2018 v64 No 3 Fall

Economic Botany ...................................................................................................................................................196

Physiology ....................................................................................................................................................................201

Systematics.................................................................................................................................................................204

135

SOCIETY NEWS

We live in a technological era where information

can be used, abused, misinterpreted, and virally

shared for presenting ideological viewpoints

without regard to accuracy of content. When

this involves science and government policy,

the potential for major consequences to the

environment, society, scientists, and future

generations exists.

Several years ago, I started using Merchants

of Doubt (Oreskes and Conway, 2010) for a

supplemental textbook in my “Society and

Evolution” course. The subtitle for this book

is “How a handful of scientists obscured

the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to

global warming.” The book describes how a

small number of scientists could be used by

political entities to misrepresent the majority

opinion of other scientists with regards to the

causes and environmental impacts of acid

rain, atmospheric ozone holes, global climate

change, as well as the health effects of tobacco

use and environmental consequences of

pesticide use. What struck me as particularly

By Andrea Wolfe

The Ohio State University

Department of

Evolution, Ecology, and

Organismal Biology

E-mail: wolfe.205@osu.

edu

Science—It Really Does Matter

Remarks from BOTANY 2018

by President-Elect Andi Wolfe

dangerous was how politicians and political

lobbyists use small bits of scientific studies

that agree with their ideological viewpoints to

influence public policy that may affect several

generations after regulations are enacted or

rescinded.

My “Society and Evolution” course focuses on

trying to understand why some populations

of the USA are anti-evolution and, in general,

anti-science. My students do several research

projects where they mine databases to look at

trends of acceptance or denial of evolution,

based on stories covered in local, regional,

national, and international newspapers. One

of the outcomes of these projects is a better

understanding of the role of religion and

politics in science education and science

literacy.

The newspaper databases offer one a chance

to see general trends about a society’s reaction

to specific opinions, policy, and scientific

research. Thus, I found myself turning to

newspaper archives when I decided to talk

about why science matters in society. I wanted

to investigate how government leadership

can affect science policy and debate, and I

was interested in seeing how government

policies impact scientific research and science

education. Also, I was curious about how

political biases may have an impact on science

literacy, and how this might affect efforts for

science communication.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

136

How government leadership

impacts scientific research

and debate

My focus was on the most recent U.S.

administrations, straddling the end of the

20th- and into the 21st-century. This included

the administrations of Bill Clinton (1993-

2001), George W. Bush (2001-2009), Barack

Obama (2009-2017), and Donald J. Trump

(2017-current). I searched the Newspaper

Source database with the following

words in the all-text mode: science (and)

president’s name (and) policy. The number

of articles returned ranged from 756 (Trump

administration, covering 1.5 yr) to 1,974 (Bill

Clinton administration); there were 1,319 and

1,564 articles returned for Obama and Bush,

respectively. Not all of the articles referred

to science policy, but there was a sufficient

number of articles with repeated themes to

take the pulse of an administration’s attitude

about science, and the role of science in

administrative policy.

Headlines from each administration are listed

in Table 1, along with either quotes from,

or notes about, the article. There are very

clear trends regarding an administration’s

attitude about science, and the effect it has

on policy decisions. First, from 1993 to 2018,

administrations with a Democrat as president

were pro-science, pro-environment, and used

advice from scientists before making decisions

about policy. For example, Clinton expanded

wilderness areas and enacted environmental

protections aimed at reducing pollution and

greenhouse gas emissions. Clinton was also

concerned about the declining test scores for

U.S. high school students on standardized

tests for math and science. Obama started

his administration by recruiting well-

known scientists to fill cabinet positions for

departments that need science expertise. He

also implemented strategies for increasing

funding for science, reducing the nation’s

need for fossil fuels, enforcing environmental

regulations on greenhouse gas emissions, and

releasing restrictions on scientific research

that were based on conservative ideology.

In contrast, both Republican presidents

during this period had a pattern of

ignoring or misusing science, reducing

funding for basic research, and rolling back

environmental regulations to benefit the fossil

fuel energy industry. Under both Republican

administrations, climate change denial was

systematic throughout federal agencies.

The Bush administration focused its efforts

for science research on homeland security,

and implemented restrictions on science

research that offended the conservative right

population. This had impacts on basic research

in that scientists had restrictions about who

could work with them, what topics could be

studied, and how, or if, scientific results could

be disseminated. Trump’s administration is

anti-science, and this is reflected in the sheer

number of articles that address his “war on

science,” his campaign to turn public lands

into opportunities for businesses to exploit,

and his enabling the federal government,

particularly science and environmental

agencies, to implode due to mismanagement.

The role of government in

scientific research and

science education

Given the above information about the major

differences the political party of a president

has on American science, I wanted to know if

the government has a role in scientific research

PSB 64 (3) 2018

137

President

Date(s) Headline

Publication

Notes

Bill Clinton

(Democrat) 1993-2001

03/08/1995

Endangered Species

Act faces its own dan-

gers

Christian Science

Monitor

The recently formed Senate Republican Regu-

latory Relief Task Force put the ESA at the top

of its “Top Ten Worst-Case Regulations.”

05/19/1995

The GOP needs a bit

more R&D on its sci-

ence and technology

policy

The Washington Post

Congress had made a point to change the bud-

get submitted by Clinton to reduce spending

efforts on science.

07/04/1995 A Department of Sci-

ence?

The Washington Post

This was an attempt by Republicans to con-

solidate NASA, NSF, EPA, USGS, NOAA, the

Patent & Trademark Office, and research arms

of the Energy and Commerce Departments.

It would have changed funding for each of

the agencies, with major impacts on basic re-

search. The initiative failed.

09/07/1995

Alaska becomes test

of wills on Federal

land policy

Christian Science

Monitor

This was about how a Republican-led Congress

attempted to open the Arctic National Wild-

life Refuge and Tongass National Forest to oil

drilling.

02/19/1997 States feud with EPA

Christian Science

Monitor

“After giving states more power to protect

clean air and water, the Clinton administration

is threatening to take back such controls be-

cause of concerns that, in some states at least,

devolution means more pollution.” The EPA

argued that state laws for pollution were too

lax. Ironically, it was Michigan that was fight-

ing Federal oversight.

10/30/1997 Greenhouse gas plan

faces GOP red light

Christian Science

Monitor

Clinton’s proposals for international action

to combat global warming were considered

too lax by environmentalists and Europeans,

but too strict by Republicans because the link

between greenhouse gas emission and global

warming “is not firmly established.”

03/17/1998 Clinton proposes test-

ing

New York Times

High school seniors were performing poorly

on standardized math and science tests. Clin-

ton proposed testing high school teachers to

prove competency prior to receiving a teach-

ing license.

06/15/1999

Clinton plan hopes to

reassert the value of

‘wilderness’

Christian Science

Monitor

Clinton was trying to set aside five million

acres of national park land as wilderness, pri-

marily to prevent development.

11/15/2000

In last days, Clinton

begins environmental

offensive

Christian Science

Monitor

Clinton ordered one-third of America’s na-

tional forests to be made off limits to logging,

mining, and road-building.

George W.

Bush (Repub-

lican)

2001-2009

04/20/2001 Bush walks fine line

on ecology

Christian Science

Monitor

Critics of Bush’s appointments and early deci-

sions on global warming and endangered spe-

cies policies state that Bush “has declared war

on the environment.”

Table 1. Headlines about science and policy from the past four administrations in the United States.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

138

06/17/2001

Sure, it’s rocket sci-

ence, but who needs

scientists?

New York Times

“Indeed, some experts believe that science’s in-

fluence in public policy matters has not been at

such a low ebb since before World War I.”

07/24/2001

Researchers forecast

rapid, irreversible cli-

mate warming

Environmental News

Network

“The United States signed the Kyoto Protocol

under the Clinton administration, but Pres-

ident George W. Bush announced in March

that the United States would not ratify the

treaty. This move caused a crisis in the inter-

national approach to the agreement since the

United States emits 25 percent of the world’s

heat-trapping greenhouse gases.”

08/02/2001 As House votes on en-

ergy plan, oil booms

Christian Science

Monitor

“The House expects to vote on Bush’s initia-

tive—which stresses boosting production—by

the end of the week.”

11/05/2001

Science a proven tool

in ensuring homeland

security

The Dallas Morning

News

The attitude toward science changed after 9/11,

but only with regard to homeland security.

11/27/2001

Scientists ponder lim-

its on access to germ

research

New York Times

In response to 9/11, and concerns about bio-

terrorism, there were proposals to restrict ac-

cess to information and materials that might

be used for biological weapons.

“Already several proposals have been made in

Congress to forbid some people, including cer-

tain foreigners, from working in laboratories

that handle dangerous microbes.”

10/19/2002

Researchers say sci-

ence is hurt by secre-

cy policy set up by the

White House

New York Times

“The presidents of the National Academies

said yesterday that the Bush administration

was going too far in limiting publication of

some scientific research out of concern that it

could aid terrorists…Specifically, they said, the

administration’s policy of restricting publica-

tion of federally financed research it deemed

‘sensitive but unclassified’ threatened to ‘stifle

scientific creativity and to weaken national se-

curity.’”

12/06/2002

Now, science panelists

are picked for ideolo-

gy rather than exper-

tise

Wall Street Journal

Scientific advisory panelists for federal agen-

cies was controversial due to selection of can-

didates with conservative ideologies rather

than on their skills or experience.

07/08/2003

Policy as arcade game:

when science crosses

Bush agenda, it takes

a beating

The Philadelphia

Inquirer

“President Bush is playing Whack-a-Mole

with scientific reports that he doesn’t like: Un-

comfortable facts about global warming pop

up in an environmental report card. Whack!

Yellowstone National Park staffers tell a world

treasures watchdog that the park is in trouble.

Whack! The Environmental Protection Agen-

cy discovers a senator’s clean air bill is more

effective than the president’s. Whack! But the

moles are popping up faster than the Bush

team can beat them back. Information is leak-

ing out. A pattern of deception is emerging.”

PSB 64 (3) 2018

139

02/23/2004 Uses and abuses of

Science

New York Times

“Although the Bush administration is hardly

the first to politicize science, no administra-

tion in recent memory has so shamelessly dis-

torted scientific findings for policy reasons or

suppressed them when they conflict with polit-

ical goals.” This was from an indictment deliv-

ered by >60 prominent scientists, including 20

Nobel laureates.

Barack Obama

(Democrat) 2009-2017

01/14/2009 EPA nominee vows to

rely on science

USA Today

Obama began his administration by filling his

cabinet with qualified individuals.

01/20/2009

Boulder, Colo.

area scientists cheer

Obama

Daily Camera

“After eight years of pervasive political med-

dling in science, according to the Union of

Concerned Scientists, researchers in Boulder

are cheering Barack Obama, who has prom-

ised to return integrity to U.S. science policy…

Obama has promised to double federal invest-

ment in basic research, and he has nominated

distinguished researchers for key positions,

such as tapping Nobel Prize-winning physicist

Steven Chu for secretary of energy.”

01/27/2009 Elevating science, ele-

vating democracy.

New York Times

Essay by science editor Dennis Overbye: analy-

zing Obama’s inaugural speech, where Obama

proclaimed that he would “restore science to

its rightful place.” The president also vowed to

harness technology for clean energy.

01/28/2009

Climate expert says

global warming will

be major priority of

Obama Presidency

Irish Times

Mentions Obama’s appointment of experts to

his cabinet, and vows to prioritize clean energy

initiatives.

02/26/2009

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n

tasked with undoing

Bush-era policies on

air quality

The Press-Enterprise

“Less than six weeks after George W. Bush left

office, clean-air advocates are wasting no time

under the new administration to push for new

and tougher regulations. Several of the former

president’s air pollution policies already are in

jeopardy, raising hopes among clean-air advo-

cates and fears among those who worry that

industries could get hit with higher costs du-

ring a recession.”

03/10/2009

Editorial: Finally: The

right approach to sci-

ence

Obama puts his own

spin on the mix of sci-

ence with politics

La Crosse Tribune

New York Times

Reports on Obama’s efforts to have policies

built on science rather than ideology. This was

specifically in reference to rolling back the

regulations on embryonic stem cell research

from the Bush administration.

07/20/2009 Mo. Lawmaker battles

Obama agenda

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

“In his first months in office, [Blaine] Luetke-

meyer, R-St. Elizabeth, has established himself

as an unwavering conservative, a budget hawk,

and a critic of global warming theories who is

so certain in his beliefs that he accuses Nobel

Prize winners of ‘junk science.’”

PSB 64 (3) 2018

140

12/28/2010

Science bill could

bring federal money

to the Valley

The Monitor

“A relatively unknown bill affecting science

education and job creation won overwhelm-

ing approval in the U.S. Congress before it re-

cessed, and could energize science-related op-

portunities in South Texas.” This was referring

to the America Competes Reauthorization Act

(ACRA), which had unanimous approval in

the Senate and was approved at 228-130 in the

House of Representatives.

11/19/2012 Rubio: ‘I’m not a sci-

entist’

GQ Magazine

This was one of many stories during the Obama

administration about Republican politicians

making a statement about their lack of scien-

tific literacy, and that their decisions about sci-

ence policy were based on other factors.

05/14/2014

All science is wrong,

concludes esteemed

Fox News panel

New York Magazine This was an article about partisan pushback on

science.

05/30/2014

Why do Republicans

always say ‘I’m not a

scientist’?

New York Magazine

“’I’m not a scientist’ allows Republicans to

avoid conceding the legitimacy of climate sci-

ence while also avoiding the political downside

of openly branding themselves as haters of sci-

ence. The beauty of the line is that it implicitly

concedes that scientists possess real expertise,

while simultaneously allowing you to ignore

that expertise altogether.”

Donald J.

Trump (Re-

publican)

2017-cur-

rent

11/19/2016

Climate change in

Trump’s age of igno-

rance

New York Times

“We now live in a world where ignorance of a

very dangerous sort is being deliberately man-

ufactured, to protect certain kinds of unfet-

tered corporate enterprise. The global climate

catastrophe gets short shrift, largely because

powerful fossil fuel producers still have enor-

mous political clout, following decades-long

campaigns to sow doubt about whether an-

thropogenic emissions are really causing plan-

etary warming. Trust in science suffers, but

also trust in government. And that is not an

accident. Climate deniers are not so much an-

ti-science as anti-regulation and anti-govern-

ment.”

11/30/2016

Trump administra-

tion’s climate-change

skeptics worry re-

searchers, advocates

KUAC FM radio

“There’s growing concern among the scientif-

ic community that President-elect Trump will

reduce or eliminate support and funding for

studying climate change.”

01/19/2017

03/12/2017

Rogue scientists race

to save climate data

from Trump

California scientists

worry that Trump will

interfere with climate

data

Science

The San Diego

Union-Tribune

Report on how scientists were saving climate

change databases under threat from Trump’s

policies at government agencies such as EPA,

US Department of Interior, and others.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

141

01/31/2017

Science will suffer un-

der administration’s

travel ban, officials

say.

New York Times

Discusses the potential impact of Trump’s trav-

el ban on people from certain countries.

01/31/2017

Why science matters

more than ever in

Trump’s America

Forbes Magazine

“It may be the only way to save the USA—and

the world—from alternative facts.”

03/03/2017

Trump plan for 40%

cut could cause EPA

science office ‘to im-

plode,’ official warns

Science

A response to cuts in program funding at EPA.

03/20/2017

03/27/2017

08/17/2017

Research is an af-

terthought in first

Trump budget

The Trump Adminis-

tration’s War on Sci-

ence

Trump’s first list of

science priorities ig-

nores climate—and

departs from his own

budget request

Science

New York Times

Science

Trump’s initial budget either made cuts or flat-

lined federal spending on science research

04/22/2017

March for Science:

Protesters gather

worldwide to support

‘evidence’

CNN

A global response to the disregard for science,

and the promotion of “alternative facts.”

05/08/2017

At FDA, TVs now

turned to Fox News

and can’t be switched

CBS News

“CBS News has confirmed an email was sent

to researchers at the FDA’s Center for Biologics

Evaluation and Research responding to appar-

ent efforts to change the channel on internal

television screens.”

05/28/2017

Editorial: Trump ap-

pointees twist facts,

deny science

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

“President Donald Trump has named two

prominent anti-abortion activists and LGBT-

rights opponents to influential positions in the

Department of Health and Human Services,

but those views aren’t what should trouble

Americans most. What is very disturbing is

that each appointee openly denies science and

facts.”

06/06/2017

85 percent of the

top science jobs in

Trump’s government

don’t even have a

nominee

The Washington Post

This trend continued up until the time of my

BOTANY 2018 talk. The only agencies with a

complete complement of scientists more than

a year later from the publication date of this

article were Education and Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

06/28/2017

Trump will try to

sidestep science in

rolling back clean wa-

ter rule

Science

Rules enacted during the last months of a pres-

ident’s term are subject to being overturned by

the next president’s administration. Whereas

Obama’s administration relied on scientific

findings for implementing regulations, the

Trump administration was catering to the

fossil fuel industry—specifically, coal—for re-

scinding this rule.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

142

07/01/2017

10/31/2017

12/05/2017

07/10/2018

EPA chief pushing

government-wide

effort to question cli-

mate change science.

Trump’s EPA has

blocked agency grant-

ees from serving on

science advisory pan-

els.

Accumulating evi-

dence: Federal scien-

tists are being silenced

DOI restricts scien-

tists from attending

scientific conferences

The Washington Post

Science

Union of Concerned

Scientists

Union of Concerned

Scientists

Climate change information was removed

from the EPA and other agency websites,

memos stating rules about not using specific

terminology had been circulated, and regula-

tions were being rolled back concerning green-

house gas emissions. Scientists were prevented

from conducting research, attending meetings,

and serving on expert panels

07/11/2017

07/20/2017

09/01/2017

12/05/2017

04/17/2018

Trump nominates fi-

nance executive for

DOE science under-

secretary

Trump picks climate

change doubter for

USDA science job

Trump has picked

a politician to lead

NASA. Is that a good

thing?

Trump science job

nominees missing

advanced science de-

grees

Ryan Zinke refers to

himself as a geologist.

That’s a job he’s never

held.

Science

The Hill

Science

Associated Press

CNN

Cabinet positions requiring science literacy in

the Trump administration were filled by non-

or under-qualified personnel. This list includ-

ed Rick Perry, a previous presidential election

candidate who had wanted to disband the De-

partment of Energy. Trump appointed Perry to

lead that agency.

07/17/2017 Sidelining science

since day one

Union of Concerned

Scientists

“The Trump presidency has shown a clear pat-

tern of actions that threaten public health and

safety by eroding the role of science in policy.”

08/09/2017

The battle over sci-

ence in the Trump

administration

CNN

“Scientists allege policies of ‘myth over truth’

under Trump.”

12/14/2017

A year of Trump: Sci-

ence is a major casual-

ty in the new politics

of disruption

Scientific American

“From a rollback of environmental protections

to attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act,

here’s a look at the president’s impact on sci-

ence-related issues.”

12/26/2017

‘Junk science’? Studies

behind Obama regu-

lations under fire

Fox News

“The federal report by dozens of U.S. govern-

ment scientists concludes climate change is

real and is driven almost exclusively by human

activity.”

PSB 64 (3) 2018

143

01/01/2018

The Trump adminis-

tration’s war on sci-

ence agencies threat-

ens the nation’s health

and safety

Scientific American

“Budget cuts and layoffs threaten the nation’s

health and safety.”

01/09/2018

U.S. Interior Depart-

ment to put academ-

ic, nonprofit grants

through political re-

view

Science

Grants provided by DOI to receive scrutiny to

“ensure they align with Trump administration

policies.”

01/16/2009

Citing ‘inexcusable’

treatment, advisors

quit National Parks

Panel

New York Times

The advisory panel was formed in 1935. The

majority resigned in protests of Ryan Zinke’s

plans to open protected areas to oil drilling and

mining.

01/18/2018

Trump administra-

tion is ‘abandoning

science,’ scientists

claim

Newsweek

“The White House has been sidelining ad-

vice from scientific advisory councils sin-

ce President Donald Trump took office in

January 2017, according to a new analysis

released Thursday…The report titled ‘Aban-

doning Science Advice’ by the nonprofit ad-

vocacy organization Union of Concerned

Scientists found that science advisory commit-

tees had experienced ‘unprecedented’ levels of

disrespect and neglect from the White House

and across agencies including the Environ-

mental Protection Agency, the Food and Drug

Administration and the Department of Ener-

gy.”

01/22/2018

06/06/2018

07/19/2018

The damage done by

Trump’s Department

of the Interior

Ryan Zinke is sabo-

taging our best public

lands program

Interior Department

proposes a vast re-

working of the En-

dangered Species Act

The New Yorker

Outside Magazine

New York Times

“Under Ryan Zinke, the Secretary of the Interi-

or, it’s a sell-off from sea to shining sea.”

“The secretary of the interior was once a loud

supporter of the Land and Water Conservati-

on Fund. Now he wants to almost completely

defund it.”

“The changes are in keeping with a broader

pattern of regulatory moves in the Trump ad-

ministration aimed at reducing costs and other

burdens for business, particularly the energy

business.”

03/23/2018

Congress ignores

Trump’s priorities for

science funding

The Atlantic

“Nearly every science agency stands to get

more money under a spending bill that avoids

proposed cuts from the White House.”

05/23/2018

Internal memo sug-

gested that White

House ‘ignore’ federal

scientists’ climate re-

search.

The Washington Post Refers to the report published the previous

year.

06/09/2018

In the Trump admin-

istration, science is

unwelcome. So is ad-

vice.

New York Times

“As the president prepares for nuclear talks, he

lacks a close adviser with nuclear expertise. It’s

one example of a marginalization of science in

shaping federal policy.”

PSB 64 (3) 2018

144

beyond funding and policy. I researched the

U.S. government websites, and data from the

U.S. Bureau of Labor, to determine which

federal agencies employ scientists, and how

many scientists are employed by the U.S.

government. The list of federal agencies

employing scientists is in Box 1. This may

not be totally inclusive, but it does give an

overview of the scope of research by federal

scientists.

A comparison of the number of biological and

related scientists employed in government,

private industry, and academia is shown in

Table 2.

There are significantly more scientists

employed in government than in academia.

There are also more scientists in private

industry than in academia. According to a

recent Congressional Research Service report

(Sargent Jr., 2017), 6.9 million scientists and

engineers were employed in the United States,

of which 4.1% were life scientists. Given that

the majority of scientists are employed by

government agencies, it is surprising that

private industry outspends government

and academia by a wide margin (UNESCO,

2015). In 2012, for example, private industry

purchasing power parities (comparison of

currency rates among countries) was $249.6

billion, compared to $122.2 billion for

government and $24.9 billion for academia.

The amount of research and development

(R&D) performed as a share of state gross

domestic product (GDP) varied greatly across

the United States. California, Maryland,

Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico, and

Washington, combined, contributed to 42%

of the national R&D expenditure (UNESCO,

2015). Each of these states contributed 3.88%

and above of their state GDP to R&D. States

with the lowest expenditure of GDP for R&D

(below 0.75%) included Arkansas, Louisiana,

Nevada, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and

Wyoming (UNESCO, 2015).

How political biases may

have an impact on

science literacy

Ideological biases (consistently liberal vs.

consistently conservative) were relatively

constant from 1994 to 2004, but diverged

greatly by 2014 (Nisbet and Markowitz, 2016).

Consumption of news is influenced by political

bias. For example, 47% of conservative voters

name right-leaning Fox News as their main

source for news, whereas liberals mostly use

the New York Times, NPR, MSNBC, and CNN.

This can influence a person’s acceptance of

scientific findings as true or false. Jamieson

and Hardy (2014) found that people with

polarized views will accept or reject scientific

findings based on whether they conform to

a group’s position (conservative or liberal),

or not. For example, on topics of climate

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

U.S. Department of Energy

Central Intelligence Agency

National Science Foundation

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Environmental Protection Agency

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

U.S. Department of Interior

National Air and Space Administration

Smithsonian Institution

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

National Institutes of Health

U.S. Agency for International Development

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

National Park Service

U.S. Department of Agriculture

U.S. Forest Service

U.S. Geological Survey

Box 1. Government agencies employing scientists.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

145

change, Americans’ attitudes can affect their

interpretation of science findings (Jamieson

and Hardy, 2014; Nisbet and Markowitz,

2016). Although Americans rely on general

news outlets for science news (54%), these

outlets generally get facts about science

right only about 28% of the time (Nisbet and

Markowitz, 2016). This combination can only

be amplified in right- or left-leaning media and

when incorrect information is propagated via

social media (Bessi et al., 2015). Political bias

can also affect support for funding scientific

research as well as civic science literacy. One

has only to review the Congressional budget

process over the past 30 years to see this in

action.

The importance of

communicating science and

being involved in society

In this day and age of “alternative facts”

and “fake news,” we have a challenge in

communicating science. It is clear that science

can be misused for political agendas, and that

policy decisions based on misinformation or

ignorance can do lasting harm to society and

the environment (Oreskes and Conway, 2010).

Government scientists are using social media

to good effect to counter the information and

misinformation distributed by the current

administration via @alt_ Twitter accounts and

Facebook pages.

Scientists still have credibility for the

general public, and 44% of Americans say

they personally know, or are friends with, a

scientist (Nesbit and Markowitz, 2016). This

gives us an opportunity for outreach that is

very powerful. Scientists can reach a broad

audience at every level of society by sharing

their stories and research findings in informal

settings, through social media, by writing

articles for newspapers and blogs, and by

public lectures. We should also be working

towards presenting our findings on television

programs such as Nova and those found

on the Discovery Channel. A study by the

Pew Research Center (2009) found that the

percent of conservatives and liberals watching

science programming on these channels is

not statistically different. Jamieson and Hardy

(2014) also found that the way science is

Discipline

Government Private Industry Academia

Life, Physical, Social Science

302,780

169,500

128,010

Environmental and Geoscience

43,680

3,560

5,020

Biological Sciences

35,100

29,140

11,390

Conservation Science and Forestry

22,110

420

1,430

Medical Science

5,750

39,320

24,530

Soil and Plant Sciences

2,740

1,770

2,900

Zoology and Wildlife Biology

12,090

900

1,270

Total

424,250

244,610

174,550

Table 2. Comparison of the number of scientists employed in different science disciplines for gov-

ernment, private industry, and academia. The data are from the May 2017 release from the U.S.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. The majority of scientists employed for each discipline is in bold type.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

146

presented matters when political biases exist.

If a scientist presents contentious findings

without advocacy, and helps the audience

to understand how conclusions were made

by using techniques that allow the audience

to make inferences by analogy, the effect of

political biases can be minimized.

Currently, there are few scientists in the U.S.

Senate or House of Representatives. One

major outcome of the misuse and abuse of

science in policy-making throughout the

21st century is a record number of scientists

running for government office this year—60

for federal office, and approximately 200 for

state office (Kaufman, 2018; Manchester,

2018). Many of these scientists are seeking

to replace politicians who have voiced anti-

science beliefs. For those of us without political

ambition, it is still important that we remain

engaged in the political process. We have a

civic obligation to vote, of course, but we can

also be effective communicators on proposed

legislation that affects policy about science,

technology, education, and the environment.

We have expertise. Let’s use it.

Literature Cited

Bessi, A., M. Colletto, G. A. Davidescu, A. Scala, G.

Caldarelli, and W. Quattrociocchi. 2015. Science vs

conspiracy: collective narratives in the age of misin-

formation. PLOS One 10(2): e0118093. doi:10.1371/

journal.pone.0118093.

Jamieson, K. H. and B. W. Hardy. 2014. Leverag-

ing scientific credibility about Arctic sea ice trends

in a polarized political environment. Proceedings of

the National Academy of Sciences, USA 111: 13598-

13605.

Kaufman, A. C. 2018. The largest number of scien-

tists in modern U.S. history are running for office in

2018. This comes at a time when there’s only one

Ph.D. scientist in Congress. https://www.huffington-

post.com/entry/science-candidates_us_5a74fffde-

4b06ee97af2ae60 (accessed 09/20/18).

Manchester, J. 2018. Record number of scientists

running for office in 2018. https://thehill.com/blogs/

blog-briefing-room/news/372200-record-number-

of-scientists-running-for-office-in-2018 (accessed

09/20/18).

Nisbet, M. C. and E. Markowitz. 2016. Americans’

attitudes about science and technology: the social

context for public communication. Commission Re-

view, American Association for the Advancement of

Science.

Oreskes, N. and E. M. Conway. 2010. Merchants of

Doubt, Bloomsbury, New York. 355 pp.

Pew Research Center. 2009. Public Praises Science;

Scientists Fault Public, Media. Available at http://

www.people-press.org/2009/07/09/public-prais-

es-science-scientists-fault-public-media/ (accessed

09/20/18).

Sargent Jr J. F. 2017. The U.S. science and engineer-

ing workforce: recent, current, and projected em-

ployment, wages, and unemployment. Congressional

Research Service publication.

UNESCO. 2015. UNESCO science report – Towards

2030. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and

Cultural Organization. 410 pp.

Welcome to

New BSA Staff Member,

Amelia Neely

The BSA is pleased to welcome Amelia Nelly

to the staff! Amelia joined BSA this September

in the leadership role responsible for the

development, coordination, implementation,

and oversight of all BSA membership and

communication programs. She is also

responsible the membership programs for the

Society for the Study of Evolution (SSE) and

the Society for Economic Botany (SEB).

Amelia comes to the BSA with 16 years

of non-profit development experience

specializing in member stewardship and

database management from positions at both

the Missouri Historical Society and Forest

Park Forever. She brings a variety of interests

and skills including member acquisition

and retention campaigns management,

website development, graphic design, event

coordination, and database management.

Amelia can be reached at aneely@botany.org.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

148

Many botanical collections like herbaria or

botanical gardens perfectly match the criteria

of the definition of a museum given by the

International Council of Museums (ICOM;

Eberwein 2011). They “…acquire, conserve,

research, communicate and exhibit the

tangible and intangible heritage of humanity

and its environment for the purposes of

education, study and enjoyment”. This short

sentence shows the importance of imparting

(botanical) knowledge in the broadest sense to

all people: communicate, exhibit, and educate!

And knowledge about plants is now more

necessary than ever before. It plays a key

role in all parts of human life, reaching from

climate, biosphere, living space, agriculture,

and industry to nutrition, medicine,

pharmaceutics, and well-being. All are

influenced directly and indirectly by human

activities. Raising the level of botanical

education is therefore imperative. On the

other hand, botanical institutions suffer

from severe financial cuts and cancellation

of activities, and some botanical gardens are

severely threatened by estate speculations.

The Botanical Advocacy Leadership Grant is

a great support for institutions under pressure

like the Carinthian Botanic Center. It allows

continuation of education, new projects, and

press campaigns that influence decisions of

politicians because they have to pay attention

to their voters.

The Carinthian Botanic Center, with its small

botanical garden, is an external department

of the Regional Museum of Carinthia in

Klagenfurt, Austria. The Center comprises

the regional herbarium (KL, 240,000 sheets),

a botanical garden, a library, and a very small

microscopy lab. Though the garden is more

than 150 years old and is very active and well

known, its history is accompanied by repeated

discussions of closure. During the last 15 years

we had to beat back three closures, and the

current lease of the area where the center is

located expires in 2020. These circumstances

require clever strategies and a lot of external

support. Up to now, the most fruitful strategy

was gathering as many fans (i.e., voters) as

possible by a vivid imparting program.

Communicating botanical topics is

therefore an essential part of Carinthian

Botanic Center’s work, because it is not only

disseminating botanical information, but

also building up a stable community of fans;

enabling free advertising in press, radio, and

TV; and aiding in discussions about function

and necessity of the institution. A published

imparting program covering all age groups

and levels of education reaching from pre-

school–age children to cooperation with

Botanical Advocacy

Leadership Grant:

Much More than a Grant!

By Roland Eberwein

Department of Botany

Carinthian Botanic Center

Regional Museum of

Carinthia, Austria

E-mail: roland.eberwein@

landesmuseum.ktn.gv.at

PSB 64 (3) 2018

149

external universities and publishing the

botanical journal Wulfenia (with a Journal

Impact Factor of 1.171) turned out to be a very

helpful working tool. In several cases, it led

to reduction of external pressure to close the

botanical garden, which allowed increasing

the quality of collections and infrastructure

during that time (Eberwein, 2004).

Motivated by this success, we started a

special lecture series in the botanical garden

in summer 2004. This series is a bit unusual,

because we have no lecture room, no protection

against bad weather, and no educational

infrastructure except a flip-chart and of

course many plants and ideas (Figure 1). Our

demands on this series can be summarized

as: steadily bringing botanical knowledge to

the public without fee in an attractive garden

in all weathers, imparting topics of current

interest as well as unknown and unexpected

fields of botany and ethnobotany, giving vivid

talks without computers (see Link-Pérez et al.,

2017) and never repeating a talk or topic. Up

to now, we have given more than 260 different

talks, and the number of listeners per talk

increased from 10 to 20 to sometimes more

than 80.

The Botanical Advocacy Leadership Grant is

a remarkable tribute to all who contributed to

the success of the talks. And it allowed us to

replace a very old and defective video camera

that was used in combination with a TV for

educational purposes until about six years

ago. We decided to buy a modern camera

that can be used without any computer. The

camera is directly connected to a screen via

HDMI, and only a second cable for power

supply is needed. Technical equipment should

not become the focus of attention, and a talk

should never be restricted by operation of

gadgets. We added an adapter to the camera

(c-mount), which allows using lenses of

SLR-cameras. Lenses with manual aperture

and a broad manual focusing ring work fine.

Aperture is preselected to f/5.6 - f/11 in order

to have a broader range of sharpness without

using additional light as well as working

distance (depending on magnification). Small

parts of plants (e.g., flowers, parts of flowers

or small seeds and fruits) can easily be placed

below the lens with minimal focusing and

without completely losing eye contact with

the listeners. Passing small objects through

the audience during a talk turned out to be

counterproductive, because objects reach

back rows much too late and listeners have

no connection between object and the topic

anymore. Showing small objects via camera

and TV during the talk with direct context

to the speech is a very fine solution. Use

of camera and TV is limited by contrast

and reflections of the screen, lighting of the

object and, in our case, by rainy weather. So, a

technical check of the equipment on location

Figure 1. Lecture about the genus Tagetes in

the Botanical Garden Klagenfurt, given by Felix

Schlatti, with 56 attendees. (Photo credit: Ro-

land K. Eberwein)

PSB 64 (3) 2018

150

prior to preparation of the lecture is strongly

recommended. Our audience enjoys the new

camera and has provided very nice feedback.
The Botanical Advocacy Leadership Grant

directed great attention of the press toward

the botanical garden, and a large report about

grant, camera, and lecture series excellently

promotes our activities and strengthens the

position of the Carinthian Botanic Center for

coming negotiations.

Literature Cited

Eberwein, R. K. 2004. Education in botanic gar-

dens? A case study of a “Potemkin’s Village” in

Carinthia (Austria). In: Novikov, V. S., D. N. Ka-

vtaradze, A. K. Timonin, V. V. Murashov, and A.

V. Sherabkov. [eds.]: Fundamental problems of

botany and botanical educations: Problems and

perspectives. Abstracts of International Scientif-

ic Conference on 200-anniversary of the Dept. of

Higher Plants of MSU (Moscow, 26-30 January

2004): 154-155. KMK Scientific Press Ltd, Mos-

cow.

Eberwein, R. K. 2011. A closed book? The botan-

ical garden in Klagenfurt is a museum. Museum

Aktuell 180: 14-17. [In German]

International Council of Museums (ICOM). https://

icom.museum/en/activities/standards-guidelines/

museum-definition/ [Accessed: 2018-08-13]

Link-Pérez, M., R. Povilus, and J. McDaniel.

2017. Cutting the cord: tips for computer-free

presentation skills. Plant Science Bulletin 63(3):

158-164.

Figure 2. Felix Schlatti uses the new video camera to demonstrate the shape of ligulate flowers.

(Photo credit: Roland K. Eberwein)

PSB 64 (3) 2018

151

This summer, the Botanical Society of

America established a new section devoted to

the professional development of faculty, and

future faculty, at higher education institutions

that fit the NSF Research at Undergrad

Institutions (RUI) criteria*. Examples of

such institutions include liberal arts colleges,

community colleges, and universities with

Master’s students and few PhD students.

Primarily Undergraduate Institutions (PUIs)

share unique opportunities and challenges.

Professors at PUIs give students invaluable

research experience in the classroom and

research labs and prepare them for further

degrees and/or professions. Some PUIs also

have extraordinarily diverse student bodies

where early exposure to hands-on research

experience can be particularly influential.

Such faculty also face distinct challenges. We

balance significant teaching responsibilities

while maintaining active research programs

predominantly with undergraduate

researchers who have diverse interests and

backgrounds. We may be the only person

within a general biology department who

studies and teaches about plants. Within our

institutions, communicating about the value

of botany, and how it fits into a broader biology

or liberal arts curriculum, may take special

effort. Networks outside of our institutions are

crucial.

We estimate that a majority of institutions

represented in the BSA are PUIs, and we have

received a feedback from many colleagues that

establishing such a network of botanists across

our institutions would benefit many.

At BOTANY 2018, the steering committee

led a well-attended and productive half-day

workshop focusing on the PUI job application

process. Our panel represented a diversity of

PUI institutions. We discussed the nature of

our jobs, our institutions, our students, and

what it is like to apply for and successfully

negotiate a faculty position. The 14 participants

included current PUI faculty, people on the

job market, postdocs, and students at PUIs.

An additional 24 people attended an informal

reception near the end of the workshop for

a discussion on broader goals and future

professional development opportunities of the

PUI Plant Network. Attendees were uniformly

enthusiastic about establishing a permanent

forum to share resources, develop further

workshops, and establish mentor relationships

between folks at similar stages of their careers

and across those stages.

We’ve created a section that will maintain and

expand a primarily online professional network

throughout the year. The PUI Plant Network

BSA section is an appropriate mechanism

to establish a sustainable PUI group, and we

expect that it will grow rapidly due to the high

number of PUI faculty members of BSA.

Primarily Undergraduate

Institution (PUI) Plant Network:

The BSA’s Newest Section

By Maggie Hanes (Eastern Michigan

University) and Rachel S. Jabaily

(Colorado College)

PSB 64 (3) 2018

152

Moving forward

We plan to host a workshop at the BOTANY

conferences annually, with rotating topics.

Future ideas include: (1) conducting research

and publishing with undergraduates, (2) a

field trip with considerations and tips for

leading class field trips from the pros, (3)

best practices for R1 PIs for preparing your

students and post-docs for careers at PUIs,

and (4) getting funded at a PUI.

We will hold an annual business meeting

at BOTANY conferences to promote

involvement, propose ideas, review issues,

and select leadership. The steering committee

currently includes: Rachel Jabaily (Colorado

College), Maggie Hanes (Eastern Michigan

University), Chris Martine (Bucknell

University), Mike Moore (Oberlin College),

and Mackenzie Taylor (Creighton University).

Membership in the section

is inclusive.

We welcome past, current, and future

faculty and students at PUIs and anyone else

interested in professional development at

PUIs. (A nominal fee of $5 has been set.)

We emphasize that we view the PUI Plant

Network Section as separate from the

Teaching Section because the PUI Plant

Network Section has a focus on professional

issues at PUIs that range far beyond teaching,

and because issues in teaching may apply to

all types of institutions. We look forward

to working with the Teaching Section and

occasionally hosting joint workshops.

For more information, please contact a

member of the steering committee. Also,

please use the hashtag #PUIPlantNetwork in

your social media.

*NSF PUI designation are accredited colleges

and universities, including two year community

colleges, that award Associate’s degrees,

Bachelor’s degrees, and/or Master’s degrees in

NSF supported fields, but have awarded 20 or

fewer PhDs in all NSF supported fields during

the combined previous two academic years.

Figure 1.

The PUI Plant Network reception from BOTANY 2018.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

153

Your social media accounts… hijacked. Your

friends… hit with a barrage of spam. Your

PC… held for ransom. Your money…. gone.

Yep, it’s 2018 and it’s well past time to take

seriously the threats out there on the internet.

It seems that over the last few years, as the

internet and other connected technologies

become more sophisticated and we depend on

them even more, there are more and greater

threats to our data safety than ever. Some of

these have hit quite close to home, impacting

the officers and sectional leaders of the

Botanical Society of America. We would like

to remind all of our members of what to look

for and basic steps to take to protect yourself

from those out there who seek to do us harm.

The basic problem is that there is a lot of

money to be made doing nefarious things

on the internet. Bad actors get big bucks to

spread spam about cheap Ray Bans, take

control of your computers and only release

them for a ransom, or to gain access to your

money through insecure or stolen login

accounts. Here are some examples of the main

approaches they take to do this.

By Rob Brandt

Information and

Technology Director-

Botanical Society of

America

rbrandt@botany.org

Protecting Your Online Presence

Helpful Hints from the BSA’s

Information & Technology Director

Account Hacking

The goal is to find out what your passwords are

to your website accounts. Once they have even

one of your accounts, they will attempt to find

other places where that account information

is used, such as banks, investment companies,

PayPal, Facebook, etc., because many people

use the same login information on many

different websites. They can use a variety of

methods to do this: “dictionary” attacks, where

they try and login at a site they know you use,

using all words in a dictionary or other source

until they find one that works. Or they’ll look

you up on Facebook to learn about you, and

use your pet’s name, your hometown, your

spouse’s name or other information to guess

your password or the security questions

that will allow them to reset your password

themselves.

Phishing

Phishing is when the bad actors try to get

someone—anyone—to respond to a message

that will allow them to get your login

information, credit card numbers, social

security number, etc. They aren’t targeting

you personally, but once they have your

personal information they will do bad things

with it. An example would be a “tech support”

message from Microsoft, Apple, Bank of

America, the IRS, etc. that prompts recipients

to click on a link. The page it takes them to

looks exactly like the real site it pretends to

be, and they are prompted to log in or make

PSB 64 (3) 2018

154

President, and Lucinda the Treasurer. All

this information is publicly available on the

BSA “current officers” website. The phisher

used the e-mail addresses listed on that page.

What’s even more impressive is that this

e-mail is signed by “Andi”, and it’s not evident

on our page that Andrea uses that nickname.

They apparently did other research elsewhere

to find that—perhaps her social media

accounts. It’s important to recognize that no

data breach enabled this attack; it’s all public,

benign information. But it’s put together in a

way that would be totally believable if it were

a normal thing for Andrea to ask Lucinda for

a transfer of funds. (It’s not.) This was a very

clever attack. “Spear phishing” is called that

because it’s very similar to actual spear fishing,

in which the fisher dives, spots a particular

fish, and targets it.

Protecting Ourselves from

Attacks

So how do we protect ourselves from these

attempts to do us harm? Short of unplugging

from the internet, there are a few basic things

we can do to make it difficult for bad actors to

succeed.

Passwords

Use safe passwords, change them fairly often,

and don’t use anything that can be found in

a dictionary or other information about you

online. Obviously don’t use “password” or

“123456” or other silly things. If you do, know

that you are already hacked. Many websites

require you to have a secure password using

certain rules, but by far the most important

thing you can do is to use a pass phrase, not

a pass word. String together a short sentence

that will be easy to remember, and yes, include

a payment. Once you do that, the bad guys

have your information and/or your money. It’s

called “phishing” because it is very much like

real fishing; you put some bait on a hook and

cast it into the water, hoping a fish will bite.

When they bite, you’ve caught your fish.

Spear Phishing

Spear phishing is very much like regular

phishing, except the phisher has his/her eye

on you specifically and are setting bait that

will appeal to you specifically. It takes a great

deal more effort for them to do this, but the

payoff is far higher if it works. I will use an

incident we recently encountered at the BSA

as an example:

From: Patsy Yates <winstonrose00@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 4:00 AM

Subject: Urgent Transaction

To: lmcdade@rsabg.org

Hello Lucinda

Can we make an urgent Transfer of $5,600

today ? So I will forward you the vendor

details for payment. Thanks
Best Regards

Andi Wolfe

This message sent to Lucinda McDade (BSA

Treasurer) purported to be from Andrea Wolfe

(BSA President) asks to transfer $5,600 “today”.

(Lucinda recognized that it was suspicious

immediately and alerted us.) There are a

few items in this e-mail that are impressive,

showing the research the phisher did to make

it appear to be an authentic request. There’s

a genuine relationship between Lucinda and

Andrea, in that they are both on the Board of

the Botanical Society of America. It seems

reasonable that Andrea would request funds

from Lucinda because Andrea is the current

PSB 64 (3) 2018

155

a few odd characters just to make it extra

difficult to guess. You should also update

your passwords from time to time, because

you may not know your password has been

compromised until much later.

Password Managers

Use an encrypted password manager to keep

track of your passwords. Don’t just save

them to a simple file on your computer or

smartphone, because if hackers gain access

to your device, they will then have all your

passwords. One of the first things a hacker

will do on a newly hacked device is search

it for “password” to find everything stored

there. Password Managers are designed to

keep them safe. The data are stored in an

encrypted database, and can only be accessed

if you have a password. Use a different

password on the password manager than the

one you use for the device, so that the hacker

will need to know TWO passwords to get at

your other passwords. There are numerous

password managers available, but one good

one available for many devices, and is free,

is KeePass (https://keepass.info/download.

html). The database format is universal, so

you can keep your password database on all

your devices.

Single Sign-on

Many websites allow you to sign on with an

account from another service. For example

you can sign on with your Facebook, Twitter,

Gmail or Amazon account. There are some

downsides to doing this, but the one huge

advantage is that the site you are using

your Facebook account on does not get your

password. The least trustworthy sites are

the ones from small operators who cannot

afford full-time security specialists. Those

are the sites that get breached the most. It’s

a really good thing if they never even see

your password. The downside of this is that

Facebook and others can then share other less

critical information with the site, such as your

e-mail address, list of friends, etc. When you

first create a new account using your existing

Facebook or other account, you should be

notified of what is being shared; note it and

consider whether it’s an acceptable tradeoff

for you.

Use Plain Text E-mail

We all like nicely formatted e-mail. Hackers

like it even more, because it allows them to

obscure what they are doing, making it more

likely that you will click on some variety of

phishing attack. The previous example of the

spear phishing attack is a perfect example.

Everything looks legitimate except for the

“from” line at the top. The message purported

to be from Andrea Wolfe, but the “from” said:

“From: Patsy Yates <winstonrose00@gmail.

com>.“ In this article, that’s plainly obvious.

But most people pay more attention to the

content of a message than who it’s “from.”

The phisher could have taken an extra step of

changing the “from” to:“From: Andrea Wolfe

<winstonrose00@gmail.com>“ and it would

have been harder for Lucinda to see who it

really was from.

Links in the text are similar. A plain text

e-mail to a phishing site might display a link

such as https://wellsfargo.asldkjalfjhlaksdjf.ru,

whereas a nicely formatted e-mail will simply

show “Wells Fargo”, and you can only see the

URL it points to by hovering your mouse over

it, or (yikes) clicking on it. And once you click

on it, and it looks like a Wells Fargo page, are

you going to look at the URL to make sure

PSB 64 (3) 2018

156

that’s really where you are? Probably not.

As a bonus, recent studies have shown

that plain text e-mails get read more often

than formatted ones. I believe the reason is

that formatted e-mails look too much like

newsletters, and no one reads newsletters

(right?). So there’s additional reason to just

keep it plain. Just say “no” to html e-mail.

Just pay attention!

Be aware that the internet is not a safe place,

and keep your mind engaged when you are

browsing the web or reading your e-mail. The

e-mail to Lucinda failed because it was an odd

request, and she knew it. Think about whether

you were expecting to receive requests for

information, or tasks to perform. Don’t

download files just because someone asks you

to. There’s no shame in verifying that it really

came from whom it claims to be from. Look

at URLs that links send you to, and look at the

“from” on e-mails to be sure they make sense.

The internet can be a dangerous place, just like

anywhere else in the world. But you don’t have

to get hurt if you do the basics to keep yourself

safe. Understand where the dangers are and

what they want to do, keep your sensitive

information safe, use good security measures,

and above all pay attention.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

157

Science and Civic

Participation

Before becoming scientists, we were citizens

of somewhere. As such, we have a basic

civic responsibility to make an informed

vote in our registered locale. What we

may forget in our busy professional lives

is that this is our basic responsibility to ensure

our democratic institutions continue to

operate. As scientists, we can easily overlook

additional civic duties we have earned by

developing our expertise: educating and

engaging with those trying to understand

science-related policy issues, evaluating

policy positions on their empirical merits,

and holding our elected leaders accountable.

The challenges of the 21st century require scientific

solutions, evidence-based decision-making, and

greater civic engagement by scientists. Many of

us are now more inspired than ever to become

involved in our democracy. However, the

multitude of options can be overwhelming,

resulting in inaction. Here, we provide a

framework for participating in civic life as a

scientist in ways that can effect real change.

By Ingrid Jordon-Thaden (University of California Berkeley),

ASPT EPPC Chair, Krissa Skogen (Chicago Botanic Garden),

and Kal Tuominen (Metropolitan State University), BSA PPC

Co-Chairs

Commit to a Satisfying

Connection

Determine the amount of time you can commit

and the type of engagement that is compelling

to you. Then push yourself outside of your

comfort zone, just as you do in other areas of

your life. You will be more effective if you are

realistic about your strengths, interests, and

what you can commit. Few of us will spend

a career in science policy, but most of us can

create time to speak or volunteer at a one-day

event. All efforts are important, no matter

how small!

Evaluate and Hold

Accountable

Scientists with policy experience seem to

share a common refrain: most policymakers

value scientific input, but they don’t always

remember to create a seat at the table for

those who can provide it. Evaluating elected

officials and candidates for office on their

willingness to reserve a seat for us is a deeper

way scientists can support civil society.

Do you know where

candidates in your district

stand on science issues? How

have incumbents voted in

the past? For the midterm

elections, American Institute

of Biological Sciences (AIBS)

has teamed up with 11 other

science-related organizations

to create the Science Debate

2018 questionnaire. Whether

and how candidates respond

Public Policy News

PSB 64 (3) 2018

158

can help us evaluate candidates’ ability to

lead. View candidates’ responses at https://

sciencedebate.org/sciencedebate-index.html.

Don’t see your candidate’s answers? Send an

e-mail encouraging him or her to respond!

Another way to hold candidates accountable

is to attend a town hall or debate and ask

questions about their views on science-related

issues. Questions might relate to government

funding for science, climate change, public

lands, food security, natural disaster

preparedness, or other issues. The goal is to

get candidates to state their positions on the

record.

Educate and Engage

Politics can muddy the waters on scientific

issues for the general public, even when the

weight of evidence is clear to us. Election season

is a great time to educate voters about scientific

consensus and its connection to policy. We can

also educate each other: share what you learn

about candidate positions and voting records with

your peers to help them make an informed vote!

Finally, consider helping a science-savvy candidate

get out the vote. Campaigns need the most

volunteers in the week before the election. Voter

engagement involves calling and knocking on the

doors of likely supporters. Speaking with undecided

voters in a close election can help determine the

outcome! You can practice your pitch during a

brief volunteer training: “As a scientist, I value using

evidence to make policy decisions that impact the

lives of all Americans. [Candidate X] has a track

record of supporting science and using knowledge

and sound reasoning in policy decisions. For

these reasons, I feel they are a strong candidate

for office and encourage you to vote for them

on November 6.”

If all of that seems too easy, we have one last

question: have you considered running for

office in 2020?

PSB 64 (3) 2018

159

Just about 2 1/2 weeks before the start of

our annual conference this year, staff at

the Botanical Society of America received

word—via Twitter—that at least two of our

members were denied U.S. visas and were

unable to attend our BOTANY 2018 meeting

in Rochester, MN. The conference is a unique

and welcoming venue where botanists share

current research, develop collaborations,

establish and strengthen networks, and

generally enjoy the camaraderie of the plant

science community. We knew the travel ban

would affect the scientific community, but

until we saw their tweets, we did not know how

many plant scientists would miss our meeting.

As soon as we learned of their plights, we leapt

into action to figure out how we could help

them to participate.

As with many professional conferences at

two weeks out, the sessions’ agendas had

already been carefully arranged, which made

the creation of a separate “remote presenter”

session unlikely. However, we knew we could

and should allow our missing attendees to

present their work remotely; we just needed

to work out the details. The BSA does have

How the BSA Helped Members

Affected by the the U.S. Travel

Ban at BOTANY 2018

a Zoom Video Communications account,

which has been consistently reliable and

effective for remote meetings and training

webinars for our organization. Therefore

we were confident we could pull in our two

international participants—one in Canada,

whose Ph.D. was completed on the west coast

of the United States, and one in Denmark,

who was slated to present work completed at

the Smithsonian in Washington, D.C.—via

Zoom.

Preparation

To get started, we needed to make sure that

our remote presenters felt comfortable with

Zoom. We knew that the transition from local

to remote presenter and back again could be

tricky, especially with the tight timetable for

each session. In light of this, one week prior

to their sessions and three days before the

start of the conference, we held a practice ses-

sion with both scientists to allow them time

to practice using the Zoom platform - finding

and adjusting the video and audio controls,

sharing their screens, etc. Each presentation

looked good and worked smoothly during the

practice sessions, and each presenter noted

and set the proper microphone and camera

settings for the real deal.
Once the BSA staff were at the Mayo Clinic

Civic Center, in Rochester, MN, we set up

practice Zoom meetings to establish the

appropriate settings on the computers to be

used in each room. The one caveat, we knew,

would be the internet connection, because

By Jodi Creasap Gee, PhD

BSA Education Technology

Coordinator

E-mail:

JCreasapGee@botany.org

PSB 64 (3) 2018

160

we were using Wifi and not the hardwired

connection. There was a very real chance that

the remote presentations would hit a snag

with an internet connection that could be

laggy due to excessive use. After our on-site

practice run looked good, we felt ready to roll

with the presentations.

Delivery

The reality of the situation was that we needed

to use the hard-wired internet connection

in the session rooms to guarantee that there

would be no interruptions to the remote

presentations, which is what happened with

the first presenter. Her audio became garbled,

and the slides were pixelated. We quickly

overcame the issue by tethering the room

computer to a phone’s hotspot for the duration

of the 15-minute presentation. The second

presentation went a little more smoothly, and

we immediately starting making notes on

what to do in 2019, in case we need to address

this issue in the future.

Outlook

Several of us have brainstormed about options

and possibilities for subsequent meetings,

and we are determined to be prepared for the

possibility of remote presentations. While

our ultimate goal is to develop a protocol for

remote presenters denied U.S. visas, we do

have a few ideas of what we can do better next

year.

First and foremost, remote presenters need

more practice ahead of time. This means they

should run through their presentations at least

once prior to the actual session time. Because

our scientific program contains 15-minute

talks, we need to improve our efficiency in

this capacity to ensure that presenters are

comfortable with the platform and can use it

with great ease.

Due to the transition time from local to remote

and vice versa, remote presenters should be

scheduled at the beginning or the end of the

session.

This one seems like a no-brainer, but

establishing a signal to give the presenter a 5-,

3-, and 1-minute warning is critical. No one

likes to cut anyone off, and it feels especially

rude when the person being cut off isn’t even

in the room. Surprisingly, in our case, the

chat box of the Zoom platform was not quite

enough to get the presenter’s attention.

Most importantly, we need to accept that

the U.S. travel ban will affect the foreseeable

future of scientific congress in the United

States, and we need to be diligent in keeping

our international colleagues in the scientific

community. The Botanical Society of America

is taking on this challenge, and we hope

that our fellow botanists know that we have

not abandoned them or their efforts and

collaborations.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

161

Botany 2018 - in your words.....

comments from the post-conference survey!

Fantastic meeting this year. the

energy was phenomenal

Another great conference with a lot

of interesting talks.

Great! This year's food (breakfast, snacks,

opening/closing reception) was A+

Botany is my fav conference.

Everyone is so nice

and supportive

I thought that over-

all this was one of

the better

Botany conferences

that I have attended.

Being around all the "plant people" at

Botany is so much fun!

I always enjoy this meeting

PSB 64 (3) 2018

162

Botany 2018 was my first con-

ference and I absolutely loved

it. Everything was very orga-

nized, there was a lot of diversi-

ty within the presentations, and

there were lots of social

and networking opportunities.

I thought the diversity of

science was great.

I love the atmosphere of

this conference.

Everybody is friendly

and it is a nice and in-

spiring environment.

I am looking forward

for the next one

Botany conferences have the most

friendly people, I really enjoy

attending these conferences.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

163

California Botanists gather for breakfast!

PSB 64 (3) 2018

164

For the past several years, the conference has participated in a volunteer project to give back to

our host city. On Sunday of the conference a number of dedicated souls board a bus and go off

to do some good! They get a commemorative t-shirt, a lunch, a water bottle, and a feeling of

being a do-gooder! Here is an account of this year's project!

Volunteering for the Botany In Action outing this summer started

with a 20-minute bus ride from the conference center to a protected

area that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is

restoring to something resembling its appearance and composition

before the arrival of Messrs P. Bunyan, J. Appleseed, and J. Deere.

Two state conservationists met us there and gave us a short talk

on the history of the vegetation of the area and on the techniques

that Minnesota is using to foster the native flora. The area in

front of us, one of low hills and ridges formerly partly forested

and partly more open and shrub-dominated, had not received the

undivided attention of the three gentlemen named above, but had

nevertheless been significantly altered over the last two centuries.

Our job was to remove as many individuals of sumac (Rhus glabra L.)

as we could from one of the hillsides. As the conservation officials

explained to us, sumac, although a native species, has become

invasive in some more-or-less intact ecological zones, crowding

out other native species restricted to these zones. We were given

gloves and provided with sturdy loppers, long-handled cutters

that easily slice through any stem less than 2 inches diameter,

and then spaced ourselves a few yards apart at the base of the

shrub-and-grass-covered hill and started hunting for 1- to 4-foot

tall shrubs with compound leaves and glaucous lower surfaces.

It was a hot day, but everyone worked at his/her own pace, and by

noon we had nearly reached the top of the hill, leaving behind us

hundreds of prone, silver-green victims. At that point we went

downhill to the stack of lunchboxes, the bus back to town, and to the

DNR’s assurances that we’d made a real contribution to the labor-

intensive work of suppressing the invasive sumac.

Gordon

McPherson

PSB 64 (3) 2018

165

And the winner is.....

With many thanks to Aurora Storage,

Chris Havron of Campbell University

was the winner of the

Herbarium Cabinet raffle at Botany 2018

Visit Tucson raffled off free airfare to the

Botany 2019 conference.

Martin Kalfatovic of the Smithsonian is the winner!

See you all in Tucson!

166

Harvard University Bullard Fellowships in Forest Research

Annually Harvard University awards a limited number of Bullard Fellowships to individuals in

biological, social, physical and political sciences, and the arts to promote advanced study or the

integration of subjects pertaining to forested ecosystems. The program seeks to allow mid-career

individuals to develop their own scientific and professional growth by utilizing the resources

and interacting with personnel in any department within Harvard University. In recent years

Bullard Fellows have been associated with the Harvard Forest, Department of Organismic and

Evolutionary Biology, and the J. F. Kennedy School of Government and have worked in areas of

ecology, forest management, policy, and conservation. Stipends up to $60,000 are available for

periods ranging from six months to one year and are not intended for travel, graduate students,

or recent post-doctoral candidates. Applications from international scientists, women, and

minorities are encouraged. Additional information is available on the Harvard Forest website

at http://harvardforest.fas.harvard.edu. Annual deadline for applications is January 15.

ANNOUNCEMENTS

FROM THE

PSB

ARCHIVES

60 years ago: BSA publications have always been an important venue for sharing methodology. In 1958,

F.W. Went describes the Mobile Desert Laboratory as a tool for studying the biology of desert plants. Today this

article might appear in Applications in Plant Sciences.

“During the last fifteen years I had been studying problems concerning desert plants. I found that their

germination occurred only under very special conditions which did not prevail every year and very often did

not occur in the same locality more than once every five to ten years. . .

To overcome the problems of a fixed location, a mobile desert laboratory was designed, partly on the basis

of the car park of the Land Research and Regional Surveys Division of the Commonwealth Scientific and Indus-

trial Research Organization in Australia and partly on the truck-based ecological laboratories which had been

surveying the Sahara desert. Through the generosity of Mrs. Pearl McManus of Palm Springs these plans could

be realized and in the autumn of 1956 the first trial runs were made. In the intervening 2 years the laboratory

has proven its effectiveness and now a short description of its facilities can be given. -Went, F.W. “A Mobile

Desert Laboratory “ PSB 4(6): 1-3

50 years ago: The Pelton Award in Experimental Plant Morphology was established. “The Conservation

and Research Foundation has established the Jeanette Siron Pelton Award in Experimental Plant Morphology.

This award, honoring the memory of Jeanette Siron Pelton, will consist of a $1,000 premium to be given not

more often than annually to a person selected for his sustained and imaginative productivity in the field of

experimental plant morphology. The field may be broadly defined to include the subcellular, cellular and or-

ganismal levels of complexity. The award will not be restricted as to sex, nationality or society affiliation of the

recipient, nor as to the language in which his work is published. -PSB 14(4): 4

[Note: The Editor believes that the use of only the masculine pronoun in a sentence directly stating that the

award will not be restricted as to sex highlights the need for the careful use of gender-neutral language.]

167

he publication process can be especial-

ly daunting for new authors who must

navigate the intricate submission steps and

the “mystery” of peer-review. Early career

authors are also under substantial pressure to

publish to develop their professional portfolio.

Is there anything that new authors can do to

maximize the chance that their article will be

accepted? The answer is, “Yes!” The following

tips and suggestions are based on a workshop

held by a panel of editors and reviewers at the

BOTANY 2018 meeting in Rochester, Minne-

sota, on July 22, 2018.

The Editorial Perspective

In order for your manuscript to be accepted

and published, you, the author, must first

understand what editors are looking for.

Because more manuscripts are submitted to

How to Publish Your Research:

Tips for Junior Researchers

journals than can be published, editors have

to carefully discriminate among submitted

manuscripts to identify those of high quality

that also match the scope and audience of

the journal. Understanding what editors are

looking for will greatly increase your chances

of having your manuscript selected for peer

review and possibly publication.

Upon receiving a manuscript, an editor

immediately asks two questions. Your goal is

to convince the editor that the answer to these

two questions is yes.

1. Is the paper appropriate for the journal?

• As an author, you need to do your background

research on the journal to make sure it is a good

match for your manuscript.

• Know your target journal: Does your manu-

script align with its aims and scope?

Written with assistance and input from Pamela K. Diggle, Amy McPherson, Beth Parada,

Richard Hund, Loren H. Rieseberg, J. Chris Pires, Stacey D. Smith, and William E. Friedman

SPECIAL FEATURES

By Theresa Culley
Department of Biological Sciences, University of

Cincinnati, 614 Rieveschl Hall, Cincinnati, OH

45221-0006

E-mail: theresa.culley@uc.edu, Tel: 513-556-9705

PSB 64 (3) 2018

168

• What types of papers have already been pub-

lished there? Are they similar to yours?

• How are existing papers framed? What is the

context of their work?

• Who is the audience of your paper? Is this jour-

nal one where your work would be read and

cited?

• Look at the editorial board; is there a

member with the necessary expertise to

handle your paper?

2. Should the manuscript go out for review?

To answer this question, the editor will look at

the Title, Abstract, and Cover Letter.

• The title should be succinct and descriptive (ap-

proximately 16 or so words).

• The abstract must justify the study and explain

why it is needed and interesting; often this is the

only text that the editor will review (and not the

entire manuscript).

• Is the abstract, and the paper itself, in compre-

hensible English? Is it evident that the author

has worked hard to polish the writing?

• The cover letter is critical to communicate the

importance of the study to the editor, who may

not have expertise in your particular field of

study. Its purpose is to (1) tell the editor why

your paper is suitable for the journal, and (2) ex-

plain how the work advances the field. It should

not merely reiterate the abstract, but must an-

swer the following questions regarding your

manuscript:

What are the questions addressed or

hypotheses tested?

What is the major contribution of your

paper to your discipline?

How is this contribution of interest to

the readership of the journal?

Tips for the Editorial

Process

Based on our combined experiences of

over 160 years serving as editors, authors,

and reviewers for a variety of journals, we

developed the following tips to maximize the

possibility of acceptance of a manuscript in a

peer-reviewed scientific journal.

A. Pre-Publication

• Wait until you have generated a substantial

data set with a thorough analysis before submit-

ting to a high-impact journal. Although there

may be lots of pressure to publish, resist the urge

to publish several small, frivolous papers (some-

times known as “least publishable units”) just

to increase your publication rate. At the same

time, you do not need to include everything in a

single paper; reviewers will not want to read an

entire thesis with an abundance of supplemen-

tal tables. Instead, editors and reviewers want to

see a big “take-home” message condensed with-

in a cohesive, concise paper.

• Take ownership of your research and consider

how it will appeal to the general public, even

while you are still doing the study. If appropri-

ate, take video and photos and keep a detailed

journal of your research; this is especially valu-

able if your article will eventually be promoted

on social media.

B. Finding the Right Journal

• Submit to the right journal: Carefully review

the aims and scope of the journal, and look at

other examples of what has been recently pub-

lished. Is the journal the right “home” for your

paper? Will it reach your intended audience?

What is the average turnaround time? How is

the journal perceived in your field? You can

aim high for a specific journal, but always have

PSB 64 (3) 2018

169

a back-up plan of other journals to consider if

your manuscript is not sent for peer review or

not accepted at the journal of your first choice.

• If you are unsure if the journal is the right “fit”,

ask! Contact the editorial office with any ques-

tions about whether your manuscript is appro-

priate, providing a compelling argument of why

you think it is, and including at least the title and

abstract. The editors may be able to offer advice

for submitting a successful manuscript—or of-

fer suggestions for alternative outlets for your

work. This could save you time and trouble.

• Avoid predatory journals. In the search for an

ideal journal, be aware of and avoid for-profit,

online-only journals that promise rapid pub-

lication but have low quality. The purpose of

these journals is solely for their own financial

benefit, often charging either very low ($50-

$60 US) or very high ($2000-$5000) fees. In

addition, predatory journals typically advertise

rapid publication, but their peer review is often

a sham; such journals are not indexed in ma-

jor services such as Web of Science. Predatory

journals devalue science and can be detrimental

to individual professional advancement; hiring

and promotion committees are increasingly not

accepting articles in predatory journals. Simi-

larly, authors now need to think about whether

articles they cite are from these sham journals.

Predatory journals can be identified using

Beall’s List (https://beallslist.weebly.com) or Ca-

bell’s Blacklist (https://www2.cabells.com). Au-

thors can also identify predatory journals using

common red flags (see Culley, 2018). One ca-

veat is that some new journals (especially in de-

veloping countries) may be unfairly identified

as predatory, so you need to carefully research

your choice of a journal.

C. Preparing Your Paper for Submission

• Follow directions in the Instructions for Au-

thors for your chosen journal and prepare your

paper as carefully as possible, especially if there

are word limits, required formats to follow for

particular article types, or other requirements

(e.g., structured abstracts, minimum number of

key words, data accessibility statements, author

contribution paragraphs). Manuscripts may be

returned without review if there are too many

deviations from the author guidelines.

• Seek feedback from others. Make sure that

your paper has been thoroughly vetted by other

readers (such as fellow members of your labora-

tory) for content as well as for presentation. Ty-

pos, misspellings, and grammatical and punctu-

ation errors signal to editors and reviewers that

the paper is sloppy, and they may be disinclined

to rate it highly (or in some cases, may even re-

fuse to review it). A well-prepared and carefully

written paper will keep editors and reviewers

more favorably disposed toward your paper so

they can focus on the paper’s content; this can

speed up the review process.

• If you have any questions, contact the edito-

rial office. They are there to help you. The ed-

itorial staff works with all other individuals in

the process (reviewers, editors, readers, the pro-

duction team that will compose your article for

publication, etc.), and they are a good resource

for helping you succeed in the publication pro-

cess.

• Know your audience. In particular, write the

paper with your reviewers and readers already

in mind. What would you think if you were re-

viewing this paper? As a reader, what informa-

tion would you really like to know?

• Tell a good story to hook readers and persuade

them to read further. Make the paper interest-

ing to non-specialists in your field or those who

work with different taxa. This may require that

you think broadly beyond your own study sys-

tem. Write your paper in such a way that people

outside of your immediate area can appreciate

it and apply what they have learned to other

PSB 64 (3) 2018

170

systems. Address a consequential question in

plant biology, evolution, ecology, or conserva-

tion that is relevant beyond your study taxon.

This is where hard work on the introduction

and discussion, with strong literature referenc-

es, will pay off. How do your specific findings

illuminate a broader set of questions or ongoing

intellectual debates?

• Use the most up-to-date and appropriate an-

alytical procedures. Some papers may be re-

jected simply because the analysis is perceived

as not being as rigorous as it could have been.

Reviewers will expect you to justify your choices

of analytical methods and statistical tests, and

provide a detailed description of each. Be sure

to look at similar papers in your target journal

to see how the data were analyzed.

• Generate great figures! A carefully constructed

and effective figure can often communicate a

difficult concept or result more easily and con-

cisely than text. Figures make papers aestheti-

cally interesting and appealing to reviewers and

readers alike.

• Make sure your data are archived and public-

ly accessible. This is increasingly being required

by many peer-reviewed journals and serves to

advance your field (see Culley, 2017).

D. Submitting Your Paper

• Prepare your cover letter with care. If you

have never done this before, ask other research-

ers for examples of cover letters from their ac-

cepted papers, especially for the journal that you

are targeting. See above for more information.

• Suggest five appropriate reviewers and not

just the obvious ones in your references, if the

journal allows reviewer suggestions. This helps

the editor find reviewers in a timely manner to

speed the review process. Be sure that none of

your suggested reviewers have conflicts of inter-

est (e.g., a former or current mentor or advisor).

If you are unsure, do not hesitate to ask an editor.

• Look at the Associate Editors of the journal

and suggest someone who might be appro-

priate to handle for your paper—that also helps

facilitate the process.

• Once you have submitted your paper—con-

gratulations! Now the wait begins. Be patient,

but also do not be afraid to “check in” with the

editorial office if the review process seems to be

taking a long time.

E. After Peer Review

• After receiving your reviews, take a deep breath,

and wait at least a day before responding if they

are negative (and longer is probably better). In

some cases, you may understandably be upset,

but wait until you can consider the reviewers’

comments objectively. Immediate responses

in the heat of the moment do not generally fare

well with the editorial staff and the reviewers.

Once you have completed your revision, con-

struct a careful cover letter that provides a de-

tailed description of how you responded to each

point raised in the reviews. If you disagree with

a reviewer’s request or criticism and choose not

to make a change to the manuscript, carefully

explain your reasoning (see next bullet point).

Point-by-point responses, even when you do

not wish to make a change in an area, make the

evaluation of your revision more efficient.

• The reviewer is always right (even if they are not

actually right). If your paper was not accepted

but revisions are requested, look carefully at the

reviewer comments. If you disagree with any

comment, provide a constructive and polite

response; remember that the original reviewer

may be asked by the editor for his or her assess-

ment of your response. Even if you disagree

with a comment, try to understand what the

reviewer’s issue might be to determine what ef-

fort is needed (i.e., put yourself in the reviewer’s

shoes); make at least some effort to address it.

One effective response is to modify the text for

PSB 64 (3) 2018

171

clarity if there appears to have been some confu-

sion. Remember that the review process allows

you to benefit from the expertise of your review-

ers, who have typically invested significant time

and effort to help you publish the best possible

version of your research.

• Revise with the fewest number of changes. A

drastic change to one part on the manuscript

may inadvertently affect the flow and compre-

hension of the rest of the paper. Thus, always be

sure to read your paper from start to finish af-

ter you have completed your revisions to make

sure that everything still flows and makes sense.

Also, double-check tables and figures to make

sure they agree with the revised text.

F. Post Publication

• Put together a press package using information

you gathered earlier. This could include a lay-

man’s summary of your study, as well as suitable,

non-stock images and graphics. Journalists

often choose to write about papers because of

great pictures!

• Promote on social media. Don’t be afraid to

tweet an announcement about your new paper!

Ask the journal staff what they might do to also

help promote your article.

If you carefully follow these tips, you’ll soon

be on your way to a strong publication record.

Although the process of publishing your work

can be arduous, the combination of your

efforts along with the those of the reviewers

and the editors will ensure that the final article

is of high quality and high impact. Thus, our

overall message here is: Don’t Give Up. Even

if your paper is rejected from a journal, think

carefully and objectively about why, make

appropriate modifications, and submit to

another journal. Also, there is considerable

stochasticity in the review process, so

remember the old adage “Try, Try Again.” The

experience publishing your work will not only

build your skills as a communicator, but will

strengthen your science, which benefits the

entire community.

Literature Cited

Culley, T. 2017. The frontier of data discoverabil-

ity: Why we need to share our data. Applications

in Plant Sciences 5(10): 1700111. https://onlineli-

brary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.3732/apps.1700111

Culley, T. 2018. How to Avoid Predatory Journals

When Publishing Your Work. Plant Science Bul-

letin 64(2): 96-111.

https://botany.org/file.php?file=SiteAssets/

publications/psb/issues/PSB-2018-64-2.pdf

PSB 64 (3) 2018

172

n A Short History of Botany in the United

States, Ewan designated the period from

1797 to 1818 as “the Barton Epoch.” This was

primarily for his botanical textbook, the first

published in America, (Barton, 1803). But

Benjamin Smith Barton (1766-1815) was also

known as a teacher who “taught Baldwin,

Darlington, Ives, Horsfield, and many less

well remembered students. He played decisive

roles in the lives of William Bartram, [Fred-

erick] Pursh, and [Thomas] Nuttall” (Ewan,

1969, p. 38). He also taught David Hosack,

who went on to teach Botany and Materia

Medica in New York (Sundberg, 2011). Barton

helped to make Philadelphia one of the cen-

ters of botany in the United States. He pub-

lished extensively in many aspects of natural

history and hoped to publish a Flora of North

America. He had a particular interest in Na-

tive Americans, their language, and their uses

of plants, which could be incorporated into

Materia Medica (see publications list in Ewan

and Ewan, 2007). He shared many of these

interests with Thomas Jefferson and thus was

charged to train Meriwether Lewis in natural

history in preparation for the voyage of dis-

covery. In fact, Jefferson sent his grandson,

Thomas Jefferson Randolph, to Philadelphia

to study natural history and botany with Bar-

ton (Ewan and Ewan, 2007, pp. 787-788). One

of Barton’s most outstanding graduates was

William Darlington (1782-1863). Upon his

graduation Dr. Darlington collected a quan-

tity of rare seeds at the Calcutta Botanical

Garden and distributed them to a number of

American botanists including Barton, Hosack

in New York and David Ramsey in Charles-

ton, South Carolina (Ewan and Ewan, 2007,

pp. 556-558). He later collected and published

extensively on the plants of Chester County,

Pennsylvania. Darlington, the student, is the

primary source for this paper.

In 2011 I summarized Barton’s pivotal role

in American Botanical education (Figure

1). Briefly, Barton, who was born in 1766

in Lancaster, PA, enrolled in the College of

Philadelphia in 1785 hoping to study botany

under Linnaeus’ student, Adam Kuhn.

However, Kuhn no longer taught botany and

the following year Barton left for Edinburgh.

But again, his botanical interests were foiled.

Dr. John Hope, Professor of Botany, who

had studied under de Jussieu in Paris and

was a proponent of the new

Linnean System, died shortly

after Barton arrived. However,

Hope had established a five-

acre botanic garden that he used

extensively for teaching and that

contained many plants provided

by John and William Bartram of

Philadelphia. Barton was familiar

with many of these plants and no

doubt appreciated the benefits of

Barton’s College Botany at the

University of Pennsylvania, 1804

By Marsh Sundberg

Department of Biology

Emporia State University

Emporia, KS 66801

E-mail: msundber@emporia.edu

PSB 64 (3) 2018

173

this garden for learning botany, yet after three

years of study he left the University without

a degree (Ewan and Ewan, 2007; Sundberg,

2011). He arranged to take an honorary

degree from the University of Keil (see Ewan

and Ewan, 2007, pp. XV, 844, correction of

Barton and Barton, 1836) in the fall of 1789

and was immediately elected Professor of

Natural History and Botany at the College of

Philadelphia upon his return to Philadelphia

later that year (Barton, 1900). This despite

the admission that “I have never attended

any lectures, however imperfect, on Natural

History, or Botany” (Barton, 1807). Two years

later the College merged with the University

of Pennsylvania and his appointment was

confirmed. He taught botany every spring until

his death in 1815 (Barton and Barton, 1836).

Thirty-four years later, his student, William

Darlington, reminisced, “Professor Barton,

in those days, occasionally gave a course of

Lectures on Natural History and Botany, to

small classes in the University of Pennsylvania

(one of which courses, in 1803-1804, the

writer had the privilege of attending): and

there can be no doubt that he did more than

any of his contemporaries, diffusing a taste for

the natural sciences, among the young men

who then resorted to that school” (Darlington,

1849, p. 24). We remember our favorite

teachers for the impact they made on our lives,

but we don’t always remember specific dates;

Darlington had the right academic year, but

his hardbound course notebook dates from

April 3 through June 7, 1804 for the Botany

course. Like many students today he used

the same notebook for several courses—the

first half contains his notes from Dr. Barton’s

1802/3 Natural History lectures.

Barton’s Botany

Registration was by subscription and students

purchased a ticket to attend the course (Figure

2). In 1808, Thomas Jefferson paid $12

(approximately $240 today) for his grandson’s

Figure 1. Benjamin Smith Barton. With per-

mission of the American Philosophical Society.

Figure 2. Title page from Darlington’s Bota-

ny notebook in the rare book collection of the

University of Kansas. Photo by the author.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

174

ticket to Barton’s botany class (Ewan and Ewan,

2007, p. 787). During the first day of lecture,

April 3, 1804, Barton presented an overview of

the design and extent of the course (Table 1).

It would be primarily a lecture/demonstration

course with several field trips. It would meet

three to five days a week, but rather irregularly:

7 Mondays; 8 Tuesdays; 5 Wednesdays; 7

Thursdays; 8 Fridays; and 3 Saturdays from

Tuesday April 3 through Friday, June 7. At

the end of Volume 1 of the second edition

(1812), Barton notes, “The Botanical lectures

commence, annually between the 10

and 16

of April, and continue two months. Including

the excursions, the Professor delivers at least

four lectures every week.” Presumably classes

were in the morning, as Darlington makes

note that their field trip on Tuesday, May

15, was in the afternoon. The course was

divided into four main units: natural history

(but confined to the botanical branch),

plant structure, plant physiology and the

sexual system, and plant classification. “This

beautiful branch of natural history [botany] he

[Barton] calls the Key of the Materia Medica”

(Darlington, 1804, p. 3). This obviously made

an impression on the young student who went

back to the title page of his notes and beneath

his name “By William Darlington, Student of

Medicine, Member of the American Linnean

and Philadelphia Medical Societies” added the

phrase “Herbarum Scientia Materia Medica

clavis est“ [Plant science is the key to Materia

Medica] (Figure 3).

Barton’s newly published textbook was

certainly available for use in the course (Figure

4). Although some European botanists were

critical of the work, for occasional errors and

lack of scientific detail, William Hooker (later

the Royal Botanic Garden, Kew’s first director)

noted that “though rather diffuse in style, [the

text] is full of entertaining anecdotes: and the

April 3,

T Introduction

5, Th Affinities of plants and animals

6, F Affinities (cont)

11, W Roots

12, Th Radix, Herba @ Fructifuication

13, F Herbs

16, M Leaves

17, T Leaves (cont)

19, Th Bracts

21, Sa Fruits

23, M Flowers

24, T Flowers (cont)

27, F Pistil

28, Sa Doctrine of sexes

30, M Flowers

May 1,

T Sex in Palms

2, W Sex (cont)

3, Th Opposition to the sexual system

4, F Vegetable irritability

7, M Irritability (cont)

8, T Double flowers

9, W Seed germination

11, F Classification, Sexual System - Monandria -

Triandria

12, Sa did not go to class – celebrated acquisition of

Louisiana (covered Tetrandria - Hexandria)

14, M Classification- Heptancria - Enneandria (9

stamens)

15, T No lecture – visit Hamilton's garden

17, Th Classification Decandria – Icosandria (cont)

18, F Classification - Polyandria

21, M Classification - Didynamia

22, T Classification - Tetrahynamia

24, Th Classification - Monadelphia

25, F Classification - Diadelphia

29, T Classification - Polydelphia

30, W Classification - Syngenesia

June 1,

F Classification, Gynandria

4, M Classification, Monoecia

5, T Dioecia

6, W NO CLASS – Graduation Day (Dr. Medicine)

7, F Polygamia, Cryptogamia and Fungi.

Table 1. Botany Course Syllabus, 1804, recon-

structed from William Darlington's Lecture

Notebook.

references and terms being all made applicable

to American plants, it must have done much

towards recommending the study of botany

in that country” (Hooker, 1825, p. 271).

PSB 64 (3) 2018

175

Twice in his notes, Darlington commented

that the lecture “…was principally read from

his Elements…” It is not clear if Barton used

his 1803 self-printed first edition, or the

1804 London edition. It is also not clear if

Darlington had his own copy, but I suspect he

did. During the first three days of the course

his notes are extensive, and the material

covered was not included in the text (although

a discussion of the affinities of animals and

plants was scattered in two sections of his 1812

second edition part one and two additional

places in part two). Later, in the sections on

plant anatomy and physiology, the notes are

primarily a page or two of high points and

anecdotes related by Barton; in the last section

on classification, notes are mostly limited to

the names of families covered in lecture. On

two occasions Darlington noted that, “Dr. B’s

fourth lecture was principally a recital of the

first section of his Elements, illustrated by the

demonstration of the various kinds of roots, by

living specimens” (p. 19); and “It [the lecture]

was principally read from his Elements –and

illustrated by specimens” (p. 69) (Darlington,

1804). In addition, in his 1845 “Memorials,”

he commented, “Though somewhat diffuse,

it [Elements] was a useful and dependable

performance” (Darlington, 1845). It is

interesting to note that Darlington wrote his

notes on only the right side of facing pages

assigning each a sequential odd number—a

note-taking method I still recommend

so students have a place for calculations,

questions, comments, and critique (Sundberg,

2009).

So, if Barton was not reading the lecture

from his textbook, what was he doing? A

fairly extensive collection of Barton’s medical

course notes is housed at The Historical

Society of Pennsylvania Archives. Curiously,

many of the pages with medical notes on

one side have botany lecture notes on the

other. For instance, in the folder “Absorbant

System,” two sheets have botanical notes on

Figure 3. Ticket for 1800 botany course by

Benjamin Smith Barton from the Archives

of the American Philosophical Society. Note

that Hock is not listed as a pupil of Barton

who received his M.D. degree. (Ewan and

Ewan, 2007, 926). Photo by the author.

Figure 4. Title page, Elements of Botany, 1

edition from the John Hay Library, Brown

University. Photo by the author.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

176

the back: one describing alkali fertilizers and

the other horizontal root systems. The folder

“Absorption, Cutaneous” includes notes on

tuberous roots and perpendicular roots.

These notes summarize three of the five types

of roots discussed in his text, and while some

of the specific examples are the same (e.g., Iris

and Hops are included both in the text and his

notes), other examples are in one place or the

other. For example, he gives Cinquifoil as an

example only in his lecture notes, but may-

apple is only in the text (Barton, 1813, folder

A-B). On the back of lecture notes in the

Cynachetrachialis folder are botanical notes

on medicinal uses of the plants of the Family

Alliaceae as well as Sanguinaria canadensis

and Polygala Senega. An explanation of the

use of Indigo as a remedy is on the back side

of an American Linnaean Society certificate

(Figure 5). He also made use of many extra

printed pages (or tear sheets from surplus

books?) of his first edition botany text for

his medical lectures (Figure 6; Barton, 1813,

Folder C). In a memorandum dated August

5, 1814, Barton complained that some of his

“…memorandums, notices, &c., written upon

loose scraps of paper, in my usual way, were

mislaid, and could not, without some trouble,

be discovered…” (Ewan and Ewan, 2007, p.

909).

What was Barton like as a lecturer? According

to the biographical sketch by Middleton,

Barton’s greatest assets as a teacher were his

infectious “earnest and excited enthusiasm”

and his encouragement for students to “teach

themselves” (Middleton, 1936, p. 480). His

nephew’s comments about Barton’s teaching

style seem somewhat mixed. “As a medical

teacher, he was eloquent, instructive, and

when occasion called for it quite pathetic.

His voice was good, though attenuated,

penetrating, and sometimes rather sharp

—his enunciation clear and distinct—his

pronunciation constrained, and his emphasis,

owing to his remarkable kind of punctuation,

and a desire to be perspicuously understood,

was studied, forced, and often inappropriate.

Figure 5. American Linnean Society membership certificate, with notes on Indigo as a remedy

on the back side, from the Benjamin Smith Barton papers, Violet Delafield Collection, Ameri-

can Philosophical Society. Photo by the author.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

177

In his lectures, his diction was cacophonous

and unpleasant” (Barton and Barton, 1836).

Barton always brought fresh examples to the

classroom to use in illustrating his lectures,

but he also brought his classes into the field.

The most common destination was Bartram’s

Garden, across the Schuylkill about 5 miles

from campus, which was visited twice by the

1804 class. Barton visited the Garden often,

but only a dozen miscellaneous notes of plant

flowering times between April 15, 1791 and

June 17, 1816 document these visits (Barton

Papers; Figure 7). Eight of these notes were

from dates that could be associated with

class visits. The others were from August,

September, or October. Furthermore, all but

two of the plant illustrations in the Elements

were originals by William Bartram. The

other commonly visited garden was William

Hamilton’s “Woodlands,” which was also

visited by the 1804 class. Other venues were

Landreth’s garden, along either the Schuylkill

or Delaware Rivers, or further afield. The field

trips were a course highlight for students.

According to Charles Wikins Short, an 1814

student in Darlington’s last botany class, “In

these excursions we reduce to actual practice

on any plant that presents those doctrines

which we have heard during the week – It is

indeed. a highly delightful study but I believe

that our venerable and eminent preceptor

would make anything so. I have seen him take

up a poplar leaf which I had trodden on, and

though destitute of every source of enquiry,

and talk most earnestly and eloquently for a

quarter of an hour on it...” (Short, 1814).

Darlington’s Notes

Natural History: Similarity of

Animals and Plants

As noted previously, the first lecture was

primarily course housekeeping and an

explanation of the rationale for natural

history, and particularly botany, in the medical

curriculum. It provided the background for

understanding Materia Medica, which was a

primary component of medical training. The

next two lectures, April 5 and 6, elaborated

on the affinities between plants and animals

and commanded four pages of notes each,

by far the most extensive elaboration in the

notebook. This information is not contained

in Barton’s Elements nor in any of his published

writings listed in Ewan and Ewan (2007).

Figure 6. Repurposed page from Elements

of Botany used for lecture notes—p. 145, end

of the first part from the Historical Society of

Pennsylvania archives, Philadelphia. Photo

by the author.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

178

Barton’s teaching was similar to his writing

style in the Elements; he would state a claim

by some authority, then go on to provide

supporting or contrary evidence, based on his

own observations, or published observations

of others. This was intriguing for students,

like Darlington, but seemed disjointed to

other botanists. One interesting example was

his use of poke berry juice (a natural dye he

used for tracking diffusion in tissues [Barton,

1814. Elements, Vol 2, p. 22]) in tubers to

demonstrate accelerated absorption following

application of camphor and nitre [potassium

nitrate]).

Barton went on to say that all animals can

produce some heat independent of the

atmosphere, but that some plants can do the

same. The example he cites was an experiment

by John Hunter (Table 2) who noticed that

ice forms on a dead branch faster than on a

living branch (Darlington, 1804, p. 9). What

about breathing? Animals have various

respiratory organs including the spiracles of

insects. Barton noted that it has been proved

that if you cover the spiracles with oil, the

insect will die in the same way that if you

cover the trachea [stomata] of leaves with

oil, they will die as well. (This was actually an

experiment performed by Erasmus Darwin,

1791, Vegetable Respiration, Note XXXVII,

part I, p. 102.) Furthermore, Barton explained

that Joseph Priestley demonstrated that plants

gave off “pure air, and supposed that the two

kingdoms of animals and vegetables labored

reciprocally for each other” (Darlington,

1804, p. 9). The only animal organ that does

not appear to have a plant counterpart is

the stomach. “Vegetables have no stomach,

properly so called” (Darlington, 1804, p. 11).

The focus of lecture three was the affinities

between plant and animal reproduction.

Hermaphrodites are found among both plants

and animals “...although some philosophers,

more squeamish than wise, have wished

to abolish the term from Dictionaries”

(Darlington, 1804, p. 13). There are also some

animals and plants with no sex. Just as horses

and asses form hybrid mules, hybrid offspring

can be produced by the union of different

plants, for example mullein and tobacco

(Darlington, 1804, p. 13). Johann Hedwig

thought that the true distinction between

plants and animals was that the stamens

(male organs) of plants always die and drop

off after producing pollen for insemination,

whereas this does not happen in animals. But

Barton noted that Samuel Hearne claimed

that the Hudson’s Bay hare “sheds its penis

Figure 7. June 17, 1814 notes on plants flow-

ering in Bartram's Garden from the Barton

Papers, Delafield Collection, American Phil-

osophical Society. Photo by the author.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

179

• Moreland (1703) – pollen fertilizes ovule

• Johannes Hedwig (1730-1799) – sex in cryptogams

• Antonie Philips van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723) – sex in

animalicules

• Joseph Pitton Tournefort (1656-1708) – rejected Linnean

system

• Giulio Pontedera (1688-1757) – rejected Linnean system

• Antoine Laurent de Jussieu (1748-1836) – maple pollen said

to be hollow

• Aristotle (384 BC-322 BC) – pollen necessary to fertilize

palms

• Fredrick Hasselquist (1722-1752) – Arabs pollinate date

palms

• John Hope (1725-1786) – produced hybrid poppy

• Abbe Francisco Javier Clavigero (1731-1787) – some in-

stances of the propagation of mules

• William Smellie (1740-1795) – argued against sexual sys-

tem

• James Logan (1674-1751) – American botanist saw pollen

in style of maize

Lectures 19-22

• Charles Bonnet (1720-1793) – categorized motions of

plants

• Felice De Fontana (1730-1805) – categorized motions of

plant

• Erasmus Darwin – Loves of Plants, Canto 1, Lines 51-56;

double flowers

• Lord Kaimes (1696-1782)

• Linnaeus – flowers open and close at certain times

• John Walker (1731-1803) – Magnolia seeds must pass

through digestive tract before germination

• Friedrich Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859) – light not

essential for color of vegetables

• Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) – vegetable thermometer

Lectures 23-37

• Linnaeus – sexual system

• Frederick Burckhardt – proposes sexual system before Linnaeus

• Note: I have not found De Sexu Plantarum by this author, as

per Darlington’s notes, but:

• De Sexu Plantarum, Adam Zaluzansky, 1592, 1604.

• De Sexu Plantarum epistola, Rudolf Camerarius, 1694

• Pythagoras (570 BC – 495 BC) – legumes produce bitter

honey

• Bruce – legumes produce bitter honey

• Minnick ? – fungi form by crystallization

Lectures 2-3 Affinities between Plants and Animals

• Joachin Jungius (1587-1657) – plants lack sensation, cannot

move

• Herman Boerhaave (1668-1738) – plants cannot move

• Lazzaro Spallazoni (1729-1799) – plants are racemose animals

• Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656-1708) – plants have roots by

which they are nourished

• James E. Smith (1759-1828) – plants are organized bodies devel-

oped by nutrition and that produce secretions

• Carolus Linnaeus (1707-1778) – stones grow, plants grow and

live, animals grow, live and feel

• Albrecht von Haller (1708-1777) – irritability is peculiar to an-

imals

• John Hunter (1728-1793) – a living branch produces heat, but

only animals have a stomach

• Joseph Priestley (1733-1804) – plants give off pure air (oxygen)

• Edward Tyson (1651-1708) – animals have an alimentary canal

• Alexander Monro 1st (1697-1767) – some animals have no

heart

• Johann Hedwig (1745-1792) – male organs of plants always

die and drop off after impregnation but those of animals do not

• Samuel Hearne (1745-1792) – Hudson's Bay hare sheds its pe-

nis after use

Lectures 4-13 Roots, stems, leaves, and flowers

• Sir John Hill (1714-1775) – author of "The Vegetable System"

• Anonymous "French Botanist" proved Viscum is a parasite

• Linnaeus

• Horace Benedict de Saussur (1740-1799) – rete muscosum in

plant leaves

• Caspar Friedrich Wolfe (1734-1794) – blood becomes red

when oxygenated

• Claude Louis Berthollet (1748-1822) – leaf color change in au-

tumn due to oxygenation

• Erasmus Darwin (1731-1802) – bracts oxygenate the sap go-

ing to flowers

• Charles Louis L'Heritier de Brutelle (1746-1800) – pistils of

peach and other fruits freeze before stamens

Lectures 14-18 Doctrine of sexuality in plants

• Linnaeus

• Empedocles (495 BC - 444 BC) – plants have different sexes

• Andrea Cesalphinus (1519-1603) – female plants fertile,

male plants sterile

• John Ray (1627-1705) – anthers are male organ

• Neahmiah Grew (1641-1712) – Plants have sexuality

• Rudolph Jakob Camerius (1665-1721) – experiments on

sex in hemp and maize

Table 2. Scientists referenced by Barton during his lectures (birth and death) and topic con-

sidered by Barton. Number of citations is inversely related to topical coverage in Barton's

Elements of Botany.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

180

after coition... the testes of fowls are known to

diminish after the season of love” (Darlington,

1804, p. 15). “Both plants and animals, as far as

we can get see, are similar in all respects. Both

plants & animals are blindly led by the laws of

nature. Man himself is as blindly led by those

Laws as the simplest vegetable” (Darlington,

1804, p. 15). After spending another page

and a half describing chemical similarities

between plants and animals, Darlington

summarizes: “Dr. B. does not deny that there

may be a difference; but he says it is not yet

discovered” (Darlington, 1804, p. 19).

Structure of Flowering

Plants

“Dr. B’s fourth Lecture was principally a recital

of the first section of his Elements; illustrated

by the demonstration of the various kinds of

roots, by living specimens” (Darlington, 1804,

p. 9). After a brief review of Natural History,

and some elaboration of the difference

between geology and minerology, most of the

lecture covered roots. Darlington notes that it

is important to remember that the Bulbosa are

generally active plants but boiling “deprives

them of their active qualities” (Darlington,

1804, p. 11).

In the fifth lecture, Barton quickly diverges

into commentary. For instance, while in many

plants, the fructification is very evident, as in

the apple and other trees, in the case of ferns it

is not so—instead, they are on the back sides

of leaves. Later, “Dr. B. lays it down as a rule,

that the tendency of all plants is to become

perennial” (Darlington, 1804, p. 21). This is

often an adaptation to climate—genera that

are herbaceous in the north are frequently

woody and perennial in warmer climes. On

parasitic plants, “Linnaeus called a parasitic

plant Hillia parasitica, after Sir John Hill,

who was a great flatterer and parasite of the

nobility of his time” (Darlington, 1804, p. 23).

According to Barton, Tillandsia usneoides is a

parasitic plant that is used by upholsterers to

fill matrasses. “A French Botanist has proved

that viscum, a parasite, does receive a part of

its nourishment from the plant supporting

it. He put an apple tree limb into pokeberry

juice, in such a manner that the viscum

roots did not touch it. The limb absorbed it,

and it appeared in every part of the viscum”

(Darlington, 1804, pp. 23-25).

Similar commentaries perfuse Barton’s

lectures on stems and leaves. “As physicians we

should remember that all culmiferous plants,

with the exception of Lolium, are nutritious . . .

whenever we meet a culmiferous plant, we may

conclude with safety, 999 times in 1000, that it

is nutritious” (Darlington, 1804, p. 25). Leaves,

according to Barton, are “...compressed and

extended petioles...” continuous with the

layers of the stem. He goes on to describe a

maceration technique to visualize venation by

soaking the leaves for 10 to 15 days in warm

water in the sun and, when it becomes pulpy,

pressing it between two sheets of muslin. When

the sheets are separated, the parenchyma

adheres to the muslin and the skeleton of veins

remains. However, “Caterpillars make the

best skeletons of leaves” (Darlington, 1804, p.

29). Barton goes on to say that some plants,

like Ilex, have two layers of reticulate vessels

and an orange leaf has three. “Dr. B. thinks

those vessels are real absorbents. Leaves are

respiratory organs, or the Lungs of vegetables”

(Darlington, 1804, p. 29).

According to Barton, oxygen has a special role

in animals for inducing irritability because,

as shown in chick development by Caspar

Friedrich Wolfe (1734-1794), blood does not

PSB 64 (3) 2018

181

turn red until it is oxygenated and only then

does the embryo begin to respond—that

oxygen imparts irritability “...is likely probably

the same in vegetables” (Darlington, 1804,

p. 29). Barton explains that the largest leaves

on any plant growing in the United States are

those of Magnolia growing in North Carolina,

which can be up to 30 inches long, but these

are small compared to various palms. Barton

went on to explain that Claude Louis Berthollet

attributed leaf color change in the autumn to “a

preternatural absorption of oxygene [sic].” But

Darlington notes: “Dr. Barton is not satisfied

with this explanation but says it is well worth

inquiring into. The same species of plants

always assume the same color at the same

time. The defoliation of those plants, in our

country, which are Evergreen in temperate,

equable ones, is owing to the vicissitudes of

climate” (Darlington, 1804, p. 29).

According to Barton, the action of tendrils

demonstrates that “Plants have real

Intelligence.” Not only does the direction of

coiling, left or right, remain constant within

a species, but the Hops plant will always seek

out the nearest support, even if it is in less

light (Darlington, 1804, p. 31). “In Sarracenia

the leaves are hollow, to collect water for the

support of the plant. They demand much

water, & are never found without” (Darlington,

1804, p. 31). Yet in his extensive description

of this plant (Barton, 1803, pp. 301-305,

caption to Fig. 1), Barton explains that while

it was thought that the hollow leaves served

as water reservoirs, “I have not yet made the

experiment, but the experiment would I think

show, that our plant would flourish very well,

were we to close the openings of the ascidia,

and completely prevent them from receiving

any supply of water from external sources”

(p. 302). Unfortunately, this wonderful

description of the pitchers, collecting and

digesting insects, frogs, and other small

animals, was deleted from all subsequent

editions.

Barton attributes to Darwin (1791) that the

function of bracts “is to assist in the perfection

of the flower to oxygenate the sap. In a species

of Euphorbia, the bractes [sic] become red

immediately upon the expansion of the flower

– said to be from the absorption of oxygene

[sic]” (Darlington, 1804, p. 33). Barton

distinguishes between leaf buds, flower buds,

and buds containing both, and he thinks

that most buds are the latter but flowers do

not appear “because there is not sufficient

vegetating power” (Darlington, 1804, p. 33).

He also says that it was generally believed that

when trees begin to grow in the spring, it is

from the top down, but that it is now known

that sap begins to flow from the bottom of the

tree.

Lecture 10 begins the section on reproduction,

and the next three lectures, on floral parts,

are brief in Darlington’s notes: “...for good

accounts of which, see his [Barton’s] Elements

of Botany” (Darlington, 1804, p. 35).

According to Barton, Linnaeus is too broad

in his definition of nectary, which Barton

thinks should only be applied to parts that

“secrete a honied liquor.” Concerning the

style, it is hollow in many plants but never

hollow in others. In these, Barton produced

an opening by applying camphor, musk, or a

small amount of alcohol—another example of

plant sensitivity.

The Sexual System

Lectures 14-16 again stimulate extensive note-

taking as Barton discusses the “Doctrine of

the Sexes of Plants” (Darlington, 1804, p. 37).

This begins with an extensive history of the

study of sexuality in plants, beginning with

PSB 64 (3) 2018

182

Empedocles who, according to Aristotle, said

plants were of different sexes. According to

Barton, Andrea Cesalpinus [sic] was the first

to understand the true nature of plant sexuality

and who “first taught Botany with precision

and system” (Darlington, 1804, p. 39). While

Neahmiah Grew was the first to ascribe male

function to the anthers, “...Camerarius was the

first who proved it by his own experiments”

(Darlington, 1804, p. 39). On the other hand,

Joseph Pitton Tournefort and Giulio Pontedera

both denied the sexuality of plants. Linnaeus

resolved the issue in 1703 with multiple

arguments: (1) Procendentia, pollen is shed

while the flower is most vigorous and before

the fruit forms, (2) Situs, stamens are placed

where pollen can be shed onto the pistil, (3)

Tempus, anthers release pollen at the same

time pistils are receptive, (4) Loculamenta,

cellular nature of the pollen, (5) Pluvia, the

closing or drooping of flowers at night or

before a rain to protect the pollen, (6) Fumus,

drying of pollen in city smoke—thought not

to be of much importance by Barton, and

(7) Figura, pollen is of similar shape. “The

granules of the maple are said by Jussieu to be

hollow; and that when they come in contact

with the moisture of the stigma, they burst and

give out their fovilla—here we see another use

of the moisture, besides that of holding the

pollen” (Darlington, 1804, p. 43).

Barton appears to begin the next lecture with

a brief review of the previous day stating that

there are the same number of cells in the ovule

as there are in the future seed (a validation of

Linnaeus’ Locumenta?). Linnaeus’ arguments

continue: (8) Castratis, if the anthers are

removed, no seeds are produced or they

will abort, (9) oculus; visible pollen on the

stigma prior to fruit and seed production of

the pistil, (10) Proportis, the flower stands

erect when the stamens are the longest, and

(11) Locus, having the anthers situated above

the pistil in legumes. Barton notes that this

position is reversed in pines where female

cones are above the males, but here pollen is

produced in such abundance as to cover the

ground. “Dr. B. thinks the showers of Sulphur

mentioned in the Scriptures, consisted of the

pollen of the pines. In Sweden this pollen is

mistaken for Sulphur, by the ignorant, to this

day” (Darlington, 1804, p. 45).

Barton again appears to begin the next class

with a review of wind pollination, but then

diverges to discuss palms. The sexual nature

of palms was known to Aristotle and that

if pollen is shaken onto the female organs,

seeds will quickly ripen. Palms grow in warm

countries and not north of Charleston, South

Carolina, in the U.S. “A female Date tree

which was 70 years old, and had never borne

fruit, was impregnated with pollen 9 days old

—it bore fruit in consequence... Hasselquist

saw the Arabs climb the female palms with

male branches in their hands, with which they

powder the females, and thereby impregnate

them. The Arabs told Hasselquist that they

kept an unopened, or unprotruded spadix,

or bunch of male flowers, over year, in case

the other should fail” (Darlington, 1804, p.

45). Barton goes on to explain that the figs in

the United States do not produce viable seed

because “we do not have that insect which is

known to impregnate the females in France,

Portugal” (Darlington, 1804, pp. 47-49).

Linnaeus’ 12th argument is Flora Submersa, an

example of which is Vallisneria Spiralis, which

has female flowers on a long stalk that reaches

the surface and male flowers on short stalks

that release their pollen to float to the surface

and fertilize the females. Linnaeus’ next

argument is a summary of the sexual system.

In many flowers, such as several species of

Saxifrage, Ruta graveolens, and Tobacco, the

PSB 64 (3) 2018

183

stamens approach the pistil, release their

pollen, then return to their former position.

“The Weeping Willow of our country is only

the female of that plant; and a seed from it has

never been known to germinate. The Male has

never been even in Europe until the French

lately brought it there from Egypt.”

Linnaeus’ last argument is the formation

of hybrids. He thinks that “all species are

the product of the copulation of different

genera. Dr. B. does not adopt this opinion

in its full extent...” (Darlington, 1804, p. 51).

The rest of this lecture contains examples of

plant hybridization. For example, John Ray

described a gardener who sold collyflower

[sic] seed to a man who planted them near

cabbage and a hybrid was produced. The man

filed suit and recovered damages. “We know

150 hybrid vegetables” (Darlington, 1804, p.

53).

Lecture 18 consisted of arguments opposed

to the sexual system, primarily by William

Smellie in his Philosophy of Natural History.

Bartram counters every argument by Smellie,

and Bartram’s position is clear: “The Anti

Sexualists acknowledge their ignorance of the

use, or final cause of the generative organs of

plants, while the Sexualists explain it.”

Plant Irritability

Lectures 19 and 20 consider plant irritability,

a topic not directly covered in the textbook.

He begins with plant movements, particularly

of stamens, and makes a distinction between

voluntary and involuntary movement. As

an example of the former, Barton describes

geranium with 5 straight and 5 reflexed

stamens. The straight stamens release their

pollen first, and then the reflexed stamens

extend themselves and release their pollen.

Common barberry is an example of the latter

because when the stamens are irritated, they

immediately approach the pistil and discharge

their pollen. He cites Erasmus Darwin for

examples where the stamens are shorter than

the carpels (Darwin, 1791, Loves of the plants,

Canto 1, line 51-56). Roots demonstrate

considerable irritability, as do the sleep

movements of leaves. Mimosa is particularly

noteworthy for their response to contact. “Dr.

B has seen them contract from the influence

of the odor of musk; which shows that it is not

owing to the mechanical impulse” (Darlington,

1804, p. 61). The glandular part at the joint is

the site of this response. Yet, these leaves will

not respond to burning with a lens as long as

the glandular part is not affected.

Barton then proceeds to discuss seeds. Some

plants, like turnip, germinate early while

others, such as parsley, are very late. “Hence

the vulgar proverb in England, that ‘parsley

seed goes nine times to the Devil before it

comes up!’” (Darlington, 1804, p. 63). The

radical always grows down toward the earth

and the plumule grows upward.

The following two lectures continued on

the topic of seeds, but now principally read

from Elements. Barton notes that neither the

Burdock, scattered by burs, nor Dandelion,

scattered by its pappus, are native to America

but are scattered widely. According to John

Walker, Magnolia seeds would not germinate

in Europe until they passed through the gut of

Turkeys. Barton said he could not germinate

Ginseng until he feed seeds to Dunghill

fowls. He notes that Friedrich Alexander

von Humboldt demonstrated that some

mushrooms grow in mines, without light, and

finally states, “The Vegetable Thermometer, as

Mr. Jefferson calls it, is the best criterion of the

nature of a climate” (Darlington, 1804, p. 67).

PSB 64 (3) 2018

184

Plant Taxonomy

The rest of the course was a taxonomic

survey of plants using Linnaeus’ Sexual

System. Barton begins by noting that prior

to Linnaeus, Frederick Burckhardt published

an essay De Sexu Plantarum that “...says that

the Doctrine of the Sexes is fully established

– that the roots, leaves, fruits, etc. Afford

objectionable, and often fallacious criteria

for classification; and asks if a better one may

not be established upon the male organs;

and the ordinal divisions upon the female

organs?” (Darlington, 1804, p. 67). Barton

says Linnaeus “undoubtedly saw the paper”

but never acknowledged Burckhardt.

Darlington skipped class on May 12 to take

part in a celebration of the Louisiana Purchase,

but Barton taught the class as usual. On the

15th the class went to Hamilton’s garden in

the afternoon (Table 1). Darlington notes that

this is the third trip taken by the class; the

other two were to Bartram’s Garden. On the

18th, Barton mentions that the bulbous root

of Ranunculus bulbosus causes blisters but is

used to treat palsy and chronic rheumatism.

Boiling removes the toxin (Darlington, 1804,

p. 71). On May 24, Barton described a hollow

Plantanus he saw growing on the bank of the

Ohio River that was so large, “...two men rode

round abreast on horseback, in the hollow if it.”

And the next day, when discussing legumes,

he stated, “this class furnishes a very flatulent

alimentary product” (Darlington, 1804, p.

75). On May 30, when describing composites,

Barton said “...the middle states of the U.

States, would contain more syngenesious [sic]

plants than ten times as much space of any

other part of the world” (Huntington, 1804,

p. 77). Concerning maize, “The Zea mays was

never seen growing in a wild state, since the

memory of man – or, if it do grow wild, it has

been so altered by cultivation that we do not

know it. We do not know its native country –

neither do we know the native country of the

Wheat, the Barley, nor the Rye. One species

of the Wheat, however has been seen growing

wild in Persia. The Hickories are peculiar

to our country” (Darlington, 1804, p. 79).

On June 6, there was no lecture because of

commencement and the awarding of Doctor

of Medicine degrees. Finally, the last day, June

7, covered the fungi, after which, “Dr. Barton

bade us a polite, & perhaps a Last Adieu. Finis

Notarum” (Darlington, 1804, p. 79).

Conclusions

Barton’s primary recognition is as a teacher

who promoted botany and the botanical

research of his students and collaborators

and, I will argue, remains an excellent role

model for professors of botany today. In

many ways his approach to teaching was

similar to Amos Eaton’s, and both chose to

use Linnaeus’ sexual system of classification

for the ease with which it could be employed,

despite their recognition of the merits of

Jussieu’s Natural System (Ewan and Ewan,

2007, p. 829; Sundberg, 2011). Even in the

first edition of the Elements, Barton notes that

Linnaeus’ Sexual System will be “deserted”

for a more natural one (Barton, 1803, p. 189).

Thomas Jefferson, who shared much botany

with Barton, seems to summarize it well. “I

adhere to the Linnaean because it is sufficient

as a groundwork; admits of supplementary

insertions, as new productions are discovered,

and mainly because it has got into so general

use that it will not be easy to displace it” (Ewan

and Ewan, 2007, p. 567). A major difference

between Barton and Eaton’s approaches was

that Barton’s students, all male, were preparing

for careers in medicine whereas Eaton

PSB 64 (3) 2018

185

encouraged men and women to study botany

for the sake of science (Sundberg, 2011). It

appears that Barton was taking great pains to

highlight the similarities between the plants

his students were studying in botany and the

human biology they focused on during the

rest of their medical training. Eaton did not

have this concern.

Traits drawing comment from former

students were especially Barton’s infectious

enthusiasm for the subject and ability to

apply instruction to the local flora and to

medicine. His textbook, the first botany

textbook published in America, illustrates his

understanding of the field and familiarity with

the work of his European contemporaries

and predecessors. Yet, it was not adopted by

others in America, presumably because of his

frequent injection of opinion, commentary,

and asides. The class notebook of one of these,

William Darlington, provides much insight

into Barton’s pedagogy. Lectures were not

pure recitation from his textbook, although

in some instances he resorted to this when

the goal was to present salient information as

concisely as possible, such as the terminology

relating to the structure of parts or the

classification of species. In such instances,

Darlington’s notes are brief, and he simply

refers to Barton’s Elements. Some topics were

not covered in the text at all, or only briefly,

such as the commonalities between plants and

animals, and plant irritability, and some were

of controversial topics still unresolved, or only

recently resolved, such as sexuality in plants

and the sexual system of Linnaeus. On these

topics Darlington’s notes are extensive and

Barton makes extensive citation of the works

of others. You can almost feel that Darlington

felt he was being brought into the company

of botanical scientists and their research. The

fact that this was an elective course, but that

it still “made and paid” every year of Barton’s

tenure, speaks to the popularity of the course

and its instructor.

Acknowledgements

I thank the reading room staffs at: The

American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia;

The Historical Society of Pennsylvania

Archives, Philadelphia; and The Spencer

Library, Rare Books Room, University of

Kansas, and two anonymous reviewers.

Literature Cited

Barton, B. S. 1900. Collections for an essay to-

wards a Materia Medica of the United States.

1798, 1804. Bulletin of the Lloyd Library of Bota-

ny, Pharmacy, and Materia Medica. 1 (Reproduc-

tion series 1): 1-10.

Barton, B. S. 1803. Elements of Botany or Out-

lines of the Natural History of Vegetables. Phila-

delphia, Printed for the author.

Barton, B. S. 1804. Elements of Botany or Out-

lines of the Natural History of Vegetables. Lon-

don. Printed for J. Johnson, St. Paul’s Churchyard

by I. Gold, Shoe Lane.

Barton, B. S. 1807. A discourse on some of the

principle desiderata in natural history and on the

best means of promoting the study of this science

in the United States. Philadelphia, Denham &

Town.

Barton, B. S. 1812. Elements of Botany or Out-

lines of the Natural history of Vegetables. 2

Edi-

tion. Volume 1. Volume 2, 1814. Philadelphia.

Printed for the author.

Barton, B. S. 1813-1815. Lecture notes: A-B.

C-D. The Historical Society of Pennsylvania Ar-

chives, Collection 1623. Philadelphia.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

186

Barton, B. S. and W. P. C. Barton. 1836. Elements

of Botany or Outlines of the Natural history of

Vegetables, new edition revised and condensed

with an account of the life of the author.

Barton Papers. Benjamin Smith Barton papers.

Violetta Delafield collection, American Philo-

sophical Society. Mss. B.B.284d. Series II, Bar-

ton Notes. Lectures on Botany, Botanical Notes

#1 - #12.

Bartram, W. 1783. Catalogue of American Trees,

Shrubs, and Herbaceous Plants, most of which

are now growing, and produce ripe seed in John

Bartram’s Garden, near Philadelphia.

Bartram, W. 1807. A Catalogue of Trees, Shrubs,

and Herbaceous Plants, Indigenous to the United

States of America; Cultivated and Disposed of by

John Bartram & Son at their Botanical Garden,

Kingsess, near Philadelphia: to which is added a

Catalogue of foreign plants, collected from Var-

ious Parts of the Globe. Bartram and Reynolds,

Philadelphia.

Darlington, W. 1804. Notes taken from the Lec-

tures of Benjamin S. Barton, M.D. on Botany in

the University of Pennsylvania. Darlington (Wil-

liam) papers, University of Kansas, Spencer Li-

brary, MS C154.

Darlington, W. 1849. Memorials of John Bartram

and Humphry Marshall; with notices of their bo-

tanical contemporaries. Philadelphia: Lindsay &

Blakiston.

Darwin, E. 1791. The Botanic Garden: A Poem,

in two parts. Part I. The economy of vegetation.

Part II. The loves of the plants. with Philosophical

Notes. J. Johnson, London.

Ewan, J. 1969. A short history of Botany in the

United States. Hafner Publishing Company, New

York.

Ewan, J., and N. D. Ewan. 2007. Benjamin Smith

Barton: Naturalist and Physician in Jeffersonian

America. Missouri Botanical Garden Press, St.

Louis

Hooker, W. J. 1825. On the botany of America.

American Journal of Science. 9: 263-284.

Middleton, W. S. 1936. Benjamin Smith Barton.

Annals of Medical History new series 8: 477-491.

Short, C. W. 1814. Letter to John Cleaves Short.

Library of Congress, Manuscript Division, Wash-

ington, D.C.

Smellie, W. 1808. The Philosophy of Natural His-

tory. Thomas & Tappan & Samuel Bragg. Dover,

New Hampshire.

Sundberg, M. D. 2009. Botany 213, Biology of

Plants. Printed by author, Emporia, Kansas.

Sundberg, M. D. 2011. Botanical education in the

United States: Part 1, The impact of Linnaeus and

the foundations of modern pedagogy. Plant Sci-

ence Bulletin. 57: 134-158.

187

SCIENCE EDUCATION

By Dr. Catrina Adams,

Education Director

BSA Science Education News and Notes

serves as an update about the BSA’s educa-

tion efforts and the broader education scene.

We invite you to submit news items or ideas

for future features. Contact Catrina Adams,

Education Director, at cadams@botany.org.

“I think simply working with the teachers really

helped me understand how students think

about photosynthesis. This way, as a mentor

and liaison, I can help the students with

misconceptions and provide useful feedback as

they develop their own projects.”

“It’s really easy to just tell people the answer. It’s

actually much harder to slow down and wait

for them to come to it on their own.”

“I used to make a lot of assumptions about high

school education…now I know what they learn

in high school. I know what to expect when they

enter college.”

“I now use many of those things back in my class

here in the university…for example how to ask

questions that will trigger students to answer

in a deeper way…so I changed the way I asked

questions so students get more opportunities to

express themselves.”

Digging Deeper Fellows from the NSF-

funded Digging Deeper research project

report that the experience increased their

understanding of what effective teaching

looks like, increased their understanding of

what students experience in high school, and

gave them ideas for how to improve their own

science teaching.

Teachers also report how valuable they found

opportunities to interact with mentors during

the workshop.

“Carrying out the project on the PlantingScience

website and corresponding with the mentors via

the website was incredibly helpful, especially

because our project didn’t get the results

we expected…We learned that we had to

communicate really clearly, that it was super

fun when our mentors talked to us, and got a

sense of how our kids would feel.”

Early-Career Scientist

PlantingScience Liaisons Both Help

and Benefit from Interactions with

Secondary Teachers and Their Students

188

“The time we spent working with the

mentors really helped build relationships and

collaboration.”

During and after the workshop, Digging

Deeper Fellows were involved in developing

new resources for students and mentors. The

first of these new resources are being released

this fall, including a PlantingScience mentor

tips video (https://vimeo.com/293044208)

and a humorous video explaining the leaf disk

flotation method used in PlantingScience’s

Power of Sunlight photosynthesis and

respiration investigation theme (https://

vimeo.com/293030333) (Figure 1).

The 45 scientists who participated in Digging

Deeper are part of a larger cohort of graduate

students and postdocs who make up our

Master Plant Science Team (MPST). These

scientists serve as mentors to teams of students

and as liaisons for secondary school teachers.

They help teachers make mentor matches for

their teams and ensure good communication

between a teacher and his or her mentors, as

well as stepping in to help keep all the student/

scientist conversations going strong. BSA is

Figure 1. Screenshot from a video covering what is needed to conduct leaf disk flotation experi-

ments. Developed by Digging Deeper Fellows, the video will be used to support the Power of Sun-

light photosynthesis and respiration module, but can also serve as a stand-alone resource for AP

biology students and others who will use the technique.

supporting the following 23 scientists on the

MPST for 2018-2019:

Ioana Anghel, Alina Avanesyan, Liming Cai,

Ghana S. Challa, Foong Lian Chee, Mason

Kamalani Chock, Aayudh Das, Kelsey Fisher,

Laura Klein, Joshua Kraft, Jill Marzolino,

Angela McDonnell, Molly Ng, Funmilola

Mabel Ojo, Mischa Olson, Carlos J. Pasiche-

Lisboa, Kelly Pfeiler, Christina Scara, Jaime

Schwoch, Elizabeth Scott, Nicolette Sipperly,

Elizabeth Stunz, and Lauren Elizabeth

Whitehurst.

These graduate students and post-docs help

high school teachers to teach more plant

biology in the classroom, which is so essential

to capturing student interest and increasing

appreciation for plants. Please thank them for

their service to the field!

Learn more about the benefits and

requirements of being on the Master Plant

Science Team and consider joining next year’s

MPST cohort of graduate students and post-

docs: https://plantingscience.org/joinmpst.

Applications will open at the end of this

academic year.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

189

You don’t have to be an early-career scientist

to mentor with PlantingScience! We are

looking for scientists of all career stages to

volunteer, and you can choose which sessions

you are available to mentor. Sign up to mentor

here: https://plantingscience.org/mentorjoin/

mentorjoinmain.

We are also recruiting middle and high school

teachers to participate in PlantingScience with

their classes. The program is free to teachers; we

provide basic materials and online mentoring

support. Please direct prospective teachers

here to learn more: https://plantingscience.

org/psteachers/joinplantingscience.

First Cohort of BSA

Education Scholars Named

for Successful Completion of

“Plants by the Numbers”

Faculty Mentoring Network

Congratulations are due to the following

eight faculty members who have successfully

completed the first BSA-sponsored Faculty

Mentoring Network (FMN) and earned the

title of BSA Education Scholars:

Merrilee Anderson of Mount Aloysius College,

Leah Dudley of East Central University, Jenny

Hazlehurst of the University of California

Riverside, Maryann Herman of St. John Fisher

College, Christopher Ivey of California State

University - Chico, Jessica Joyner of CUNY

Brooklyn College, Brian Shmaefsky of Lone Star

College – Kingwood, and Gregory Zimmerman

of Lake Superior State University.

These faculty worked together to customize and

implement education modules on a range of

botanical topics drawn from the PlantED digital

library (https://PlantED.botany.org). Every

other week over the spring they met in facilitated

virtual sessions to collaborate with and support

others in the network. During the summer they

submitted teaching notes to enhance selected

resources within the PlantED library.

You may have seen BSA Education Scholar

Christopher Ivey’s poster presentation at

BOTANY 2018 where he shared a test of the

effectiveness of the new laboratory exercises

on his students’ understanding of phylogenetic

analysis and trophic interactions, including

his experiences with participating in the FMN.

Do you have an effective teaching activity to

share with peers? Phil Gibson, editor of the

PlantED digital library and past-chair of the

Education Committee, is soliciting submissions

of high-quality education resources for peer-

review and publication in the PlantED library.

Have something to submit? You can get started

here: https://planted.botany.org/EcoEdDL_

SubmissionInstructions.

We are also looking for new reviewers to

help with the digital library. You can sign up

to volunteer as a reviewer by first creating

an account on PlantED and then using this

form to enter your PlantED username and

some information about your background

and the types of resources you would be

comfortable reviewing: https://goo.gl/forms/

BaEKmmRdCH0QLSUd2.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

190

Upcoming Education

Conferences

Life Discovery – Doing Science Education

Conference, March 21-23, 2019:

Microbiomes to Ecosystems: Evolution and

Biodiversity across Scale, Space, and Time

BSA co-sponsors the Life Discovery – Doing

Science Education Conference, a stand-

alone education conference for high school

and undergraduate biology educators. This

is an interactive conference with many

opportunities to network and share ideas with

colleagues interested in biology education. The

call for proposals for Education Roundtables

is still open, so please consider joining us in

Gainesville, Florida!

For more information and to see the request for

proposals, please visit: http://www.esa.org/ldc.

What is a QUBES Faculty

Mentoring Network?

Imagine meeting biweekly over a semester

with a small group of educators around a

common interest—exploring new ideas

or classroom activities, sharing what has

worked and what hasn’t, and gaining some

credit for your teaching scholarship. That is

the Faculty Mentoring Network model.

Faculty Mentoring Networks (FMNs) are

designed to fit into the busy schedules

of college faculty, and provide support

and guidance “just in time” during the

implementation of course changes.

By capitalizing on the experience of a

mentor and peers, FMNs provide a bridge

between pedagogical theory and actionable

classroom practice.

A second Plants by the Numbers Faculty

Mentoring Network kicks off this fall

on QUBEShub.org with a new cohort of

interested faculty.

You can view new and upcoming FMN

opportunities here: https://qubeshub.org/

community/fmns#new.

191

STUDENT SECTION

By Chelsea Pretz and Min Ya

BSA Student Representatives

Scientific societies have been an integral part

in moving science forward. For example,

letters as early as the 17th century between

prominent scientists created what was

considered an “invisible college,” connecting

inquisitive minds throughout Europe. Shortly

after that, this “invisible college” became the

Royal Society. This is just one society that has

connected scientists with a common space

to share ideas. Scientific societies may have

changed over time, but one thing has remained

the same: they are a beneficial resource for its

members.

Botanical Society of America has been a

society since 1893, and since then, there have

been many changes within the field. In general,

botany departments have decreased in size in

the past years or are now non-existent. The

field of botany has expanded and much of the

approaches are now molecular—an important

reason to have a large scale “university” to

share ideas and current research. BSA’s goal

is to stay relevant in this changing scientific

environment and reflect the processes in the

current society. In this upcoming year, BSA

has expanded the amount of money that will

be given to graduate research, from $500

to $2000. Although this will decrease the

number of people who will receive the grants,

it will increase the research impact of those

recipients. This increase will allow students to

fund not just a part of the collection trip, but

the whole thing, or at least some preliminary

sequence data. While societies help promote

research by providing funds, it is also a place

for networking, setting up collaborations,

and sharing research progress. As budding

researchers, the BSA’s annual BOTANY

conference is a place for students to share

their ideas and get feedback to improve their

research, as the support is set up to be an

inclusive environment for everyone and their

ideas.

BSA has made inclusivity a priority over

the past few years. This past year was the

PLANTS Program’s eighth year, the third

annual LGBQT Mixer, and the second annual

Why Do Scientific Societies Matter?

How, As a Student,

Can I Benefit from Them?

PSB 64 (3) 2018

192

Undergraduate Mixer at BOTANY. This past

year, BSA made it a priority to update its code

of conduct. In light of the #MeToo movement,

it is important to make sure the everyone is

welcomed and feels safe to conduct research

and contribute to the field of botany. Although

there has been growth in the society, more

needs to be done; as a student member, you

can make that difference!

Students are encouraged to get engaged in the

society. Every BSA committee—whether for

grants, investments, education, development,

and more—is required to have a student

representative on it. Holding this position

is not just a good life experience, but also a

chance to shape BSA in away that is beneficial

in these changing times. To find out more

about BSA benefits, go to https://botany.

org/home/membership/member-benefits.

html.

Getting to Know your New

Student Representative,

Min Ya

When did you join BSA and what motivated

you to do so?

I became a student member of BSA in

2015. I was just starting graduate school

that summer and was trying to navigate

through all the professional organizations

and societies to decide which ones I should

join. Very soon, I was overwhelmed by the

number of societies there are that seemed to

be related to my field, so I turned to my PI

Elena Kramer for recommendation. BSA was

the very first society that Elena recommended

to me, and she also kindly offered me a gift

membership. Very quickly, I became a big

Min Ya, Kramer Lab, Department of Organis-

mic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard Uni-

versity

fan of BSA. For example, botany.org became

a “dictionary” to me, and I can’t remember

how many times I have visited the website

to look for information regarding careers in

plant sciences, outreach in plant sciences,

funding opportunities, trainings, or just

random fun facts about weird plants. During

my first botany conference, BOTANY 2016, I

was also so pleasantly surprised that anyone

who wanted to give a talk could indeed give

a talk and appreciated this fact a lot as there

aren’t many opportunities for junior graduate

students and undergrads to present in the same

session with very experienced professors. I

met so many interesting people, learnt so

much about different fields of plant sciences,

PSB 64 (3) 2018

193

got endless inspiration about my work and

career, and visited so many awesome places

during BOTANY conferences—it became

something I’m really looking forward to every

summer.

What motivated you to run for the position

of Student Representative to the Board of

Directors?

A number of reasons motivated me to run for

the position. Firstly, I was very fortunate and

was awarded a number of research awards and

travel awards by BSA, which was extremely

encouraging to me as a young scientist. I would

love to make my own effort to help the society

to grow and glow and help more students to

have positive experiences like mine with BSA.

Secondly, former student rep Becky Povilus,

a very close friend and a role model of mine,

very patiently explained to me the duties and

expectations of student reps of BSA, and I

made sure to know what I might be facing

and something I could contribute to before

I decided to run for the position. Thirdly,

since my undergrad, I have lived and studied

in China, Japan, Sweden, Germany, France,

and the United States, and I am hopeful that

my international experience could bring

something new to BSA if I became a student

rep. Particularly, I have experienced many

struggles that any international student would

have, and

I believe my personal experiences

will help me to communicate and connect

well with all the non-U.S. members of the BSA

community, and hopefully also building up

(both academic and non-academic) resources

in the society that international members

can refer to. On the other hand, now it’s the

fourth year for me living in the States, and I

hope my experiences and perspectives will

help the society to expand outside of the

United States and establish more international

collaborations.

Lastly, I am a hopeless plant

lover and plant blindness is something that

really drives me crazy. Becoming a student

rep of BSA will be the very first step for me

to learn and strategize how to cure plant

blindness outside of our communities.

What is your research about?

Meristem, meristem, meristem—the

foundation of plant development and the

thing that makes plants so different from

others. I love everything about plant evo-

devo, but I really have a soft spot for anything

related to meristems. Using the beautiful

Columbine flowers (Aquilegia), I’m exploring

one important aspect regarding meristem

during my graduate school: How is the natural

variation in floral meristem proliferation

controlled at the evolutionary level? Unlike

the vegetative meristem, floral meristems are

always determinant—the stem cell activity will

be shut down at a specific time point during

primordium initiation, and that’s why every

flower only makes a finite number of floral

organs. Floral meristems of some flowers

proliferate for a long time, so that many whorls

of floral organs are made in a flower, but floral

meristems of some flowers only proliferate

for a very short period, resulting in very few

whorls of floral organs. This difference in the

timing of floral meristem termination lays the

foundation of a large part of floral diversity we

see in nature, but we have very little idea of

how it is controlled both developmentally and

evolutionarily.

Aquilegia is a very good model for tackling

this question as it already has a sequenced

and annotated genome and established

functional tools, and different species have a

high degree of interfertility and their flowers

have identical numbers of all floral organs

except for stamens. Therefore, the variation in

the duration of floral meristem proliferation

PSB 64 (3) 2018

194

can be well represented by the variation of

stamen whorl numbers.

I’m absolutely in

love with my research and feel very grateful

for the fact that it’s a nice integration of

molecular lab work, computational analysis,

histology and microscopy, and morphological

characterization. It allows me to spend a lot of

time with my plants, documenting their details

at all levels, from macroscopic to microscopic.

What sorts of hobbies do you have?

I like hiking and kayaking, and spending time

with plants (literally). I like drawing, mostly

watercolor of plants (no, there’s no such thing

as too much plants). I love traveling and I’m

flying between Asia, Europe and America

very often. I like learning languages, and I

used to make subtitles for Japanese animes.

Music is also a big part of my life. I go to a

lot of concerts (and Boston is a great place

for concerts), most often hardcore metal and

heavy metal bands, and underground local

bands. I have been playing piano since I was 5

years old, and I still practice religiously every

week—especially after a hard day of work,

nothing comforts me more than putting my

fingers on piano keys.

Building an Intentionally

Inclusive Community

One of our main goals moving forward is to

focus on building an intentionally inclusive

community for student members of the BSA.

If you have any questions, concerns, sugges-

tions, or comments about how we can make

a more inclusive community, please reach

out to either Chelsea Pretz (chelsea.pretz@

colorado.edu) or Min Ya (yamin@g.harvard.

edu)—or use our new BSA Student Represen-

tative e-mail: bsastudent@botany.org. Follow

us on Twitter at @Botanical_!

Quick notes on the

BOTANY 2018 conference

We would like to extend a thank you to every-

one who attended BOTANY 2018 in Roches-

ter, Minnesota! From our perspective, the con-

ference was filled with great workshops and

mixers geared toward the student membership

of the society as well as great talks given by

students, faculty, and alumni. More impor-

tantly, approximately 30% of the conference

attendees were students—a number that has

gradually increased throughout BSA’s history.

During our “Careers in Botany” Student Lun-

cheon, we were inspired by Susan Pell that

there are many different paths in botany. We

also had a two wonderfully executed work-

shops! During the Job Search Transparency:

Learning the Unwritten Rules to Land your

Dream Job, panelists Rob Labort, Jason Cant-

ley, Allison Miller, and Ya Yang enlightened

us with advice such as on how to be prepared

for the next stages in life. Amanda Grusz led

a group of students on the workshop The El-

evator Speech: Crafting an Effective Pitch

that Highlights your Research and Illustrates

the Broader Impacts. This explored how to

catch people’s attention in just a short period.

Overall, our student-oriented events were a

success, and we loved having the opportunity

to meet everyone at the student mixer, which

was hosted at the Grand Rounds in downtown

Rochester. We look forward to seeing all of

you again, or getting to know you for the first

time, at BOTANY 2019 in Tucson, Arizona,

July 27-31!

www.digitalherbarium.com

WHEN IS YOUR

HERBARIUM

UP FOR DIGITIZATION?

picturae-herbarium-7x9.indd 1

18/06/2018 09:04

196

BOOK REVIEWS

Economic Botany

Kumeyaay Ethnobotany Shared Heritage of the Californias ........................................................196

American Eden: David Hosack, Botany, and Medicine in the Garden

of the Early Republic ..............................................................................................................................................197

Rhododendron ..........................................................................................................................................................198

Sunflowers ...................................................................................................................................................................199

Physiological

Gravitational Biology I: Gravity Sensing and Graviorientation in

Microorganisms and Plants ................................................................................................................................201

Systematics

The Plants of Jordan: an Annotated Checklist .....................................................................................204

Kumeyaay Ethnobotany:

Shared Heritage of the

Californias

Michael Wilken-Robertson

2018.

ISBN: 978-1-94138-430-5

Softcover, US$29.95. 282 pp. +

xxix

Sunbelt Publications, Inc.,

Rancho La Puerta.

The Kumeyaay are Native Americans living

on both sides of the United States–Mexican

border in Baja California. The author is

an anthropologist, so the reader has the

advantage of an anthropological insight into

the Kumeyaay way of life. This is a region where

the culture and plant uses of the indigenous

people are being eroded by development.

Thankfully, this book documents the uses of

plants and how they are prepared.
Following the introductory chapters dealing

with prehistory, contemporary landscapes,

language, and methods, the botanical heart of

the book discusses 47 plants and their utility.

These are all well illustrated with clear full-

color images showing diagnostic features of

the plants as well as stages in the preparation

of foods, fibers, dyes, medicines, arrows, and

construction materials.
Like the rest of the book, species treatments are

well written and detailed enough to repeat the

processes of food, dye, and basket preparation.

I am interested in the use of acorns for food, so

I appreciated the unit dealing with coast live

oak (Quercus agrifolia). After the oak seeds

are ground in the querns carved in boulders,

the resultant meal is boiled and strained. This

is added to meat dishes or eaten on its own

as a gruel. The leftover matter solidifies in a

kind of gel that resembles mok, the traditional

Korean delicacy made from Q. dentata.
Another fascinating food is derived indirectly

from the chaparral ash, Fraxinus parryi. The

army worm (a caterpillar from the family

ECONOMIC BOTANY

PSB 64 (3) 2018

197

Noctuidae) is eaten and prepared like the

mopane worm (Gonimbrasia belina) that is so

widespread in southern Africa. The mopane

worm feeds mainly on Colophospermum

mopane. In both cases the caterpillar is

eviscerated by squeezing, then dried.
Less interesting but with more gustatory

appeal are species of cherries and a lengthy

section of agave. For a book dealing with

ethnobotany, one could wish for more specific

identifications than Salix spp. and Quercus

spp.
This well-produced book ends on challenging

but encouraging chapters with the author’s

reflections, a discussion of sustainability, and

developing public interest in the culture and its

ethnobotany. One can’t help but wonder how

many other cultures and their ethnobotany

would benefit from a book like this.

-Lytton John Musselman, Department of

Biological Sciences, Old Dominion University,

Norfolk, Virginia 23529-0266

American Eden: David

Hosack, Botany, and

Medicine in the Garden

of the Early Republic

Victoria Johnson

2018.

ISBN-13: 978-1-63149-419-2

Hardcover; US $29.95. 480 pp.

Liveright Publishing Corporation, New York, NY, USA

The cast and characters of early U. S. history

have recently regained fame associated with

the success of the hit musical Hamilton. One

plotline not featured on Broadway is that

of David Hosack, a prominent doctor and

botanist in New York City during this period,

and his struggles to create the first botanical

garden in America. In American Eden: David

Hosack, Botany, and Medicine in the Garden

of the Early Republic, Victoria Johnson, Ph.D.

in sociology and associate professor in urban

policy and planning at Hunter College, paints

a dynamic picture of the social, political,

economic, and personal threads that tied

Hosack’s botanical quest to the early history

of the nation.
This historical work tells the tale of Hosack as

an individual in the context of the scientific and

political scene in which he was entrenched.

Hosack was born before the Revolutionary

War but came of age as the nation did. Johnson

details his early life, education, professional

and civic engagements, and medical and

scientific journey. Inspired by medicine and

the use of plants in contemporary remedies

and their utility as a teaching tool, he sought

to establish America’s first botanical garden,

the Elgin Botanic Garden, in New York City

where the Rockefeller Center now sits.
The book is structured around the timeline of

Hosack’s life while providing insights into the

cultural, economic, and political background

that both drove and hindered his progress.

Johnson draws upon primary resources

from Hosack, his contemporaries, family,

and friends, many of whom are recognizable

as prominent figures during that time. She

details his educational journey both home and

abroad, where he mingled with prominent

British scientists, and his return to New York

where he established his medical practice.

Hosack made numerous contributions to

medicine, but perhaps his most famed act as

a doctor was treating Alexander Hamilton

after the duel with Aaron Burr. In addition

to his profession as an attending physician,

he held professorships in botany, natural

history, midwifery, and surgery, a breadth

of accomplishments and titles near unheard

of today. Hosack’s desire to establish his

botanical garden continued to be a driving

force for many years, through times of peace

and war, personal and political strife, and

financial distress and luxury. Although this

PSB 64 (3) 2018

198

in. Those with a penchant for either of these

themes, as well as medicine and the arts and

sciences more broadly, will find pieces to

relish in this book!
-Nora Mitchell, Department of Biology, Uni-

versity of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New

Mexico, USA

Rhododendron

Richard Milne

2017.

ISBN: 978-1-78023-815-9

Hardcover, £16.00. 236 pp,

Reaktion Books Ltd.,

London

It’s timely to be reading

Richard Milne’s Rhododendron while enjoying

the peak flowering season for azaleas and

rhododendrons in New York City. Milne, an

evolutionary biologist and environmentalist

at University of Edinburgh, presents an

utterly charming adventure story that surveys

the many ways by which rhododendrons

have influenced human cultures, as well as

their diversity and evolution. Milne’s writing

is easily read, sprinkled with dry humor, as

exemplified by these imaginative chapter

titles.
“Sex and the Single Rhododendron” explores

the promiscuous behavior of rhododendrons

because each of the 1000 species can cross with

many other rhododendron species. Milne

personifies their toxic dark side in the role

of “femme fatale” and with links to departed

souls and cuckoos.
“The Fall and Rise of Azalea” follows

the constantly changing classification of

rhododendrons and azaleas. Milne emphasizes

the important point that taxonomy is opinion,

amenable to disagreement. Recent results of

investigations with DNA enable scientists to

path meanders and may not be as climactic as

a fictional story, the reader will be drawn to

Hosack and his persistence.
The botanical focus is a uniting thread

throughout this book. Among the primary

resources and catalogs that Johnson weaves

into a storyline are mentions of innumerable

plant species, both North American and

exotic, as sources of medicine, collection,

and overall fascination. The botanist will

delight in the writings of prominent political

figures that mention species by both common

and scientific name. Hosack even had loose

ties to Lewis and Clark; the reader can only

imagine how exciting the discovery (to those

of European descent) of a whole continent of

plants must have been!
Throughout the book there are themes

recognizable and relevant to science and

society today. These include Hosack’s struggles

to obtain funding for his garden, both from

government and private sources, and the

difficulties he encountered in justifying

botanical science and its uses to the public

and medical community. Hosack also had

numerous international collaborations, not

only receiving part of his education abroad,

but also hosting visiting scholars from Europe

and exchanging seed collections with people

from all over the world to boost his collection

of exotic plants. He even proposed an early

citizen science effort for the collection of local

plants through the New-York State Society

for the Promotion of Agriculture, Arts, and

Manufactures, although his attempt was

unsuccessful.
Overall, Johnson presents an engaging and

well-written insight into a little-known, yet

highly influential, doctor and botanist of early

America. This book reads like a story, but

with rich details focusing on the historical

and botanical context that Hosack worked

PSB 64 (3) 2018

199

follow rhododendron evolution, even assisting

scientists to understand continental drift.
“Rhododendromania” reveals the history of

how botanists, merchants, missionaries, and

other early explorers became plant collectors,

trying to satisfy the tastes of sponsors who

were eager to obtain novel plants, especially

rhododendrons.
“Glasshouse Sensations” demonstrates how

the beauty of the approximately 250 species

of tropical rhododendrons, the Vireyas,

led to an intense interest in greenhouse

rhododendrons. Spice merchants brought

back Vireya rhododendrons that captured the

attention of nurseries. The development of the

Wardian case, an early version of a terrarium,

enabled merchants and botanists to transport

live plants.
“Home of the Rhododendrons” investigates

the extensive knowledge and appreciation of

rhododendrons in China. Once China opened

its borders to traders in the mid-18

century,

explorers, missionaries, and merchants arrived

in China, steadily discovering new species.

Plant collectors became intent on bringing

back seed for their sponsors in Europe and

North America. Explorers have also found

fossil records that provide a timeline to the

evolution of rhododendrons. Botanists have

matched fossil evidence with DNA studies

to follow the evolution and migration of

rhododendrons over millennia. Once Mao

assumed power, foreign exploration closed

until botanists in the West were able to open

collaborations with Chinese botanists, leading

to joint plant exploration by Western and

Chinese botanists that continues today.
“Potions, Petals and Poisons” depicts the

toxicity of rhododendrons from antiquity

to present, involving poisoning livestock;

eliminating bedbugs, mice, fleas, and lice;

irritating eyes if burned; and intoxicating

humans—its narcotic honey was even used

in warfare. Rhododendrons were an herbal

remedy, now confirmed by modern medicine.

Prior to the Reformation, gruit ales were made

with R. tomentosum and R. groenlandicum for

their intoxicating effects, a practice banned

entirely in Germany in 1855.
“The Tears of the Cuckoo” follows the impact

of rhododendrons on culture. This is especially

true in southwest China, where the Yi people

hold the Torch Festival, offering rhododendron

flowers to their Flower God. Every year, at the

height of the rhododendron flowering season,

these minority peoples will wear festive

costumes, light a fire, sing and dance, and

warmly welcome guests. Milne enumerates

Chinese folktales linking rhododendron with

tragedy and death. Chinese legends describe

a tragic figure that turns into a cuckoo, whose

song recalls its tragic life, and whose mouth

spills blood, which emerges as rhododendrons.
“Black Sheep: The Tale of Rhododendron

ponticum“ is a high point of the book. R.

ponticum has run wild across the British

countryside; it easily establishes itself in areas

where the soil is disturbed. Today, R. ponticum

is an even greater problem since it is a carrier

of Phytophthera ramorum, sudden oak death.

The negative economic and ecological impact

has led to controversial efforts to eradicate R.

ponticum.
“Conservation, Collections and the

Future” examines the ecological status of

rhododendrons and forecasts their potential

future plight. Increasingly, when botanical

explorers return to previously collected

locations, rhododendron species are no longer

found. Rhododendrons are being cleared to

make room for agricultural development.

Not only are known species disappearing, but

many species that had not yet been discovered

are believed to be destroyed as well. The

PSB 64 (3) 2018

200

effort of plant collectors to bring these

species to other parts of the world for study

provides a safety net for select species but

eliminates natural evolution that could occur

in the wild. Fortunately, the habitat of some

rhododendrons is in areas where agricultural

development is not practical. Milne stresses

that today, “rules restrict collection” and closes

with cautionary comments about climate

change—of major significance to Milne—

concluding: “The future of rhododendrons, as

with so much else, is in our hands.”
Rhododendron is the eighteenth volume

in Reaktion’s superb series devoted to

“integrating horticultural and botanical

writing with a broader account of the cultural

and social impact of trees, plants and flowers.”

Compared with Tulip, another volume from

this series (see review on page 85 of the Fall

2017 issue of Plant Science Bulletin (63(3)),

this coverage displays depth and originality;

it will delight botanists, gardeners, and

history buffs. Following standard design for

this Reaktion series, the book is well-bound

with stitched pages; printed on high-quality

paper stock; offers 70 color plates, 30 halftone

color illustrations, a timeline, table of groups

within Rhododendron, a short list of further

reading, a list of associations and websites,

acknowledgments and meticulous photo

acknowledgments, a 7-page index, and floral

end papers, here in eye-catching seafoam

green. Rhododendron is a thoughtful and well-

researched book based on Milne’s extensive

study of the genus, evident from the 24 pages

of references accompanying the chapters.

Milne’s writing is clear, his arguments amply

documented, and his style thoroughly

captivating.
–Dorothea Bedigian, Research Associate, Missou-

ri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, Missouri, USA

Sunflowers

Stephen A. Harris

2018.

ISBN: 978-1-78023-926-2

Hardcover; US$27.00. 256 pp.

Reaktion Books, London, U.K.

Two images of sunflowers

come to mind. First, large fields of giant

flowers in western Kansas—although this

scene repeats itself in many states of the upper

Midwest in the summer. These fields are

impressive because all the heads of the flowers

face the same way due to solar tracking.

Sunflowers are one of several plant species

that exhibit this behavior by turning to face

the sun, and these movements are also termed

heliotropism, a complex response to daily

environmental cycles (Vandenbrink et al.,

2014). Although this phenomenon has been

well known for a long time, many questions

about the precise mechanisms remain

unanswered.
My second thought about sunflowers is the

tremendous circumnutation, or helical organ

movement, that occurs in young seedlings

(Kiss, 2006). One of the first scientists to

characterize circumnutation is Charles

Darwin in his monograph Power of Movement

in Plants (Darwin and Darwin, 1880). These

dramatic movements can be easily captured

in time lapse photography (for example, see

http://circumnutation.umcs.lublin.pl/en.html

and https://youtu.be/eKo5F87A8a0).
This book, written for the general reader, is

part of a series that integrates botanical work

into a broader social and historical context.

All books in the series have a single word title

(e.g., apple, cactus, oak, etc.) as well as chapter

titles that are single words.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

201

Chapter One in Sunflowers is titled “Amazing”

and gives a broad introduction to this

fascinating plant group. Although the focus is

on sunflowers (Helianthus annuus), the book

considers the larger group of the Asteraceae

family. The author, Stephen Harris, is the Druce

Curator of the Oxford University Herbaria

and a research lecturer in the Department of

Plant Sciences at Oxford.
Harris considers the controversies around the

mechanisms of circumnutation, namely that

the theory proposed by Darwin and Darwin

in 1880 (that circumnutation had an internal

driving force in plants) has been questioned

by scientists performing recent spaceflight

experiments. However, the author does not

discuss the most up-to-date work on the

mechanisms of solar tracking in sunflowers.
In the chapter on “Surviving,” Harris considers

how various members of the Asteraceae have

adopted and survived in hostile environments

such as those found in high altitudes. Other

stressful locales considered are arid areas

with significant water stress and fire-prone

ecosystems.
In “Curing,” the medical properties of this

plant group are outlined, and in “Feeding”

the food and culinary value of sunflowers

are discussed. The chapter on “Profiting”

continues this theme and expands it to the

economic value of sunflowers and its relatives.

Helianthus annuus is one of the few crops to

have been domesticated in North America

(about 5000 years ago). Sunflower seeds and

commercial oilseeds have economic relevance,

and their histories as an oil crop in Europe,

Russia, and the United States are chronicled.
The book is beautifully illustrated with many

images of sunflowers and other Asteraceae

in natural settings along with herbarium

photographs. The broader culture is

considered with images such as paintings by

Vincent van Gogh and photos of sunflowers

on stamps throughout the world. This book

is reasonably priced and will be enjoyed by

professional and amateur botanists as well

as by horticulturalists. In summary: a very

enjoyable read.

Literature Cited

Darwin, C., and F. Darwin. 1880. The Power

of Movement in Plants. John Murray Publishers,

London.

Kiss, J. Z. 2006. Up, down, and all around: how

plants sense and respond to environmental stim-

uli. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci-

ences (USA) 103: 829-830.

Vandenbrink, J. P., E. A. Brown, S. L. Harmer, and

B. K. Blackman. 2014. Turning heads: the biol-

ogy of solar tracking in sunflower. Plant Science

224: 20-26.

-John Z. Kiss, Department of Biology,

UNC-Greensboro, Greensboro NC 27402

PHYSIOLOGY

Gravitational Biology

I: Gravity Sensing

and Graviorientation

in Microorganisms

and Plants (Springer

Briefs in Space Life

Sciences)

Markus Braun, Maik Böh-

mer, Donat-Peter Häder,

Ruth Hemmersbach, and Klaus Palme

2018. ISBN-13: 978-3-31993-893-6

Paperback, US $69.99; 122 pages

Springer

Due to their stationary nature, plants have

evolved mechanisms that help them to adapt

to changes in their surrounding environment.

PSB 64 (3) 2018

202

Tropisms, directed growth movements in

response to external stimuli, help ensure the

survival of the plant (Vandenbrink et al.,

2014). Gravitropism, which is the directed

growth of plants in response to the gravity

vector, is one of the most important factors in

plant development. In addition, since gravity

has been ubiquitous and unchanging on Earth,

the ability to sense and respond to gravity has

been key throughout evolutionary history.
This book provides eight chapters that serve as

review articles on the topics of gravity sensing

and response in plants and microorganisms.

Thus, in addition to gravitropism in plants,

the topic of gravitaxis, or movement of

unicellular organisms in response to gravity,

is also considered. Typically, but not always,

gravitaxis occurs in the form of swimming in

a water column. Most of the chapters provide

an up-to-date literature review (i.e., references

current to 2017 or 2018).
The authors are experts in the fields of space

biology, plant gravitropism, and gravitaxis

research in microorganisms. Interestingly,

they all work in Germany and are associated

with the German space agency, the

DLR (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und

Raumfahrt). In some ways, although the

authors clearly have significant expertise, it

may have been desirable to have some experts

from outside of Germany.
The first chapter provides an overview and

offers some important definitions of the

major terms in these fields of gravitational

research. The second chapter considers

important tools in gravitational biology

including microgravity and microgravity

simulators. The gravity effects on objects

are reduced or eliminated during the state of

“free fall” or microgravity. Methods to achieve

microgravity include the use of drop towers,

parabolic flights of airplanes, sounding

rockets, and, of course, orbiting space vehicles

such as the International Space Station. In

addition to true microgravity, biologists have

developed methods to simulate microgravity

by using devices such as clinostats and random

positioning machines (see also Brungs et al.,

2016).
This second chapter also considers the

importance of investigations in reduced

gravity. There have been numerous studies

on plant growth and development in the

microgravity environment of low Earth orbit

since the beginning of human spaceflight

(Vandenbrink and Kiss, 2016). In contrast,

we know little about plant behavior in reduced

(sometimes termed fractional) gravity

environments (less than the nominal 1g that

occurs on Earth). Since international space

agencies have cited human exploration of the

moon/Mars as long-term goals, it is important

to understand plant biology at the lunar

(0.17g) and Martian levels of gravity (0.38g) as

plants are likely to be part of bioregenerative

life support systems on these missions (Kiss,

2014).
The third chapter focuses on gravitaxis in

ciliates and flagellates. Much of the interesting

working on gravity thresholds has been

performed with the alga Euglena, both in

space and on the ground. The authors of this

chapter also report on work that is relevant for

understanding biology at the reduced gravity

levels that were considered in more detail in

the previous chapter.
Tip growing unicellular system of rhizoids

of the alga Chara is the subject of Chapter

4. Chara rhizoids have been used in many

spaceflight experiments and related ground

research to study gravity sensing and signal

transduction. The figures in this chapter

are particularly useful to understanding the

concepts in terms of the role of the cytoskeleton

in gravitropism pathways. In addition, the use

of microgravity to unravel signaling pathways

PSB 64 (3) 2018

203

is clearly delineated and summarized.
Chapter 5 considers gravitropism in fungi,

mosses, and ferns, but it is short and not

very comprehensive. There are far better

recent reviews of these interesting topics (e.g.,

Corrochano and Galland, 2016).
The next two chapters (6 and 7) focus on the

cellular and molecular aspects of gravitropism,

respectively. In some ways, these components

overlap, and this distinction is somewhat

arbitrary. The diagrams in Chapter 6 are

particularly helpful in terms of summarizing

the knowledge about the cell biology and

physiology of tropisms. Topics covered

include the starch-statolith hypothesis, the

role of actin in sensing and response, and

secondary messenger molecules. Given

its central role in asymmetrical gravitropic

growth, the physiology and transport of auxin

are analyzed. The topic of auxin biology and

transport is further considered in Chapter 7

as well the relationship between auxin and

other plant growth regulators. In Chapter

7, the author also discusses the effects of

microgravity and altered gravity on the plant

transciptome but misses some recent articles

on this important, emerging topic (e.g., Kwon

et al., 2015).
The last chapter focuses on bioregenerative

life support systems in space research. This

short chapter provides a limited introduction

to this interesting area that will be important

for long-range space travel.
Overall, I found this volume to be a well-written

introduction to the topics of gravitropism,

gravitaxis, and plant space biology. The book

is recommended for new graduate students

in the field of gravitational and space biology

of plants and will provide a great overview to

this group. I can also imagine this collection

of review articles to be a useful supplement

in an advanced plant physiology or plant

developmental biology class.

Literature Cited

Brungs, S., M. Egli, S. L. Wuest, P. C. Christianen,

J. J. Van Loon, T. J. Anh, R. Hemmersbach. 2016.

Facilities for simulation of microgravity in the

ESA ground-based facility programme. Micro-

gravity Science and Technology 28: 191-203.

Corrochano, L. M. and P. Galland. 2016. Pho-

tomorphogenesis and gravitropism in fungi. In:

Wendland J. (ed.) Growth, Differentiation and

Sexuality. The Mycota, vol I. (Third Edition)

Springer, Heidelberg.

Kiss, J. Z. 2014. Plant biology in reduced gravi-

ty on the Moon and Mars. Plant Biology 16(S1):

12–17.

Kwon, T., J. A. Sparks, J. Nakashima, S. N. Allen,

Y. Tang, and E. B. Blancaflor. 2015. Transcrip-

tional response of Arabidopsis seedlings during

spaceflight reveals peroxidase and cell wall re-

modeling genes associated with root hair devel-

opment. American Journal of Botany 102: 21-35.

Vandenbrink, J. P. and J. Z. Kiss. 2016. Space, the

final frontier: a critical review of recent experi-

ments performed in microgravity. Plant Science

243: 115–119.

Vandenbrink, J. P., J. Z. Kiss, R. Herranz, and F.

J. Medina. 2014. Light and gravity signals syner-

gize in modulating plant development. Frontiers

in Plant Science 5: 563.

-John Z. Kiss, Department of Biology,

UNC-Greensboro, Greensboro NC 27402

PSB 64 (3) 2018

204

SYSTEMATICS

The Plants of

Jordan: An Annotated

Checklist

Hatem Taifour and Ahmed

El-Oqlah (edited by Shahi-

na A. Ghazanfar)

2017. ISBN 978-1-84246-

641-4

Paperback, US $57.38. 162

pp. + x

Royal Botanic Gardens,

Kew

The flora of the Levant has been intensively

studied for many years beginning with

the ground-breaking 1896 flora of George

Edward Post (Musselman, 2006). Plants of

Jordan follows that tradition of quality and

rigor established by Post. His research is still

relevant. In fact, the authors of the present

work include a survey of his material hosted

at the Post Herbarium of the American

University of Beirut.
Having taught plant identification at the

University of Jordan, I may be prejudiced in

my enthusiasm for this publication. The book

draws upon the extensive floristic research

of Daoud Al-Eisawi, personnel of the Royal

Society for the Conservation of Nature, as

well as the authors’ and editor’s work. This is a

collaborative effort between the Royal Botanic

Garden of Jordan and Royal Botanic Gardens,

Kew.
It is edited by Kew botanist Shahina Ghazanfar,

herself an expert on Middle East floristics; her

editing skill is evident. After a foreword by

one of the Jordanian royal family, there are

concise and informative sections on floristics,

vegetation types, and biogeography. Floristic

data were garnered from regional herbaria

and databases as well as fieldwork.

The bulk of the book, of course, is the

annotated checklist, which helpfully follows

the family delineations of the Angiosperm

Phylogeny Group. Nomenclature and

synonymy are included along with occasional

notes. There is little or no distribution data

and location information varies wildly in

detail. For example, some entries simply cite

publications, some refer to databases, and

some are as detailed as “500 m after first turn

to Al Ketteh village.” While this approach

documents occurrence, it could confuse

anyone interested in distribution of plants.

Nerium oleander, for example, is documented

from the Irbid area (in the extreme north of the

country) but is common in wadis throughout

much of Jordan. A detailed bibliography

including non-archival material concludes the

book.
The size of the well-bound book (6 × 0.6 ×

9.2 inches [15.24 × 0.15 × 23.39 cm) makes it

well-suited for field use.
If I were to teach plant identification again in

Jordan, this would be the textbook. The Plants

of Jordan is an essential resource for anyone

with an interest in the flora Jordan or Middle

East and a good example of a modern checklist.

The publication of this long-awaited work will

further the objectives of the collaborators, the

Royal Botanic Garden of Jordan, and Kew to

raise awareness of a threatened flora and the

need for conservation.

Literature Cited

Musselman, L. J. 2006. The botanical activities

of George Edward Post (1838-1909). Archives of

Natural History 33(2): 282-301.

-Lytton John Musselman, Department of

Biological Sciences, Old Dominion University,

Norfolk, VA 23529-0266

The only instrument in the
world that uses Rapid Sensing

™

Technology for fast A-C

curves

and survey measurements.

www.licor.com/6800

LI-6800 Portable

Photosynthesis System

Stinziano JR, Morgan PB, Lynch DJ, Saathoff
AJ, McDermitt DK, and Hanson DT. (2017)
The rapid A-C

response: photosynthesis in

the phenomic era. Plant, Cell & Environment,
40:1256-1262. doi: 10.1111/pce.12911

See the open access
Rapid A-C

Response

(RACiR

™

) Method paper

Plant Science Bulletin

Featured Images

The Botanical Society of

America is a membership soci-

ety whose mission is to: pro-

mote botany, the field of basic

science dealing with the study

& inquiry into the form, func-

tion, development, diversity,

reproduction, evolution, & uses

of plants & their interactions

within the biosphere.

ISSN 0032-0919

Published quarterly by

Botanical Society of America, Inc.

4475 Castleman Avenue

St. Louis, MO 63166-0299

Periodicals postage is paid at

St. Louis, MO & additional

mailing offices.

POSTMASTER:

Send address changes to:

Botanical Society of America

Business Office

P.O. Box 299

St. Louis, MO 63166-0299

bsa-manager@botany.org

The yearly subscription rate

of $15 is included

in the membership

Address Editorial Matters (only) to:

Mackenzie Taylor, Editor

Department of Biology

Creighton University

2500 California Plaza

Omaha, NE 68178

Phone 402-280-2157

psb@botany.org

Plant Science Bulletin

Fall 2018 Volume 64 Number 3

BOTANY conferences are known for great speakers,

interesting symposia, and helpful workshops. But the true

spirit of the conferences lies in the unexpected conversations,

the sudden collaborative ideas, and the pure camaraderie

between the attendees.

We can't wait for BOTANY 2019!

Back to overview

Items posted on the Botanical Society of America's website by the author/creator are licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
We value sharing, growing and learning together. In the spirit of fairness, we believe in the attribution of materials and ensuring the appropriate voices are in place when considering further use.