PLANT SCIENCE BULLETIN
A Publication of the Botanical Society of America, Inc.
December, 1969 Volume Fifteen Number Four
Economic Botany for Liberal Arts Students
S. Greenfield Department of Botany
University at Newark, New Jersey
importance of plants in human affairs is not widely enough appreciated. Plants
are intimately related to every phase of human living. They provide us with
food, shelter. clothing, medicine, and other essentials. They are also the
major material resources on which civilization is based.
is hardly any phase of human history in which plants have not played a fundamental
role. The advance of every society depended upon a successful agriculture.
Often a specific crop has influenced events. Consider the role of cotton in
the industrial revolution and in U.S. history, the potato in Irish history,
coffee in Brazil, and the enormous range of activities now dependent upon
paper and rubber.
of the great struggles of mankind, human migration, world exploration, the
institution of slavery, wars, conquests and the exploitation of subject peoples,
have been related to attempts to gain control of and utilize the productive
lands of the earth.
primitive societies, the dependence of man on plants is clearly obvious to
everyone because of the intimate daily contact with plants as sources of basic
needs. However, in complex industrial societies, man is remote from the sources
of production, and plant products often reach him after considerable processing
and change in form, so that he seldom recognizes or appreciates his dependence
are now faced with critical problems affecting our welfare, or even our survival,
among which are the need to provide adequate food and decent standards of
living for the people of the world, and the need to properly conserve and
utilize our natural resources. Attempts to solve these problems depend on
a much wider understanding of man's dependence on plants as well as of fundamental
knowledge of the nature of plants and plant science.
Although many specialists have such understandings and much work is in progress
on basic problems, effective public support for intelligent national and international
programs related to food and other plant resources requires much wider knowledge
of the nature and importance of plants on the part of the general public. The
implications of the role of plants and plant science in human affairs should
be included in courses in general biology, in botany, and in the social sciences
where appropriate, but there is a special opportunity for such studies in a
course in economic botany in the liberal arts college.
courses in economic botany tend to be technically detailed studies of plants
and plant products and are quite suitable for majors in the plant sciences.
Other courses give greater emphasis to the economic and historical significance
of plants used by man. It is the latter approach that is especially valuable
in the liberal arts college. A number of colleges have such courses, but the
enrollment is limited, and we have barely begun to make the important contribution
to the liberal arts college that can be made through the medium of economic
the spring of 1952, the author, inspired by some conversations with the late
J. Fisher Stanfield, introduced a one-semester course in economic botany at
the Newark College of Arts and Sciences of Rutgers University. The nature
of the course has varied over the years, especially as student enrollment
in it increased every year. A brief discussion of the aims and methods of
the course might serve to indicate what we are trying to accomplish.
catalog description is as follows:
or 207S. ECONOMIC BOTANY. (Cr. 3.) Lec. 3 hrs. Greenfield.
influence of plants and plant cultivation on the economic, social and cultural
history of man. An introduction to economically important plants and their
products, especially as sources of food, shelter, clothing, drugs, and industrial
raw materials; current problems of agriculture, plant industry, and medicine;
and the use and conservation of natural plant resources.
is no prerequisite, and some who take the course have not had college biology.
Freshmen are not admitted. Student majors from every discipline elect this
course but most are social science and natural science majors. Our enrollment
has grown from 13 in 1952 to an average of 360 per year in recent years, in
a college having about 3,200 students. It is reputed to be the largest enrollment
for such a course in the United States.
an introductory orientation on the intimate relation of plants and plant products
to everyday life and to current world problems, two weeks are spent on a historical
survey of man from primitive societies to the present, giving selected examples
of the fundamental role of plants and their products in every major phase
of civilization. The major part of the course consists of a series of lectures
on food, beverages, forest products, fibers, latex, medicinals, spices, etc.
We conclude with a brief survey
the role of plants and plant products in contemporary U.S. and world problems.
many students will have had little or no botany, it is necessary to introduce
fundamental botanical information, and it seems best to integrate it with
the appropriate subject. For example, in discussing food, the nature of the
seed plant, its basic structure, physiology and reproduction are essential,
and illustrations usually used are wheat, corn, a legume, beet, potato, and
apple. In the lectures on forest products, the structure and growth of the
woody stem is introduced to give understanding of the source of wood and the
basis for its varying appearance and uses. Even in a lecture hall with 180
students, lively and stimulating discussions can be held, especially on such
topics as food and population problems, alcoholic beverages, tobacco and drugs.
the subject of economic botany is so vast and a fourteen-week course of three
lectures per week can only cover the high spots, it seems desirable to have
the student study some aspect in depth. In the early years of the course,
when enrollment permitted, a term paper was required. Students selected a
topic from a long list provided, and were helped with references. Many superbly
interesting papers were submitted, and everyone regarded the term paper as
a very worthwhile experience. After the enrollment exceeded 125 it was no
longer feasible to continue with the term paper, and on the advice of colleagues
in History who had been faced with the same problem, we began to require a
brief book report instead of the term paper. There are, of course, a great
many fascinating books in the field of economic botany, and students enjoy
reading them. Some of the students will also read papers in the journal "Economic
frequently say that this is not only the most interesting course they have
taken but that it has given them an entirely new appreciation of plants and
botany, and most important, that economic botany is a really relevant subject.
'We hope that botanists will be encouraged to offer similar courses in as
many liberal arts colleges as possible.
PLANT SCIENCE BULLETIN
ADOLPH HECHT, Editor
Department of Botany
Washington State University
Pullman, Washington 99163
Harlan P. Banks, Cornell University
Sydney S. Greenfield, Rutgers University
Robert W. Long, University of South Florida
William L. Stern, University of Maryland
Erich Steiner, University of Michigan
December 1969 Volume 16
Botany: An Obituary
of Botany and Plant Pathology
Berkeley riots originated, some have said, because of left-wing agitation,
feeble administration, and undergraduate unrest about the impersonal quality
of their education. Tongue-in-cheek, students at other universities have said
"Do not fold, staple or mutilate me . . . I am a student at Berkeley."
General Botany course taught until recently at Oregon State University did
not counteract political agitation nor produce administrators with more spine,
but it did seem to make students feel that they had received personal attention
in the classroom. One student put it this way:
feel that the method of learning known as a group discussion is one of the
best ways to develop both knowledge of a particular subject and the technique
of scientific investigation, which is the means of learning the subject. The
student is treated as an individual not a number, his thoughts on the subject
can be expressed and criticized without reservation. The reacher's views on
the subject matter can also be criticized without hard feelings.t (italics
late Dr. S. M. Dietz originated Group-Conference Botany at Iowa State College
more than 30 years ago. He constructed a framework of biological principles
which could flexibly accommodate new knowledge. Old view-points were often
replaced by new ones, but the discoveries in fields such as genetics, morphogenesis,
biochemistry, and population biology fit readily into Dietz's conceptual framework.
1938 report of the Botanical Society of America2 carried a description of
the Iowa State Group-Conference in General Botany. The description outlined
some drastic departures from standard science course procedures which would
still be drastic at most universities.
abolished lectures, quiz sections, and all routine laboratory exercises as
well. He changed the instructor's job from merely pouring out information
to challenging students' minds, helping them in their reasoning, and aiding
them to arrive at conclusions which could withstand
Anonymous student comment in response to a request to compare the group-conference
to the lecture-lab method of science teaching at Oregon State University.
Students handed in type-written, unsigned evaluations after one week's reflection.
The students were told that no one would look at the evaluations until after
term grades were issued. Each comment is by a different student.
Botanical Society of America. Committee on the Teaching of Botany. 1938. An
Exploratory Study of the Teaching of Botany in Colleges and Universities in
the United States. pp. 26-27.
classmates' criticisms. Neither the instructor nor the laboratory manual gave
the students more than a few specific instructions. Thus the student often
might (or had to) choose what he would do. To relieve the student of the time-consuming
job of making his own botanical drawings, artists' drawings were printed in
the laboratory manual. The time saved was spent in examining additional plant
materials, thus allowing the student to develop broader perspectives than
were possible if he made a de-railed drawing of just one kind of plant material.
instructor's tools included living plants, problems about plants. his mind,
and two hours with the students at each session. Each instructor met with
each class of no more than 32 students three times weekly. The botanical problems
presented led students to integrate their previously acquired knowledge and
ro apply it; the problems also raised questions about plants in students'
minds and gave them an opportunity to think for themselves. After the students
had worked out answers to their botanical problems and had discussed them,
the instructor molded the students' observations and deductions into a correct
features of the group-conference just described. these departures from tradition,
have proved to be sound over 30 years of classroom use.
easiest lab course I have ever taken. Not easy in that the material was simple
or that the presentation was elementary but easy in the sense that one never
felt like cutting class. At S:00 A.M. on Saturday morning, that is a feat
in itself. The course is interesting both because of student participation
and because of the feeling of collective learning. The instructor skirts the
topic, the lab manual briefly outlines the topic then the class chews it,
and hopefully it is digested. It is a course where the student gets as much
as he gives. There is no way to compare it to the typical type of lab in that
the typical lab has lecture and learning through hearing while the botany
lab has learning through lecture and participation continually. This is as
close to actual experience as I have come in a subject.'
the group-conference instructor did not pour out information to the students,
they had to dig much of it our for themselves. The digging and thinking and
discussing took more time than a lecture but it appeared to be more effective.
Students needed extra time for experiments because they got to design substantial
portions of them. Thus, the group-conference required three 2-hour sessions
per week. Because they appealed to fundamental human motivations. problem-solving
and discussion earned the interest even of resentful students taking botany
as a required course and sleepy students victimized by scientifically correct
but vapid textbooks.
teacher) . attempts to make his students, or at least gives them the chance,
to ask questions of nature. This is an approach which I like very much because
I feel that I not only remember more of what is available, but I understand
it much better.'
every practitioner of Group-Conference Botany had the touch of Sam Dietz in
the classroom, but he had full responsibility for his students. This responsibility,
together with the atmosphere of discussion, encouraged a teacher to give his
best. In 1965, the Oregon Legislature appropriated a half-million dollars
for cash awards to out-standing teachers of undergraduates in the Oregon System
of Higher Education. Of the 47 $1000 awards made at
State University in 1966, only four went to out-standing teachers in the biological
sciences. All four awards went to botanists, three of whom taught Group-Conference
32-student classroom made close, friendly guidance possible. Attention sometimes
wandered when students seared at tables in groups of four reasoned out possible
solutions to a botanical problem, but the instructor could get conversations
back on the track with an appropriate question or two.
only comparison to be made of this course to a lecture-lab course is that
it is infinitely better. The atmosphere is casual but nor chaos; the projects
are short, meaningful, and simple but challenging: we are not burdened with
bumbling and grumpy lab instructors; we have a source of authority.]
Botany, with discussion among students in their groups of four and discussion
by the entire class, provided opportunities for students to explain the understanding
they had acquired by reading, discovery or insight. Art extra dividend appeared
occasionally during these discussions when a student would enlighten his instructor
on some point about which the student had special knowledge.
much prefer the group-discussion to any other teaching method so far. It enables
the student to participate in almost every-thing and not feel like he is just
a tape recorder.'
problem of integration currently concerns not only race-relations specialists
but biologists as well. The group-conference as taught at Oregon State University
integrated biological knowledge by considering together the molecular, cellular.
and organismal aspects of life.
example, when students considered the biochemistry of photosynthesis, they
had recently studied the organs, tissues, cells and organelles in which the
process occurs. They studied these specifically to learn about photosynthesis.
After studying where photosynthesis occurs and what constitutes photosynthesis
biochemically. the students were confronted with the problem of how raw materials
get to the sites of synthesis, how the products of photosynthesis get to other
parts of the plant, and what happens to those products.
integration resulted from the absence of formal lectures given separately
from the laboratory classes. When short lectures became necessary (e.g. electron
trans-port during terminal oxidation). they integrated with the experiments
or problems at hand, a situation seldom achieved in "integrated" courses (i.e.
biology courses) taught by the lecture-lab technique.
Group-Conference Botany would have integrated well with the Biological Sciences
Curriculum Survey courses in high school biology. Students from these courses,
accustomed to an inquiry approach. might have responded readily to the group-conference.
With its flexible format the group-conference could have taken them as deeply
into a biological concept as they wished to go. Further. the group-conference
had a built-in mechanism for ascertaining the students' prior knowledge (i.e.
verbal responses from students during class) and starting from where that
prior knowledge ended. The conventional lecture-laboratory method has no means
for learning about the students' prior knowledge and is ilI-adapted to making
immediate adjustments to it.
the students who have encountered the group-conference, a majority preferred
it to the lecture-laboratory arrangement. Nevertheless, some students felt
that there were disadvantages.
the student is the type who is in college just for the "ride" and doesn't
care too much about learning even in an interesting class, it will be bad
for him because he can't hide behind the crowd.'
I learn more, or I should say, find it easier to have a regular lecture, with
notes to study for a lecture test and a separate lab. In a regular lecture
facts have to be presented, whereas in this set-up it seems like we are exposed
to an idea and must find out the details for ourselves.'
I definitely prefer the lecture lab because the instructor tells the student
that so and so is true and that's it)
more genuine disadvantage of the group-conference was that it was tough on
those who taught it. It was intellectually demanding because the teacher had
to forge a rational scheme of knowledge from student responses. It was also
physically demanding for those who taught more than one class because each
class met for two unbroken hours. But the effort seemed worthwhile in this
day when students question old academic procedures.
is perhaps a sign of the times in America's larger "universities" that of
the three award-winning practitioners of Group-Conference Botany, none remains
at Oregon State. Similarly, the group-conference has been replaced by the
traditional lecture and laboratory approach. One wonders whether the student
whose remarks follow would interpret this resumption of the traditional approach
the lecture-lab type instruction the purpose of doing the lab is to finish
the prescribed method of experimentation and answer all the required questions,
and that is all. At least this is the student's purpose whether the lab instructor
knows it or not. In this conference type method the students have no such
easy way out. We must pay attention. Our object here is to learn what's happening
in the plant and not to finish a pre-scribed method . . . In the conference
type method we are given the responsibility to learn something about the plant
and not to merely answer some lab questions. The difference may seem insignificant
at first but believe me it's not. It's the difference between a parrot and
a thinking human mind.t
FROM THE. EDITOR
Stern's article, "Quo Vadis, Botanicum?" that appeared in the June 1969 issue,
continues to attract comment. Two strong dissenting views were published in
our last issue, but before these appeared Dr. Stern received a number of letters
from people who concurred with his point of view. He has sent me copies of
these letters, and has asked me to "attempt an editorial summary of them at
the same time respecting authors' confidences." It appears to me that the
best way to do this would be to extract what I think are pertinent sections
of these letters. Here they are:
. . want enthusiastically to commend you for your forthright summary, on paper,
of the frustrations and plight of good botanists in biology departments everywhere.
I would like to think that this trend toward uniting Botany and Zoology departments
can he reversed, by hard work and proper education of adminisstrations and
the public through an aroused program carefully developed by the botanists
themselves. Locally, the .. . botanists
forward to a separate Botany department within three years, after ten years
of simply outworking and out-teaching the zoologists in control of the department,
and gradually altering the ratio of zoologists to botanists from 7 to 1 to
2 to 1.
want to cheer for your article in the Plant Science Bulletin, the June issue.
We are all indebted to you for your reasonable and succinct approach to the
problem facing all botanists. I was especially pleased with your call to battle
concept. It is high time each botanist starts clearing his thought concerning
the discipline. There is too much apologizing and not enough pointing with
pride to significant progress in the field. Part of our troubles rest entirely
with ourselves in not standing up for our rights, in not emphasizing, as you
have, the difference between Botany and other disciplines, the difference
between plants and other organisms.
was ... a member of a department that was scuttled exactly in the manner you
outlined. . . . It has been a great tragedy to see the Department of Botany
at . go the same way. .
I want to direct attention to the role of Botany and Botanists in the many
newly created two-year colleges. We cannot let the Zoologists dominate the
direction of these departments. I think the Botanists have a stake in this
area. We cannot do anything about Cal Tech, Northwestern, Chicago and Princeton,
but there is a powerful lot we can do to see that Botanists and Botany are
represented in the studies and departmental make-up of these colleges.
have made a very good case for us, but I am wondering if there is more we
ought to do? The American Chemical Society has, for many years, dictated to
colleges and universities what they ought to do about the chemistry curriculum.
It seems to me that the Botanical Society ought to have some sort of a committee
which can arrange to be more aggressive in communicating to the university
administrators most of the items you have in your paper. . It is the blindness
and arrogance of so many of our molecularly oriented colleagues, as well as
their pro-found ignorance of the significance of Botany, which we have to
. . . strongly support your contention that the submersion of the science
of botany in a general biological mishmash does not increase the student's
understanding of biology, but definitely detracts him from grasping the specific
phenomena of the plant world. It leads to an overemphasis of zoological concepts
to the point to an almost complete extinction of botanical knowledge, but
for that matter does not produce better zoologists either. .. . The reason
. . . for this deplorable state of affairs is in my
a shortcut to ecology . . . the interrelationships
plants and animals . requires a. comprehensive know-ledge of both botany and
zoology and can never be mastered by those who have acquired some knowledge
of biological facts such as "molecular-biology," whatever that should mean,
on an under-graduate level. These facts are neither properly assimilated nor
adequately metabolized and this is the reason why so much undigested stuff
is written about pollution control and so little done about it.
for your editorial, "Quo Vadis, Botanicum?" . . . I op-posed the establishment
of the Biology Department at . . . most vigorously indeed. . I told Joe that
the department would become zoological; that it always went zoological; and
reduce the broadening of the science impact at . by
submerging Botany. My classic case of this going zoological came
I was at . College . . . shortly after the war visiting
, the distinguished head of the Botany Department. . . . His department was
crowded like I have never seen a Botany Department crowded. I looked across
the quadrangle and there was a big building and on the stone above the door
"Botany Department." I casually asked Professor . what was in the building
labeled "Botany Department" and he told me . . . "the Zoology Department."
have put into words what many of us have observed and felt for a long time.
I think it is high time that botanists begin to exhibit pride in their discipline
and profession and counter-act this move toward biology. Your observation
that biology almost always means a drift toward zoology and human physiology
is most accurate. I hope your statement will stir up botanists and initiate
difficulty starred many years ago with the initiation of AIBS. We, at that
time, should have stood for a plant science organization divorced from the
animal sciences, quite like physics is divorced from chemistry. I knew at
the time when we at-tempted to cooperate and probably be "palsy-walsy" with
we would have difficulty. . . . CUEBS has not helped our case. They are headstrong,
young men wanting to please everybody, especially the administrators and politicians,
and do not care too much for plant sciences . there is some ray of hope in
a few quarters because several schools are switching back to beginning general
botany and beginning zoology courses. They have tired of the confusion and
imbalance. May this tendency continue and lift us out of chaos.
was forced to accept a union at . . . College resulting in in-creased faculty,
space, equipment for zoology. My requisitions for small items like 15( worth
of red beets had to wait until we could find the head of Biology to sign.
. . . A new seminar in biology was created and an attempt was made to force
all biofaculty to attend when more than half the subjects were zoological.
are so right that the thesis which supports the union of botany and zoology,
because they are both biological, "is a deceptive proposition." I think it
has been largely a movement by administrators who do not have enough information
to know that the facts against far outweigh those for their program. Of course
the two are related intimately but on that basis many undesirable unions could
be made in our Educational curricular organization. . . .
a note of appreciation for your fine article in the Plant Science Bulletin.
. . . My only commentary would be that from my observation many of the problems
stem from the attitude of the botanists themselves. Many times they deserve
what they get. Calling attention to the situation, as you have done so well
in your article, may serve to hearten our "weak sisters" or at least give
them some confidence. More articles like this should be written and perhaps
a symposium held on the subject at some AIBS meeting.
was very much interested in the lead article by Dr. William Stern. It points
out many instances relative to my own situation at . . College. I am not a
"true" botanist as I have more credits, I believe, in the zoological area
and have taught various courses. However under our new curriculum I am the
sole "botanist" and am frequently frustrated with the fact that few persons
feel that Botany is important and get little support in this area.
is one point of a minor nature on which I have a few comments of relevance
to your article. You refer to the study of the quality of graduate education
in the U.S. by A.M. Carrter in 1966. This report was of interest to us at
. because we were among those departments cited as outstanding after Harvard,
California et at. As I recall, Caltech was listed also as having an outstanding
Botany department which struck me as being incongruous and considerably wide
of the mark! Am I not correct?
Pines Extension Campaign
William H. Thomas of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography calls our attention
and asks our support in this campaign for funds to extend the acreage of the
Torrey Pines State Park, located just north of San Diego, California. Only
about half of the some 6,000 trees in the mainland stand of this species is
under the protection of the Torrey Pines State Reserve. Approximately 4$1,500,-000
is needed to purchase 170 acres of privately owned land contiguous with the
existing reserves; some 1,500 trees are in this acreage. The State of California
has appropriated $900,000 toward the purchase, but the balance of $600,000
must be obtained by June 1970 from other sources. Contributions should be
sent to Torrey Pines Association Land Fund, P.O. Box 104, La Jolla, California
92037. Further information may be obtained by writing to the Association at
this same address.
Lake Biological Station
Mountain Lake Biological Station of the University of Virginia announces the
following botanical courses emphasizing primarily field biology will be offered
during the summer of 1970:
Term—June 10 through July 14
Dr. Francis B. Trainor, University of Connecticut Taxonomy of Seed Plants:
Dr. A. Murray Evans, University of Tennessee
Term—July 16 through August 18
Dr. Warren H. Wagner, Jr.. University of Michigan
assistance from the National Science Foundation is available. Applications
should be made to the Director, Mountain Lake Biological Station, Department
of Biology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 be-fore
May 1, 1970.
Color Paintings Loaned to Hunt Botanical Library
$75,000 collection of original water color paintings focusing on American
trees and their ecology has been loaned to Carnegie-Mellon University's Hunt
Botanical Library for an indefinite period.
unique works, executed by Swiss artist Jack Kunz for an advertising program
initiated by the Sr. Regis Paper Company in 1965, were turned over to Carnegie-Mellon
at ceremonies in Hunt Botanical Library on June 11.
the collection was William R. Adams, president of the firm. Dr. H. Guyford
Stever. president of Carnegie-Mellon, accepted the art.
Stever said that the event is one of the first examples of a corporate leader
recognizing the continuing educational value of its advertising art, and expressed
the hope that other corporations would recognize that such collections "far
transcend the primary use for which they were created . . . and will be placed
in this and other institutions where the dual objective of continued use and
of preservation for posterity are assured."
25 paintings, which will .go on public display October, 1970, portray trees
indigenous to the U.S., their growth, structure, history, reproduction, and
influences on and by their environment. They were prepared originally for
a nation-wide advertising program designed to promote interest in the kinds
of trees in this country, in timber and forestry, conservation, and in the
role of all these factors play in the production of paper, and paper products.
Adams pointed out that the ad campaign was established in recognition of his
company's responsibility for eight million acres of forest lands upon which
the nation depends heavily for aesthetic as well as practical reasons.
H. M. Lawrence, director of the Hunt Botanical Library, noted that the works
have contributed to increased knowledge about trees among school children,
university students, teachers, the business and financial community, and consumers.
artist, Mr. Kunz, is presently executive editor of Graphis, a graphics and
applied arts publication in Zurich, Switzerland. His work is well known in
this country and has been featured in Life, National Geographic, and American
Presented at the Botanical Society's Banquet
JEANETTE SIRON PELTON AWARD, recently established by the Conservation and
Research Foundation to recognize exceptionally imaginative published contributions
in the field of Experimental Plant Morphology, was awarded co Ralph H. Wetmore,
Emeritus Professor of Botany, Harvard University. Professor Wetmore thus be-came
the first person to be honored by this award, which carries a stipend of one
thousand dollars. The citation made with the Award to Professor Wetmore included
the following statement: "The quality of his long and distinguished career
has been characterized by his ability to ask significant morphogenetic questions
that have kept pace with the fantastic growth of this field over the past
40 years. By the successful employment of cytological. microsurgical, biochemical
and tissue culture techniques he has made important contributions to plant
development, and because of his broad perspective, these contributions have
had especial evolutionary significance. His enthusiasm, devotion to the quest.
and most generous patience with the many students who have struggled with
him—these qualities have made hint a great teacher; and we wish to salute
DARBAKER PRIZE awarded annually for meritorious work in microscopical algae
was divided between Isabella A. Abbott (Hopkins Marine Station, Pacific Grove,
California) for her taxonomic and morphological studies of marine red algae
of the Pacific northwest coast of North America, and Norma J. Lang (Department
of Botany, University of California, Davis) for her studies in the blue-green
algae, especially the ultrastructure of vegetative cells and heterocysts in
the filamentous forms. Each received certificates, and checks in the amount
JESSE M. GREENMAN AWARD, established in 1968 by the Alumni Association of
the Missouri Botanical Garden, and awarded annually for the best doctorate
thesis in plant systematics published during the preceding year, was awarded
to Clifford M. Wetmore of the Biology Department of Wartburg College, Waverly,
Iowa. Dr. Wetmore's paper on "Lichens of the Black Hills of South Dakota and
Wyoming" was published in the Publications of the Museum, Michigan State University,
Biological Series Volume 3, Number 4.
NEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDEN AWARD was presented to R. William Breidenbach, Albert
Kahn and Harry Beevers for their paper from the Purdue University laboratories
entitled, "Characterization of glyoxysomes from castor bean endosperm," published
in Plant Physiology 43: 705-713. 1968. In presenting this award, Dr. W. C.
Sreere, Executive Director of the New York Botanical
stated, in part: "We believe this paper is of lasting importance and represents
an outstanding advance in the plant sciences. It has already stimulated a
considerable amount of research and its impact will continue to be felt in
the fields of ulrrastructure, cytology, plant biochemistry and plant physiology."
HENRY ALLAN GLEASON AWARD of the New York Botanical Garden, presented annually
to the author of an outstanding recent publication in botany—usually
plant taxonomy, phytogeography, or ecology, was presented to Charles B. Heiser,
Jr. of Indiana University, with the following citation: "To Charles Bixler
Heiser, Jr. The New York Botanical Garden presents its Henry Allan Gleason
Award for outstanding botanical publication. Dr. Heiser's professional career
has been filled with achievements of many different kinds and the New York
Botanical Garden takes great pleasure in making the present award for a recent
major contribution to botanical literature, 'The North American Sunflowers
(Helianthu_s),' published in the Memoirs of the Torrey Botanical Club in 1969.
The award is based also on Dr. Heiser's book, The Paradoxical Nightshades,
which, although not yet published, is in page proof.' In a sense, then, this
is a dual award for two major publications in two different plant families,
in the same year!"
annual MERIT AWARDS of the Botanical Society of America were presented to
four distinguished recipients, as follows:
C. Braun, for his many significant studies on tumor inception and development
R. Raper, for his demonstration of sex hormones in aquatic fungi and work
on genetics of the Agaricales.
R. Schramm, for his very thoughtful studies of the ecology of the black mining
wastes of the Pennsylvania anthracite region.
H. Smith, for his prodigious work on the classification and ecology of the
and Terminology in Fungi Imperfecti
mycologists from eight countries assembled at the University of Calgary's
Environmental Sciences Center, at Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada, September 5
through 9, 1969, for the first International Specialists' Workshop-Conference
on Criteria and Terminology in Fungi Imperfecti. It is hoped that, after intensive
discussions of conidium ontogeny and other characteristics of these fungi,
a useful set of concepts and definitions will be agreed upon, and the course
of future research on these fungi indicated. Proceedings of the Conference
will be published as soon as possible. W. Bryce Kendrick served as Convenor
and Chairman. Mycologists attending: G. C. Bhatt, G. C. Carroll, W. B. Cooke,
M. B. Ellis, R. D. Goos. G. C. Hughes, T. R. NagRaj, K. A. Pirozynski, V.
V. Subramanian, J. W. Carmichael, G. T. Cole, J. L. Crane, A. Funk, G. L.
Hennebert, S. J. Hughes, E. Muller, J. Nicot, F. G. Pollack, K. Tubaki.
Has now been published, by W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco.
of the Business Meeting
Botanical Society of America
University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
August 25, 1969
Harlan Banks called the meeting to order at 12 noon in Room 240 of Johnson
Hall. The 57 persons present at the beginning of the meeting constituted
Minutes of the Business Meeting of 1967 as published in the Plant Science
Bulletin were approved.
Chairman of the Election Committee, Dr. C. C. Bowen, presented the names
of the newly elected officers for 1970:
Lincoln Constance, University of California, Berkeley
Richard C. Starr, Indiana University Secretary: Barbara Palser, Rutgers University
Director: Sam Postlethwaite, Purdue University Member of the Editorial Board:
Harlan Banks, Cornell University
Secretary presented for ratification the following amendment which had
been circulated to the membership over two months ago as provided for
in the By-Laws of the Society:
amend Article II, Section (d) concerning Corresponding Members from The number
of such members shall be limited to forty" to read "The number of such members
shall be limited to fifty."
amendment was approved unanimously by the member-ship present.
Secretary pointed out that his office continued to distribute two publications
of the Society. The GUIDE TO GRADUATE STUDY IN THE PLANT SCIENCES IN THE UNITED
STATES 1968 contains information on the faculties, doctoral theses of students,
etc. at 105 departments offering the Ph.D. degree in some area of the plant
sciences. This GUIDE is available from his office at the cost of $3.00. The
careers booklet BOTANY AS A PROFESSION is serving as an excellent account
of the opportunities in Botany for the young student. Quantities of 1 to 3
are available without charge upon requests by anyone; larger quantities are
charged at the rate of 8.25 per copy. Re-prints of the booklet cost the Society
$.17 each and so the extra income from the occasional sales of larger quantities
pays in part the postal charges for mailing the free copies.
President Arthur Galston, Chairman of the Committee for Selection of Corresponding
Members, presented the names of the following distinguished foreign botanists
as candidates for corresponding membership:
Ashida, Professor Emeritus of Botany, Kyoto University, Japan
Buvat, Professor of Plant Cytology, University of Marseilles, France
Kristoforavich Chailakhian, Professor and Head of the Laboratory for Growth
and Development, Timiriazev Insrintte of Plant Physiology of the Academy of
Sciences of the USSR, Moscow
Collander, Professor Emeritus of Botany, University of Helsinki, Finland
Eric Hottum, Director-Emeritus of the Singapore Botanical Gardens and active
research at the Royal Botanical Gardens, Kew, England
Martens, Professor Emeritus at the Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium
Troll, Professor Emeritus at the University of Mainz, Germany
Adolph von Stosch, Professor at the University of Mar-burg, Germany
entire slate of names was approved unanimously. This raised the total of living
corresponding members to 45, the limit being 50 as determined by the amendment
to the By-Laws passed earlier in the meeting.
Charles Heimsch, retiring Editor of the American Journal of Botany, presented
a report on the current status of the Journal and a summary of certain aspects
of the Journal operation during his 5-year tenure as Editor. The progress
of publication is up to date and conforms to the general schedule. For example,
most articles for the September number were received during December and
January, those for October during January and February, etc. There is no
current backlog of accumulated manuscripts awaiting publication. Return
of papers now in re-vision will be needed to complete a January issue of
normal size. Dr. Heimsch presented the following summary of manuscripts
published and rejected during the past 5 years:
President complimented the Editor on the special issue of the Journal which
was issued in recognition of the XIrh Inter-national Botanical Congress and
which contains papers by Corresponding members.
membership approved unanimously a motion to thank Dr. Heimsch for his service
to the Society during these past years as Editor.
Banks called on Dr. Stern, Chairman of a committee to select a new Editor
of the American Journal of Botany. Dr. Stern reported that his committee
had selected Dr. Norman Boke of the University of Oklahoma and that he
had agreed to serve for the next 5 years as Editor. The Executive Committee
of the Council had approved this selection and so Dr. Bake would be working
with Dr. Heimsch in the next months to effect a smooth changeover. President
Banks introduced Dr. Boke to the meeting, expressing the Society's appreciation
for his having assumed this important job.
Ted Delevoryas presented the Treasurer's report. As in the past this report
will appear in the Yearbook. The proposed budget for 1970 showed an increase
in income over expenditures as did the projected report for 1969 due to
the smaller contribution to the American Journal of Botany than had been
the custom in years previous to 1969. Thus the membership approved the
motion that dues be kept at the same level in 1970 as in the cur-rent
Banks pointed out that for the first time in many years the Society finds
itself with an excess in funds which can be devoted to new activities. He
asked that the membership think of ways in which such funds might be used
to further the aims of the Society.
Lawrence Crockett presented the report of the Business Manager of the
American Journal of Botany. The excellent financial health of the Journal
is due in part to continued income from page charges, but the Business
Manager (and Dr. I-feimsch, the Editor) emphasized that no paper is ever
turned clown because of lack of money from grants or university sources
to cover the page charges; page charges are never mentioned until after
a paper has been accepted for publication. Dr. Crockett's report was received
with applause and President Banks expressed the appreciation of the Society
for Dr. Crockett's excellent handling of the Journal's finances. President
Banks pointed out that it was due to Dr. Crockett that the Society now
has 6 sustaining members, each contributing $250 per year to the Society.
Ritchie Bell, Program Director of the Society, announced that the Society
will meet with the A.I.B.S. at Indiana University, Bloomington, in August
1970, and that the Council has approved a joint meeting with the Canadian
Botanical Society, and possibly other plant oriented societies in Canada
and the U.S. at the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada,
in late June 1971. The final decision on the 1972 meeting has not been
made but will possibly be with the A.I.B.S. in Minneapolis.
Bell also talked for a few minutes on the National Biological Congress being
organized by the A.I.B.S. in Detroit in November 1970. There was considerable
discussion from the floor as to the purpose and plans of the Congress. The
Botanical Society will organize a symposium dealing with some aspect of plants
and society; suggestions for the symposium should be sent to Dr. Richard Goodwin
who will organize the program for the Society.
Richard Goodwin gave a short report on the recent meeting of the Governing
Board of the A.1.B.S.
membership passed the following resolution:
Botanical Society of America directs its Secretary to express its appreciation
to President Odegaard of the University of Washington for the hospitality
shown the Society during the Botanical Congress, and to express special thanks
to our local representative Dr. Weston Blaser; without his help the Annual
Dinner would not have been possible."
meeting was adjourned at 1:30 p.m.
C. Starr, Secretary
SOCIETY OF AMERICA, INC.
OFFICERS FOR 1970
Constance Department of Botany University of California Berkeley, California
C. Starr Department of Botany Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana 47401
F. Falser (1970-74) Department of Botany Rutgers University
Brunswick, New Jersey 08903
Delevoryas (1968. 72)
Haven, Connecticut 06520
DIRECTOR: S. N. Postlethwait (1970-72)
of Biological Science
COMMITTEE: Leonard Machlis (1968-70) Department of Botany
University of California Berkeley, California 94720
C. Bold (1969-71) Department of Botany University of Texas
P. Banks (1970-72) Div. of Biological Sciences 214 Plant Science Building
New York 14850
OF BOTANY: Department of Plant Sciences Norman, Oklahoma
SCIENCE BULLETIN: Department of Botany Washington State University
Pullman, Washington 99163
MANAGER, Lawrence J. Crockett
OF BOTANY: University of the City of New York
Avenue & 139th St. New York, New York 1003i
OFFICERS AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
(Those persons so marked with an (* ) are members of the Council. The Council
also includes the Officers of the Society except those elected to the Editorial
PRESIDENT, 1969: *Harlan P. Banks
of Biological Sciences 214 Plant Science Building Cornell University
New York 14850
PRESIDENT, 1968: ` Arthur Galston Department of Biology
Haven, Connecticut 06520
PRESIDENT, 1967: *Ralph Emerson
of Botany University of California Berkeley, California 94720
(1970) : *Ian Sussex
of Biology Yale University
Haven, Connecticut 06520
(1970): Richard M. Klein Department of Botany University
of Vermont Burlington, Vermont 05401
(1970) : William T. Jackson
of Biological Sciences Dartmouth College
New Hampshire 03755
(1970): Richard H. Eyde Department of Botany Smithsonian
Institute Washington, D.C. 20560
(1970): Charles H. Uhl
of Biological Sciences Plant Science Building Cornell University
New York 14850
(1970) : `'David Bierhorst
of Botany University of Massachusetts Amherst, Masschusetts 01002
(1970 ) : Edmund Berkeley Department of Biology University
of North Carolina Greensboro, North Carolina
(1970): Emanuel D. Rudolph Dept. of Botany & Plant Pathology
State University Columbus, Ohio 43210
(1970) : Jerry W. Stannard Medizinhistorisches Institut
Bonn—Venusberg Annaberger Weg Germany
(1970) : Roger D. Goos Department of Botany University of
Hawaii Honolulu, Hawaii 96822
(1970): Jack D. Rogers
of Plant Pathology Washington State University Pullman, Washington 99163
(1970) : John E. Peterson
of Botany University of Missouri Columbia, Missouri 65201
to the Council
: Annette Hervey
York Botanical Garden Bronx Park
York, New York 10058 Representative to AJB
Board (1970) : Clark Rogerson
York Botanical Garden Bronx Park
York, New York 10058
(1970): James Canright Department of Botany Arizona State
University Tempe, Arizona 85821
(1970): "John W. Hall
of Botany University of Minnesota Minneapolis, Minnesota
(1970) : 'Philip Cook
of Botany University of Vermont Burlington, Vermont 05401
(1970) : *Graeme P. Berlyn School of Forestry Yale University
(1970): *Tom J. Mabry
of Botany The University of Texas Austin, Texas 78712
(1970) : Rainer W. Scot-a
of Horticultural Science
of California Riverside, California 92502
(1970) : Jerry McClure Department of Botany Miami University
(1970): *John Beaman
of Botany Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan
(1970) : L. I. Nevling, Jr. Gray Herbarium
Arboretum Harvard University 22 Divinity Avenue Cambridge, Massachusetts
(1970): J. Louis Martens Department of Biology Illinois State
University Normal, Illinois 61761
(1970) : Orie J. Eigsti
of Biology Chicago State College 6800 South Stewart Chicago, Illinois 60621
(1970) : *Irving W. Knobloch Dept. of Botany & Plant
State University East Lansing, Michigan 48823
(1970) : *Betty Thompson Department of Botany Connecticut
London, Connecticut 06320
(1970) : Robert K. Zuck
of Botany Drew University
New Jersey 07940
(1970): Kenton Chambers Botany Department
State University Corvallis, Oregon 97331
(1970) : Daniel Branton
of Botany University of California Berkeley, California 94 704
(1970) : *Elizabeth G. Cutter Department of Botany University
of California Davis, California 95616
(1970) : Arthur Spurr
of Vegetable Crops
of California Davis, California 95616
(1970) : Robert W. Long
of Botany & Bacteriology
of South Florida Tampa, Florida 33620
(1970) : 'Dorothy L. Crandall Bliss Department of Biology
ESSER AND RUDOLF KUENEN. Genetics of Fungi.
from the German edition (1965) by Erich Steiner with revisions by the authors.
Springer Verlag, New York, 1967. ix + 500 pp. + 74 figures. 18.50.
fungi provide a unique array of genetic systems which offer the advantages
of microorganisms. They have rapid life cycles, easily manipulated populations
and mating events producing a large number of progeny, and provide material
suitable for physiological and biochemical study. They also offer the advantages
of higher organ-isms, having chromosomes, sexual reproduction, complete and
often ordered products of meiosis, and alteration of haploid and diploid phases.
The authors of Genetics of Fungi conclude, "the geneticist experiments with
the fungi, not for their own sake, but rather, because the fungi, along with
the bacteria and viruses, are suited for the solution of many of the problems
of molecular genetics." The translation of this monograph into English has
made easily accessible a valuable summary of genetic research on fungi and
a description of some approaches to the problems of molecular genetics.
book has two great assets—its organization and its thoroughness. Too
few monographs of this scope are organized in as logical and readable manner.
The table of contents is a Iisting of seven chapters: Morphology, Reproduction,
Replication, Recombination, Mutation, Function, and Extrachromosomal Inheritance.
Each chapter is introduced with a detailed outline, a summary, and a list
of general references. Definitions and preliminary descriptions are included
in the introductions where they are needed. The subject of each chapter is
clearly subdivided into topics and subtopics with further subdivision where
appropriate. The authors have interspersed summaries throughout the book usually
appearing after detailed topics and subtopics. The practice of enumerating
problems and conclusions in the text will make the book very useful to the
inexperienced geneticist. The thoroughness of the
in compiling this monograph is underscored by the references listed at the
end of each chapter. The literature through 1965 is thoroughly reviewed in
the text and listed with the complete title for each reference. Most references
to 1967 are appended to the reference lists in the translation with the exception
of those for the chapter on replication which are not included.
book reads well and has been translated into idiomatic English. The use of
critical readers to review the translation has made certain the book contains
genetic terms now in common use. The uniform style of illustration employed
by the publisher makes the sequential presentation of data from many publications
in tables and figures easy on the eye and easy to comprehend. The authors
state that the book is not designed as a text for an advanced genetics course,
yet the organization, the thoroughness, and the clarity of text and illustration
make the book useful for an advanced course in genetics.
rapid advance in investigation in some of the
areas covered in the book has served to make certain parts
of the book so out-of-date they are erroneous. Most
notable in this regard is the chapter on function in which some discussions are only of historical interest. This
reviewer hopes the authors will revise and update this
monograph to make it even more valuable. In its present
form it is still an essential part of any geneticist's library.
John M. Hill, Jr.
Systematic Biology, Proceeding's of an International Conference. Publication
1962. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. 1969. S15.00.
1965 the Division of Biology and Agriculture of the National Research Council
brought together nine systematists, with Lincoln Constance as chairman, to
discuss what might be done to further the interests of systematic biology.
One of the results of this meeting was an international conference which was
held at the University of Michigan in June, 1967. A number of speakers and
discussants were invited and a great many different aspects of systematic
biology were covered. The principal contributions of botanists were A Historical
Review of Systematic Biology by Frans A. Stafleu, The Construction of a Classification
by Warren H. Wagner, Jr., The Systematics of Populations in Plants by Robert
Ornduff, Ecological Aspects of the Systematics of Plants by A. R. Kruckebcrg,
Molecular Data in Plant Systematics by Juan H. Hunziker, and Comparative Cytology
in Systematics by Harlan Lewis. In a sense, however. it is most inappropriate
to single out the contributions of the botanists, for one of the great virtues
of the conference was the bringing together of bacteriologists, biochemists,
botanists, zoologists and others to share their views on the subject of systematics.
Certainly one of the highlights of the meeting must have been the roundtable
discussion of molecular biology. Since most systematists in the United States
were invited to the conference and are probably already aware of the publication
of the proceedings, perhaps the chief purpose of this review is to call the
book to the attention of botanists in fields other than systematics. For those
who have had no training in systematics or had a course in
subject some years ago, this work should serve as an excellent summary of
present developments in the field as well as acquaint them with some of the
hopes for the future. I have one minor criticism of the work. There is no
B. Heiser, Jr.
BETTY P. AND DEREK W. SNOWDON. Powdered Vegetable Drugs. An Agar of Microscopy
for use in the Identification and Authentication of some Plant Materials employed
as Medicinal Agents. American Elsevier Publishing Company, Inc., New York.
1969. 203 pages, 99 plates. $11.50.
title and subtitle aptly describe this work. About one hundred drugs are described
and microscopic details of No. 60 grade powders are well illustrated by line
drawings in full-page plates. Some drugs not in powder form, e.g., senna pods
and lemon peel, are omitted but others, of special interest, such as Indian
Hemp and hops, are included. The drugs are grouped as follows: starches, wood
(one species), barks and galls, leaves and herbs, flowers, seeds, fruits,
umbelliferous fruits, and rhizomes and roots. Within a group an alphabetical
order is followed. A diagnostic key to the drugs is not given, nor is there
any reference to current uses. On the whole the treatment appears to be clear
and accurate. However, there are some minor cases of uncertainty. For example,
galls arc described as having "lignin bodies," i.e., small, apparently noncellular
masses reacting with phloroglucinol reagent. These are probably tannin sacs;
the authors find tannins in the gall material but only in an n-hexanol mount
in which they are angular fragments. Undoubtedly this book should serve as
the chief source of vegetable drug microscopy for pharmacognosy. It will be
an important adjunct to the teaching of plant anatomy.
Century Botanical Art & Illustration, Catalogue 2nd International Exhibition
of Botanical Art & Illustration, 20 October 1968 to .15 April 1969, compiled
by George H. M. Lawrence. Hunt Botanical Library. Pittsburgh. 55.00. (Distributed
by Stechert-Hafner Service Agency, Inc., 31 E. 10th Street, New York, New
handsome little book, which bears a striking color reproduction of Elsa Felsko's
Fritillaria imperialis on the cover, is evidence that good botanical art is
far from dead in our time. The 126 artists whose work is included pre-sent
us with a great diversity of styles and media. This diversity created some
problems for the engraver and printer with the result that some fine lines
were lost in a few of the small halftone reproductions but the loss is not
serious. Likenesses of all artists but one are included with biographical
sketches and a precise address. As a botanist, I am prejudiced for those figures
which deal with the plants in full realistic detail, but the generalized studies
of identifiable plants (all) are esthetically pleasing and appropriate for
greeting cards or hanging. One can scarcely evaluate an artistic exhibit from
miniature halftones but some finer essences seep through. Hunt
Library is congratulated for guarding an important portion of our botanical
heritage being neglected elsewhere. Accordingly, I join the compiler in inviting
botanical artists to submit some of their work and a biographical sketch co
the increasingly significant holdings of the Hunt Library.
for the XI International Botanical Congress received a considerably revised
and somewhat shortened paperbound edition. As it lacks considerable introductory
material, includes fewer artists and some different, as well as fewer, illustrations,
interested botanists will find it worthwhile to have the modestly priced hardbound
edition even if they have a Congress copy.
H. A. Miller
KAREN A., AND VERNE GRANT. Hummingbirds and Their Flowers. Columbia University
Press, New York and London. 1968. .vii + 115 pages. 30 colored plates. S17.50.
size, format, and handsomeness of production this book is a fraternal twin
to the earlier publication by these authors, Flower Pollination in the Phlox
Family. This time their theme is the parallel evolution displayed in some
18 plant families in the western United States, of a "floral syndrome" adapted,
usually in a highly specific way, to pollination by hummingbirds. AIthough
hummingbirds are predominantly tropical and have their greatest species diversity
in Central and South America, the breeding rang-es of a small number of migratory
species are in Arizona, California and adjacent states. The Grants choose
to limit themselves to this marginal area of hummingbird distribution, no
doubt because their personal research and field observations have concentrated
on the flora of the South-west. One can object, therefore, that the title
of the book goes well beyond its scope. On the other hand, the pat-terns of
evolutionary relationship—that is, coadaptation of birds and plants—are
much simpler here than in the American tropics, and may lend themselves better
to the kind of general, theoretical discussion which the authors wish to emphasize.
the area of North America west of the Rockies and north of Mexico, there are
about I1 species of humming-birds and at least 129 plant species whose flowers
are adapted primarily for feeding of and pollination by these birds. The floral
syndome is a familiar one: red or orange coloration is combined with a long,
stout corolla rube or spur, abundant nectar, and synchronous flowering. Successful
pollinations on the most specialized of such flowers are performed almost
exclusively by hummingbirds; how-ever, there is no one-to-one correspondence
of particular bird species to plant species, and the bird-flowers as a group
are coadaptcd with all the flower-visiting birds. Although research on the
problem is still in the descriptive natural history stage, there are certain
other characteristics that require explanation, as pointed out by the authors.
For example, species with an annual habit very rarely possess the bird-flower
syndrome. If we neglect the large genus Castilleja (Paintbrush), which is
almost entirely bird-adapted, the species with hummingbird flowers are mostly
a small number of odd-balls in Iarge, boreal, insect-pollinated genera. Or
alternatively, they are small, specialized generic offshoots. (e.g., Zauschneria
from Epilobium, Diplacus from Mininlus). Furthermore, sympatric flocks of
hummingbird-flowered species occur only in late blooming, high mountain floras;
at middle and low elevations, only one or two bird-pollinated species exist
in each area, and they are earlier to .flower. Hypotheses to explain these
facts are presented by the authors, and one expects that such problems will
attract greater attention from population biologists in the future.
book's colored illustrations are enlarged photo-graphs of habitats, floral
types, and birds, some of the latter being rather repetitious. It will be
helpful if further studies of bird pollination involve collaboration between
botanists and ornithologists. Even such alert naturalists as Karen and Verne
Grant cannot be expected to know all the details of bird ecology and behavior
that will be pertinent to the explanation of the many fascinating problems
to which this book introduces us.
A. JAYNES (Editor). Handbook of North American
Trees. The Northern Nut Growers Association
Holston Hills Road, Knoxville, Tennessee),
vii+421 pages, $7.50.
book is concerned with the many kinds of nut trees that are grown in North
America, and it brings together a great deal of information involved in the
techniques and problems of cultivating the trees. The emphasis is on nut production
for human consumption, but extensive in-formation is given concerning lumber
production, use of the tree as an ornamental, and as a source of food for
wildlife. The book should provide a valuable reference for amateurs as well
as professionals. It consists of 32 chapters written by specialists, and is
divided into four parrs.
I—consists of a short introduction devoted to the history and potential
of nut trees as a food source.
II—approximately one-third of the book covers the culture and propagation
of nut trees. A number of propagation techniques arc described, and information
concerning pruning, mulching, herbicides, soil management, and the control
of various plant pests is provided.
III—discusses the nut trees that are grown in North America. The authors
give the natural range of the species, how and when they were introduced into
cultivation in North America, their commercial development, the climatic factors
necessary for growth, cultivation practices, and the commonly grown horticultural
forms and varieties.
IV—includes numerous unrelated topics such as the potential of nut production
for wildlife, the improved breeding of nut trees, and the judging of nut crops.
editor's work must have been as varied as the subjects covered. Some of the
subjects were done by him alone; some in collaboration with others. Other
parts of the book were written by specialists. The book is a very good example
of well-planned teamwork which involved the collaboration of numerous botanists.
MARAMORSCH (Editor) . Viruses, Vectors, and V egetation. Interscience Publishers,
New York, 1969. $29.50.
Vectors, and Vegetation is a welcome addition to the growing Iist of multiauthored
texts derived from international conferences or symposia. The general frame-work
of the book originated from the United States-japan Conference on Interactions
between Arthropods and Plant-Pathogenic Viruses held in Tokyo in 1.965. However,
the scope of the book extends well beyond that of the conference. In addition
to chapters by the original conference participants covering the many facets
of aphid and leaf-hopper vector relationships, the book contains excellent
chapters on fungi, nematodes, white flies and mites as vectors. Nearly every
aspect of virus-vector-plant relation-ships is covered in one or more of the
29 chapters. Some of the chapters deal largely with previously unpublished
data, others with evaluation of recent literature and still others with historical
development of a subject. "It was the Editor's intent," according to editor
Maramorsch, "to provide readers interested in one particular aspect with a
self-contained chapter describing that subject." The book clearly achieves
its stated purpose, namely "to provide a stimulating forum for discussion
of new ideas and observations in plant-virus-vector research." Despite the
rather substantial initial investment, Viruses, Vectors, and Vegetation should
be a useful reference book for researchers, teachers and students for many
K. AND A. C. NEISH. Constitution and Biosynthesis of Lignin. (Vol. 2 in the
series, Molecular Biology, Biochemistry and Biophysics.) Springer-Verlag,
New York, Inc., 1968. 129 pp. $7.00.
there have been biochemical problems as refractory as those involved with
proteins, the elucidation of lignin synthesis, structure, and degradation
must be so ranked. Lignin as it exists in the walls of xylem and sclerified
cells of vascular plants is bonded to carbohydrates and is by no means readily
extracted. It varies in chemical constitution of the polymerized units between
species and major groups; chemically it cannot be depicted by a single formula;
we probably should speak of lignins. Despite the formidable difficulties work
during the past 50 years has led to an essential understanding of the major
pathways of lignin synthesis and of the chief variables in its structure.
Freudenberg has been intimately associated with the development of current
concepts during this period.
book consists of two sections, the first, Monomeric Intermediates in the Biosynthesis
of Lignin by Arthur C. Neish (pp. 1-43), and second, the Constitution and
Biosynthesis of Lignin by Karl Freudenberg (pp. 45-129). Neish outlines the
evidence supporting the path-way for lignin synthesis as being: carbohydrates—>shikimic
acid—3phenylalanine+cinnamic acid derivatives-cinnamyl alcohol derivatives+lignin;
he points out that in some species, e.g., in grasses, tyrosine can serve as
the pre-cursor for cinnamic acid derivatives. In a discussion of evolutionary
relationships he indicates that although micro- organisms lack lignin they
do possess pathways for phenylalanine and tyrosine synthesis similar or identical
to those of higher plants; thus the evolutionary acquisition of only a few
enzymes could have led to the formation of lignin—and of xylary tissue—essential
for the origin of vascular plants.
gives an 'excellent account—in part some-what anecdotal—of the
history of lignin research with a few side excursions on related matters such
as his role in developing a model of cellulose structure. It is natural that
the emphasis is on his own work and that of his associates. He reviews the
past and present difficulties in isolating the stuff called lignin and proceeds
to the various efforts leading to the identification of the various lignin
components, their proportions in lignins from various sources, and the chemical
structures found. Part I deals with the constitution of lignin, part II, to
the degradation products and proposals for a suitable formula, taking into
account the varying proportions of cinnamyl alcohol substituents.
all the book is well written, interesting, and has extensive bibliographies.
The omission of most work on the enzymology may be disappointing to some but
in my opinion is not serious. In view of the difficulties inherent in this
field one can only marvel at the tenacity of Freudenberg, during his academic
career, and of others, in making such a good treatise possible.
W. Plant Chimeras, Second Edition. Methuen & Co. Ltd. London, 1969. viii+123
updating his 1934 edition, the author has made many changes in form and content
of his monograph. Although some 33 of the references in the bibliography of
this second edition are new, the total number of references cited here is
about seven less than were used in the first edition. For reasons that he
presents on page 1, the author has changed his spelling from "chimaera" to
"chimera." The title of the first edition was "Plant Chimaeras and Graft Hybrids."
The new edition also considers the graft hybrid hypothesis, and similarly
dismisses it for lack of convincing evidence. This present edition, like the
original, considers Baur's basic work with Pelargonium, Winkler's experiments
with Solanum, and Jorgensen and Crane's further studies with this latter genus.
The second edition then reviews the various anatomical analyses by Satina
and Blakeslee, and Dermen, who were aided by the use of colchicine in obtaining
chromosome number differences among adjacent layers of tissues. Some of the
illustrations are the same as those in the first edition, others have been
modified, and several new ones added. Unfortunately a plate of borrowed photomicrographs,
which was not too clear as originally published, has suffered further in the
reproduction. The statement on pages 108-9, "These apical meristems . . .
are capable of initiating any kind of mature tissue of which the plant has
need . . ." implies an improbable teleology. In general the volume is clearly
written, and the format and typography of the new edition presents a considerable