

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Integrative Biology 335 Historical Systematics University of Illinois Integrative Biology 335 Historical Systematics University of Illinois Remember this quote from the Introduction to IB335 — “Taxonomy is at the same time the most basic and the most derived or synthetic field of biology. It is basic because a system of naming and classifying organisms is needed in order to communicate knowledge about them to others, and hence every field of biology uses the results of taxonomy. It is also the most derived field because it has no data of its own, but uses those from every other discipline, thus progressing with advances in accumulated knowledge and technology.” Also remember that systematics and taxonomy are often used synonymously, but ‘taxonomy’ applies to the science of classification [and naming], while ‘systematics’ implies the study of evolutionary relationships. Today’s lecture is about the evolution of ‘taxonomy’ into ‘systematics’. The system of classification used for plants in a particular place at a particular time reflects the: needs of people at the time level of accumulated knowledge philosophical concepts available technology of the period. The development of plant classification systems has been closely tied to botanical gardens. This was enhanced with botanical exploration for gardens. Even today, many established, historical botanical gardens have major herbaria and specialized libraries. The following six points summarize the sequential development of different methods to classify plants over time. 1. There is a strong historical background on the study of plants that has developed over time. Humans have been looking at plants since ancient times. The first classifications were utilitarian — the need to know if plants were useful for food, fiber, fuel, medicines, etc. or were poisonous or otherwise dangerous. 2. Humans have also been examining the structure of plants since at least the Ancient Greeks — floral details, etc. They noticed the amazing diversity of flowering plants, and this eventually led to ways of classifying this diversity. One way is to group plants based on form — tree, shrub, vine, herbaceous. 3. Another simple way to group plants is on one or a few simple traits, such as flower color or the number of stamens, which results in what we call an artificial or analytic system. [Classification systems have functions of identification and memorization] 4. Eventually, it was recognized that many plants that looked alike shared suites of morphological features (leaves, flowers, fruits) and should be grouped together in a classification system, and the idea of plant families and genera developed. This led to natural or synthetic systems of classification. [Note: there was no distinction between shared primitive and shared derived characters.] 5. After the publication of Darwin’s theory of evolution, biologists realized that the reason taxonomic groups shared certain suites of characteristics was because those groups were evolutionarily related to each other. Evolution provided the theoretical basis for morphological similarities. These result in phyletic or evolutionary systems of classification. 6. A major breakthrough in efforts to make systematics less empirical and more scientific was the development of cladistic theory and the construction of phylogenies that infer evolutionary relationships. Phylogenetic classification systems can be produced from these phylogenies. — From Peter Steven’s Chapter 3 in the Judd et al. textbook — “If you look at the phylogenetic trees in Chapters 7 through 9, you will see that it is possible to base classifications on them that capture precisely the clades in those phylogenies (See Chapter 2). Both phylogenies and classifications are hierarchical and are made up of groups nested within groups. However, some classifications in use today – in particular, evolutionary classifications – do not try to represent phylogenies in this way. Indeed, they are not strictly hierarchical. What they are trying to represent can be understood today only in the context of a long history stretching back before anyone had any idea about evolution. Understanding classifications thus means that we need to understand their history.” Hunters & Gatherers — “Ancient men (or more likely women) who made their living by gathering food from the landscape were of necessity practical plant taxonomists. Through experience, they learned which plants were edible and which were not. Those people who failed to learn this distinction also failed to become our ancestors.” [Theodore Barkley] • Agriculture developed at least 9,000 years ago • People have been using plants for medicinal purposes for at least 4,000 years Ancient Greek Theophrastus (ca. 370—285 B.C.) Student of Plato & Aristotle, knew Alexander the Great Enquiry into Plants, The Causes of Plants — 480 species. FORM [Flowers. Trees, Shrubs, Herbs; ovaries superior or inferior, sympetalous corollas] Dioscorides & Pliny (1st C. A.D.) died at Pompeii (Vesuvius) Materia Medica — 600 Species. [Plants used in medicine; mints and umbels recognized as groups] Juliana Codex (ca. 500 A.D.) UTILITARIAN MIDDLE AGES —Between fall of Roman Empire and the Renaissance, there was Little original science or observations. The Ancients were thought to have possessed all knowledge, and their works were copied repeatedly. However, many Greek & Roman texts were translated into Arabic. Cultures in Arabia, China, Japan, India, and the Americas were flourishing at this time. • Death of Mohammed 632 Renaissance Albertus Magnus (d. 1280) teacher of Thomas of Aquinas De vegetabilis [distinguished monocots & dicots] • Dante, Chaucer, Gothic Cathedrals • Marco Polo (d. 1324) • Madeira discovered 1418, Azores 1419 • Guttenberg Bible 1455 • Christopher Columbus, 1492 [He was looking for plants!] • Magellan 1522 • Copernicus (d. 1543) • Dürer (d. 1528), Da Vinci (d. 1519), Michelangelo (d. 1564) • Botanical garden established in Pisa, Italy (1543) Herbalists—People sought originality, looked at plants, not just accepted and copied what the ancients said. Moveable type made books more widely available. Exploration brought new, unknown plants to Europe to be described. There was a need for medical information. UTILITARIAN Otto Brunfels (1464—1534) Herbarum vivae Eicones [good drawings] Jerome Bock (1469—1554) Neu Kreuterbuck [good descriptions] Leonhart Fuchs (1501—1566) De historia stirpium Casper Bauhin (1560—1631) Pinax theatri botanici [6,000 species] William Turner Herball 1551 [in English] Valerius Cordus (d. 1544) Historia Stirpium [went on botanical field trips] PRE-LINNAEAN Andrea Caesalpino (1519—1580) De plantis libri xvi HABIT [Had a herbarium, used flower and fruit characters] • Botanical garden established in Pisa, Italy, 1543; also Florence & Padua, 1545 • Herbarium specimens first made by Luca Ghini in Italy, about 1532 • First shipment of coffee to England, 1650 • Rembrandt (d. 1669), Rubens (d. 1640) • Galileo (d. 1642) • William Harvey (De Motu Cordis, 1628) • Robert Hooke (Micrographia, 1665) • Francis Bacon (Novum Organum, 1620) • Chocolate introduced to Europe! (1657) • Isaac Newton (Principia, 1687) • Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750) • Antonio Vivaldi (ca. 1675-1743) • Jardin du Roi established (1635) • Chelsea Physic Garden established (1673) J. P. de Tournefort (1656—1708) Institutiones rei herbariae, 700 genera & 10,146 species, Father of genus concept ARTIFICIAL [trees & shrubs/petals free vs. petals connate/flowers actinomorphic vs. zygomorphic] John Ray (1628—1705) Synopsis methodica stirpium Britannicarum [A “flora” or account of plants that grow wild in a particular geographic region] Historia Plantarum, 3 volumes, 17,000 species NATURAL [Traveled extensively in Europe; used a classification system that relied on multiple characters of leaf, flower, and fruit characters — plants that looked alike were grouped together, such as monocots and dicots, also many modern plant families.] LINNAEUS By middle of 18th C., many developments made science of botany ready for a person to synthesize information. People needed an easy, rapid way to identify and name plants. Travel widespread in period, advances in navigation, early microscopes, widespread use of herbarium specimens, printed books widely available, groundwork of herbalists, Bauhin, de Tournefort, Ray, and others. Carl Linné or Carolus Linnaeus (1707—1778) Species Plantarum (1753) 7,700 species Genera Plantarum (1754) 1,105 genera 1. Sexual system of classification — not used very long ARTIFICIAL [“floral hanky-panky”] 2. Binomial system of nomenclature — still used today [Name of genus + the specific epithet] “Linnaea was named by the celebrated Gronovius and is a plant of Lapland, lowly, insignificant, disregarded, flowering but for a brief space—from Linnaeus who resembles it.” • John Harrison, developed first chronometer or accurate clock, 1735 • Cook’s first voyage, 1769-1771 • Voltaire, 1694-1778 • French Revolution 1789 • Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (d. 1791) • John Bartram, Philadelphia, sent plants to Europe between 1734 & 1765, traveled from Canada to Florida; discovered Franklinia • Lewis & Clark expedition, 1804-1806 POST-LINNAEAN FRENCH/SWISS Michel Adanson (1727—1806) Familles des Plantes “Phenetics” [use all measurable features when making classification] J. B. de Lamarck (1744—1829) Flore Françoise [Also hypothesized evolution through acquired characters — not scientifically correct, but did present idea that species could change over time] A. L. de Jussieu (1748—1836) Genera Plantarum — [father of plant families] NATURAL [Developed classification
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Leguminosae Subfamily Papilionoideae Author(S): Duane Isely and Roger Polhill Reviewed Work(S): Source: Taxon, Vol
    Leguminosae Subfamily Papilionoideae Author(s): Duane Isely and Roger Polhill Reviewed work(s): Source: Taxon, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Feb., 1980), pp. 105-119 Published by: International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1219604 . Accessed: 16/08/2012 02:44 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Taxon. http://www.jstor.org TAXON 29(1): 105-119. FEBRUARY1980 LEGUMINOSAE SUBFAMILY PAPILIONOIDEAE1 Duane Isely and Roger Polhill2 Summary This paper is an historical resume of names that have been used for the group of legumes whose membershave papilionoidflowers. When this taxon is treatedas a subfamily,the prefix "Papilion-", with various terminations, has predominated.We propose conservation of Papilionoideae as an alternative to Faboideae, coeval with the "unique" conservation of Papilionaceaeat the family rank. (42) Proposal to revise Code: Add to Article 19 of the Code: Note 2. Whenthe Papilionaceaeare includedin the family Leguminosae(alt. name Fabaceae) as a subfamily,the name Papilionoideaemay be used as an alternativeto Faboideae(see Art. 18.5 and 18.6).
    [Show full text]
  • HUNTIA a Journal of Botanical History
    HUNTIA A Journal of Botanical History VOLUME 16 NUMBER 2 2018 Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh The Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation, a research division of Carnegie Mellon University, specializes in the history of botany and all aspects of plant science and serves the international scientific community through research and documentation. To this end, the Institute acquires and maintains authoritative collections of books, plant images, manuscripts, portraits and data files, and provides publications and other modes of information service. The Institute meets the reference needs of botanists, biologists, historians, conservationists, librarians, bibliographers and the public at large, especially those concerned with any aspect of the North American flora. Huntia publishes articles on all aspects of the history of botany, including exploration, art, literature, biography, iconography and bibliography. The journal is published irregularly in one or more numbers per volume of approximately 200 pages by the Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation. External contributions to Huntia are welcomed. Page charges have been eliminated. All manuscripts are subject to external peer review. Before submitting manuscripts for consideration, please review the “Guidelines for Contributors” on our Web site. Direct editorial correspondence to the Editor. Send books for announcement or review to the Book Reviews and Announcements Editor. All issues are available as PDFs on our Web site. Hunt Institute Associates may elect to receive Huntia as a benefit of membership; contact the Institute for more information. Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation Carnegie Mellon University 5th Floor, Hunt Library 4909 Frew Street Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890 Telephone: 412-268-2434 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.huntbotanical.org Editor and layout Scarlett T.
    [Show full text]
  • Nomenclatural Studies Toward a World List of Diptera Genus-Group Names
    Nomenclatural studies toward a world list of Diptera genus-group names. Part V Pierre-Justin-Marie Macquart Evenhuis, Neal L.; Pape, Thomas; Pont, Adrian C. DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4172.1.1 Publication date: 2016 Document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Document license: CC BY Citation for published version (APA): Evenhuis, N. L., Pape, T., & Pont, A. C. (2016). Nomenclatural studies toward a world list of Diptera genus- group names. Part V: Pierre-Justin-Marie Macquart. Magnolia Press. Zootaxa Vol. 4172 No. 1 https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4172.1.1 Download date: 02. Oct. 2021 Zootaxa 4172 (1): 001–211 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) http://www.mapress.com/j/zt/ Monograph ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2016 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4172.1.1 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:22128906-32FA-4A80-85D6-10F114E81A7B ZOOTAXA 4172 Nomenclatural Studies Toward a World List of Diptera Genus-Group Names. Part V: Pierre-Justin-Marie Macquart NEAL L. EVENHUIS1, THOMAS PAPE2 & ADRIAN C. PONT3 1 J. Linsley Gressitt Center for Entomological Research, Bishop Museum, 1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, Hawaii 96817-2704, USA. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Natural History Museum of Denmark, Universitetsparken 15, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark. E-mail: [email protected] 3Oxford University Museum of Natural History, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PW, UK. E-mail: [email protected] Magnolia Press Auckland, New Zealand Accepted by D. Whitmore: 15 Aug. 2016; published: 30 Sept. 2016 Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 NEAL L.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of Orchids. a History of Discovery, Lust and Wealth
    Scientific Papers. Series B, Horticulture. Vol. LXIV, No. 1, 2020 Print ISSN 2285-5653, CD-ROM ISSN 2285-5661, Online ISSN 2286-1580, ISSN-L 2285-5653 A HISTORY OF ORCHIDS. A HISTORY OF DISCOVERY, LUST AND WEALTH Nora Eugenia D. G. ANGHELESCU1, Annie BYGRAVE2, Mihaela I. GEORGESCU1, Sorina A. PETRA1, Florin TOMA1 1University of Agronomic Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Bucharest, 59 Mărăști Blvd, District 1, Bucharest, Romania 2Self-employed, London, UK Corresponding author email: [email protected] Abstract Orchidaceae is the second largest families of flowering plants. There are approximately 900 orchid genera comprising between 28,000-32,000 species of orchids. The relationship between orchids and mankind is complex. The history of orchids’ discovery goes hand in hand with the history of humanity, encompassing discovery and adventure, witchcraft and magic, symbolism and occultism, addiction and sacrifice, lust and wealth. Historically, the Chinese were the first to cultivate orchids as medicinal plants, more than 4000 years ago. Gradually, records about orchids spread, reaching the Middle East and Europe. Around 300 B.C., Theophrastus named them for the first time orkhis. In 1737, Carl Linnaeus first used the word Orchidaceae to designate plants with similar features. The family name, Orchidaceae was fully established in 1789, by Antoine Laurent de Jussieu. In 1862, Charles Darwin published the first edition of his book, Fertilisation of Orchids. Darwin considered the adaptations of orchid flowers to their animal pollinators as being among the best examples of his idea of evolution through natural selection. Orchidology was on its way. During the 18th and the 19th centuries, orchids generated the notorious Orchid Fever where orchid-hunters turned the search for orchids into a frantic and obsessive hunt.
    [Show full text]
  • HSS Paper 2000
    The Many Books of Nature: How Renaissance naturalists created and responded to information overload Brian W. Ogilvie* History of Science Society Annual Meeting, Vancouver, Nov. 3, 2000 Copyright © 2000 Brian W. Ogilvie. All rights reserved. Renaissance natural history emerged in the late fifteenth century at the confluence of humanist textual criticism, the revival of Greek medical texts, and curricular reform in medicine.1 These streams had been set in motion by a deeper tectonic shift: an increasing interest in particular, empirical knowledge among humanists and their pupils, who rejected the scholastic definition of scientific knowledge as certain deductions from universal principles.2 Natural history, which had been seen in antiquity and the Middle Ages as a propaedeutic to natural philosophy or medicine, emerged from this confluence as a distinct discipline with its own set of practitioners, techniques, and norms.3 Ever since Linnaeus, description, nomenclature, and taxonomy have been taken to be the sine qua non of natural history; pre-Linnaean natural history has been treated by many historians as a kind of blind groping toward self-evident principles of binomial nomenclature and encaptic taxa that were first stated clearly by the Swedish naturalist. Today I would like to present a different history. For natural history in the Renaissance, from the late fifteenth through the early seventeenth century, was not a taxonomic * Department of History, Herter Hall, University of Massachusetts, 161 Presidents Drive, Amherst, MA 01003-9312; [email protected]. 2 science. Rather, it was a science of describing, whose goal was a comprehensive catalogue of nature. Botany was at the forefront of that development, for the study of plants had both medical and horticultural applications, but botanists (botanici) rapidly developed interests that went beyond the pharmacy and the garden, to which some scarcely even nodded their heads by 1600.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief Nomenclatural Review of Genera and Tribes in Theaceae Linda M
    Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany Volume 24 | Issue 1 Article 8 2007 A Brief Nomenclatural Review of Genera and Tribes in Theaceae Linda M. Prince Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden, Claremont, California Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso Part of the Botany Commons, and the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons Recommended Citation Prince, Linda M. (2007) "A Brief Nomenclatural Review of Genera and Tribes in Theaceae," Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany: Vol. 24: Iss. 1, Article 8. Available at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso/vol24/iss1/8 Aliso 24, pp. 105–121 ᭧ 2007, Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden A BRIEF NOMENCLATURAL REVIEW OF GENERA AND TRIBES IN THEACEAE LINDA M. PRINCE Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden, 1500 North College Ave., Claremont, California 91711-3157, USA ([email protected]) ABSTRACT The angiosperm family Theaceae has been investigated extensively with a rich publication record of anatomical, cytological, paleontological, and palynological data analyses and interpretation. Recent developmental and molecular data sets and the application of cladistic analytical methods support dramatic changes in circumscription at the familial, tribal, and generic levels. Growing interest in the family outside the taxonomic and systematic fields warrants a brief review of the recent nomenclatural history (mainly 20th century), some of the classification systems currently in use, and an explanation of which data support various classification schemes. An abridged bibliography with critical nomen- clatural references is provided. Key words: anatomy, classification, morphology, nomenclature, systematics, Theaceae. INTRODUCTION acters that were restricted to the family and could be used to circumscribe it.
    [Show full text]
  • Biblioqraphy & Natural History
    BIBLIOQRAPHY & NATURAL HISTORY Essays presented at a Conference convened in June 1964 by Thomas R. Buckman Lawrence, Kansas 1966 University of Kansas Libraries University of Kansas Publications Library Series, 27 Copyright 1966 by the University of Kansas Libraries Library of Congress Catalog Card number: 66-64215 Printed in Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A., by the University of Kansas Printing Service. Introduction The purpose of this group of essays and formal papers is to focus attention on some aspects of bibliography in the service of natural history, and possibly to stimulate further studies which may be of mutual usefulness to biologists and historians of science, and also to librarians and museum curators. Bibli• ography is interpreted rather broadly to include botanical illustration. Further, the intent and style of the contributions reflects the occasion—a meeting of bookmen, scientists and scholars assembled not only to discuss specific examples of the uses of books and manuscripts in the natural sciences, but also to consider some other related matters in a spirit of wit and congeniality. Thus we hope in this volume, as in the conference itself, both to inform and to please. When Edwin Wolf, 2nd, Librarian of the Library Company of Phila• delphia, and then Chairman of the Rare Books Section of the Association of College and Research Libraries, asked me to plan the Section's program for its session in Lawrence, June 25-27, 1964, we agreed immediately on a theme. With few exceptions, we noted, the bibliography of natural history has received little attention in this country, and yet it is indispensable to many biologists and to historians of the natural sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • Catalogue 05-2019 Biology and Earth Sciences - Mostly New Arrivals
    Catalogue 05-2019 Biology and Earth Sciences - Mostly New Arrivals To access our website for more images, click on the author's name! Botany: .................................................................................................................... 3, 5, 11 Crystallography:................................................................................................................. 1 Entomology: ...................................................................................................................... 2 Exploration, Travel & Adventure: ...................................................................................... 6 General Science: ................................................................................................................ 4 Geology & Geophysics: .......................................................................................... 9, 15, 16 Glaciology: ......................................................................................................................... 8 Mineralogy: ..................................................................................................... 9, 10, 13, 14 Microscopy: ....................................................................................................................... 2 Mining:............................................................................................................................. 14 Zoology: ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Plants Found in the Middle Parts of the State Grow Here, Excepting the Alpine Flowers
    CULTIVATION BOTANY.— Wood grows here [Concord] with great rapidity; and it is supposed there is as much now as there was twenty years ago. Walden woods at the south, and other lots towards the southwest parts of the town, are the most extensive, covering several hundred acres of light-soil land. Much of the fuel, which is consumed, is, however brought from the neighbouring towns. The most common trees are the oak, pine, maple, elm, white birch, chestnut, walnut, &c., &c. Hemlock and spruce are very rare. The ornamental trees transplanted, in this as in most other towns, do not appear to have been placed with much regularity; but as they are, they contribute much to the comfort and beauty of the town. The elm, buttonwood, horse-chestnut, and fruit trees have very properly taken the place of sickly poplars, in ornamenting the dwellings. The large elm in front of the court-house, –the pride of the common,– is almost unrivalled in beauty. It is about “three score and ten,” but is still growing with youthful vigor and uniform rapidity. Dr. Jarvis, who is familiar with the botany of Concord, informs me, that “most of the plants found in the middle parts of the state grow here, excepting the alpine flowers. The extensive low lands produce abundantly the natural families of the aroideæ, typhæ, cyperoideæ, gramineæ, junci, corymbiferæ and unbelliferæ. These genera especially abound. There are also found, the juncus militaris (bayonet rush), on the borders of Fairhaven pond; cornus florida; lobelia carinalis (cardinal flower) abundant on the borders of the river; polygala cruciata, in the east parts of the town; nyssa villosa (swamp hornbeam) at the foot of Fairhaven hill.” The cicuta Americana (hemlock) grows abundant on the intervals.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Taxonomy
    History of Taxonomy The history of taxonomy dates back to the origin of human language. Western scientific taxonomy started in Greek some hundred years BC and are here divided into prelinnaean and postlinnaean. The most important works are cited and the progress of taxonomy (with the focus on botanical taxonomy) are described up to the era of the Swedish botanist Carl Linnaeus, who founded modern taxonomy. The development after Linnaeus is characterized by a taxonomy that increasingly have come to reflect the paradigm of evolution. The used characters have extended from morphological to molecular. Nomenclatural rules have developed strongly during the 19th and 20th century, and during the last decade traditional nomenclature has been challenged by advocates of the Phylocode. Mariette Manktelow Dept of Systematic Biology Evolutionary Biology Centre Uppsala University Norbyv. 18D SE-752 36 Uppsala E-mail: [email protected] 1. Pre-Linnaean taxonomy 1.1. Earliest taxonomy Taxonomy is as old as the language skill of mankind. It has always been essential to know the names of edible as well as poisonous plants in order to communicate acquired experiences to other members of the family and the tribe. Since my profession is that of a systematic botanist, I will focus my lecture on botanical taxonomy. A taxonomist should be aware of that apart from scientific taxonomy there is and has always been folk taxonomy, which is of great importance in, for example, ethnobiological studies. When we speak about ancient taxonomy we usually mean the history in the Western world, starting with Romans and Greek. However, the earliest traces are not from the West, but from the East.
    [Show full text]
  • Lectotypifications of Some Generic Names of Gesneriaceae CV Morton
    Lectotypifications of Some Generic Names of Gesneriaceae C. V. Morton; Dale Denham Taxon, Vol. 21, No. 5/6. (Nov., 1972), pp. 669-678. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0040-0262%28197211%2921%3A5%2F6%3C669%3ALOSGNO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G Taxon is currently published by International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT). Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/iapt.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. http://www.jstor.org Tue Nov 13 09:20:24 2007 TAXON 2 I (516): 669 - 678.
    [Show full text]
  • Enquiry Into Plants the Causes of Plants De Historia Plantarum . Daucus
    The contributions are arranged as numbered lists for each taxonomist with the most important ones at the beginning. You don’t have to learn the complete note as it is, prepare them as shortnotes maximum 10 points for each taxonomist, choose them according to your own preference. Major Contribution of Theophrastus (372 BC to 287 BC) – Father of Botany Theophrastus was a Greek naturalist, he was student of Pluto and Aristotle. After Aristotle’s death, he inherited his library and the garden. Theophrastus is credited with having authored more than 200 works most of which survive as fragments or as quotations in the works of other authors. Two of his botanical works have survived intact, however, and are available in English translations: Enquiry into plants (1916) and The Causes of plants (1927). During his conquests, Alexander the Great made arrangements to send back materials to Athens, enabling Theophrastus to write about exotic plants such as cotton, cinnamon and bananas. His major contribution to botany are: 1. Theophrastus described about 500 kinds of plants, 2. He classified plants into four major groups: the trees, shrubs, subshrubs and herbs. 3. He recognized the differences between flowering plants and non-flowering plants, 4. He recognized the differences between dicotyledons and monocotyledons, superior ovary and inferior ovary, free and fused petals and also fruit types. 5. He was aware of the fact that many cultivated plants do not breed true. 6. Several names used by Theophrastus in his De Historia plantarum, e.g. Daucus, Crataegus and Narcissus, to name a few, are in use even today.
    [Show full text]