Aquilegia

2008·1.4 MB·English

by  Colorado Native Plant Society

Aquilegia
Newsletter ofthe Colorado Native Plant Society
dedicated to the appreciation and conservation ofthe Colorado nativeflora”
.
WORKSHOPS
2008/2009
byAnnHenson Mail to: CONPS c/o Linda Smith
6822 Mission Rd,
Colorado Native Plant Society workshops are designed for Colorado Springs, CO 80915
plantenthusiasts ofalllevels, fromnoviceto expert. Duringthese Registrations will not be accepted until after September 15,
sessions there is usually plenty oftime for learning and fun! 2008. Forthosewhoneedto cancel atthelastminute, pleasecon-
tactLinda Smithat719-574-6250 [email protected] so she
REGISTRATION INFORMATION
has the opportunityto fill your spot.
Workshops are for Society members only. Nonmembers must
join CONPS in orderto be able to register for aworkshop. Non- WORKSHOPHOSTS NEEDED
members may use the registration form (enclosed) tojoin. Arriving ataCONPS workshop meansthatafriendly facewill
Registrationismail-inonlyandrequirespaymentatthetimeof greet you. This wonderful person has opened the building,
registration. For each workshop, choose either session one or brought the microscopes, made sure a name tag is available,
two, as they aretypicallymore-or-lessthe same. The registration pluggedintheteapot, andprovidedsometreattofeastupon. Our
fee for each is $20. This fee is non-refundable. Furthermore, host will make sure that materials are secure for the night and
schedule changes cannot be accommodated because oftime and repeats this forthe second session. Couldyou be a host? Ifyou
space limitations. arewillingto be ahostataworkshopyouwill attend orjustover
Participationisoftenlimitedandregistrationisprocessedinthe aweekend contactAnnHenson at 303-772-8962.
order received. Ifthe workshop has already been filled, youwill “Workshops” continues on page 2
be notified, your check will not be deposited, and you will be
addedto the waiting list, ifthat isyour desire. Contents
To register, pleasemailyourcheckpayableto CONPS for$20 Workshops 1-3
per workshop along with the registration order form provided in Articles 4-7, 14
this newsletter and on our website. Or sendyour check with the Who’s inthatname? 8-9
Conservation Corner 10
following information: title and date of the workshop(s) you Branching Out 12-13
would like to attend, your name, address, telephone number, and BookReviews 11
email address. Registrationcanonlybe processedwithall ofthis Announcements 15-18
Aboutthe Society 19
information.
Calendar 20
Volume 32 Number 3 Aquilegia Fall 2008
Workshops” continued from page 1 COLORADOWILLOW IDENTIFICATION
DON’T KNOWMUCHABOUT... GRASSES Eeader: GwenKittel
Eocation: CSU Extension Service, Community Room
Leaders: LynnRiedel andAnnHenson
Natural Resources Building
Location: CSUExtension Service, Community Room
9595 NelsonRd.
Natural Resources Building
Eongmont, CO
9595 Nelson Rd.
AM PM
Longmont, CO Time: 9:00 to 3:00
AM PM Session One: Saturday, 15 November2008
Time: 9:00 to 3:00
SessionTwo: Sunday, 16November2008.
Session One: Saturday, 4 October2008
Gwen Kittel, Regional Vegetation EcologistwithNatureServe,
SessionTwo: Sunday, 5 October2008
will present aworkshop onwillows, with a focus on summer and
Afraid of grass identification? Know it’s too hard?! In this
winter identification and ecology. Willow identification can be
beginner’sworkshop, participants will gain aworkingknowledge
greatly aided by understanding species distribution and ecology,
ofthe terminology used in grass identification. UsingIllustrated
includingwhichspecies occurwhere andwithwhatotherspecies.
Keys to the Grasses ofColorado by Janet Wingate, along with
We will learn: a) terms specific to the Salicaceae orwillow fami-
driedgrasses, photographs, andherbarium specimens, wewill get
ly, b) to tell young cottonwoods from willows, c) to identify wil-
you comfortable.
VisitCONPS on-line bookstorewhereyoucanbuy Illustrated lows with floral parts, d) to identify willows by only vegetative
characteristics, and e) to differentiate the 12 most common wil-
Keys to the Grasses ofColorado by JanetWingate. Look under
lows. Gwen has worked with willows for many years and can
the pink box formembers’ only books. Books will also be avail-
identifyall 25willows inColoradobased onvegetativecharacter-
able atthe workshop.
istics alone. Adichotomouskeybasedonvegetativecharacters of
COLORADO ETHNOBOTANYWITHAN EMPHASIS ON ColoradoWillows will be distributed atthe workshop.
GREAT PLAINSAND HISPANIC PLANT LORE
WETLAND COMMUNITIESAND THEIR COMMON
Leader: DonaldHazlett
Location: CSUExtension Service, Community Room SPEICES
Natural Resources Building Leader: Barry Johnston
9595 Nelson Rd. Location: Longmont, CO (locationto be determined)
AM PM
Eongmont, CO Time: 9:00 to 3:00
Time: 9:00AMto 3:00 PM Session One: Friday, 23 January 2009
Session One: Saturday, 1 November2008 SessionTwo: Saturday, 24 January 2009
SessionTwo: Sunday, 2November2008 Various“wetlands”existinColorado. Gettingyourfeetwetisnot
Botanists oftenfocus onrareplants, while ethnobotanists focus required to become familiar with the most common types in this
more on the common plants. This makes sense since, when workshop. Whatarethey,wheredotheyoccur,andwhatspeciesare
NativeAmericans or early settlers became ill, a readily available commonmembers ofeachcommunitywill be explored. Howwet-
or common plant would be a much better choice for a medicine lands are classified ordefinedwill be explained. Tour examples of
thanarare onethatgrows only inadistantcanyon. Indeed, many these interestingplantcommunitiesviaphotographs and specimens.
ofthe easternColorado plants arewidespread, whichmakesthem
more available as medicines whenneeded.
This ethnobotany workshop will focus on the folklore, com- Sahx discolor
@
monnames,Nahuatl (Aztec)names, anduses fornative Colorado Robert H. Mohlenbrock
USDA-NRCS PLANTS
plants, especially those on the eastern plains and those sold in Database / USDASCS. 1989.
Hispanic boticas(drug stores). Some native plantuses have been Midwestwetland flora; Field
office illustrated guide to plant
well documented as effective medicines, while others have yetto
species. Midwest National
be widely recognized as useful. In this workshop, we will look Technical Center, Lincoln.
both at herbarium specimens and at herbals that have been pack-
aged for sale to the public.
Page 2 Aquilegia Volume 32 Number 3
ASTOVNDmGASTRAGALUSIN COLORAD “INTERESTING” GRASS GENERA
Leader: JenniferAckerfield Deader: Robert Shaw
Location; Colorado State University Location: Fort Collins, CO (locationto be determined)
AM PM
E-005, Plant Sciences Building Time: 9:00 to 3:00
Fort Collins, CO Session One: Saturday, 25 April 2009
AM PM
Time: 9:00 to 3:00 SessionTwo: Sunday, 26April 26 2009
Session One: Saturday, 7 February^2009 There are several interesting grass genera that members find
SessionTwo: Sunday, 8 February 2009 difficult to identify. Dr. Robert Shaw (author of Colorado
Explore Astragalus, as a group, with CSU Herbarium speci- Grasses) will help us with Festuca, Elymus and Muhlenhergia.
mens and guidance from Jennifer Ackerfield, Collections He will identify and teach other “interesting” species using
Manager. Gainknowledge ofcharacteristics, such as flowers and unknownsfromparticipants. Whatawonderful opportunitytoget
pods, using keys forthis amazing group ofplants. experthelp inyour identificationquestions! Also, get updatedon
new ideas in grasstaxonomy,
HELP! THERE’SAGAMETOPHYTE INMYENGLISH This workshop is geared to those individualswithintermediate
IVY! THE STRANGE LIFE OFMOSSES, FERNS,AND to advanced level of grass identification skills. Copies of
HORSETAILS Colorado Grasseswill be available forpurchase.
Deader: VickeyTrammell
Location: Arapahoe Community College Biology Lab BASICMTLDFLOWER IDENTIFICATION
Optional; DenverBotanical Gardens Leader: MaryAnn Bonnell
Time: 9:00AMto 1:00 PM Location; MorrisonNature Center at StarKRanch
Optional: DBGTropical Observatory 16002 E SmithRd.
Sessions: Late February or early March Aurora, CO
Contact Ann Henson at [email protected] or 303-772- Time: 9:00AM to 3:00 PM
8962 for details after 1 October 2008. Attendance limited to 24 Session One: Saturday, 2 May2009
per session. Session Two: Sunday, 3 May 2009
Do your ferns have brown spots on the backs oftheir leaves? .Tumpstart your 2009 wildflower season with a primer on plant
Haveyoueverwonderedwhatthatbrownthingisontopofmoss? parts, familycharacteristics,andtheuseofabotanical key. Inaddi-
If someone asks you to join them gathering Smooth Scouring tion to covering the basics, we’ll help you overcome your fear of
Rush seeds, should you go? Ifyou don’t know the answers to composites and the pea key, This class will be indoors. Bring a
these questions, then you might enjoy a beginner’s experience sacklunchandahandlens. Attendanceislimitedto 15persession.
with the life cycles, biology, and ecology of lower plants.
Subjects covered will include: results ofcell division by mitosis Ann Henson is Chair ofthe Workshop Committee and Society
and meiosis, alternation ofgeneration between gametophyte and Secretary.
sporophyte generations, habitat and adaptations oflower plants,
their place in the ecosystem and in evolution ofthe plant king-
dom, andwhereto findoneforapet! Wewill learn important ter- MICROSCOPE FUND
minology and anatomical details. Although we will not identify Members continue to pay off the purchase of the dissecting
the specimens to species, you will be readyto take the next step. microscopeswith $8ofthe$20workshopregistrationfeegoing
Each attendee will get to use a compound microscope and dis- directly to the Microscope Fund. We have collected approxi-
secting scope. Wewill have live greenplantstoworkwith. Bring mately 50% ofdietotal purchase price in the pasttwo seasons.
a sack lunch. Those who still want more experience can go with You can also contribute directlyto the Microscope Fund. Mail
Vickey to the Denver Botanic Gardens tropical conservatory and contributions with note ofthe fund payable to CONPS at P.O.
seai'ch foreveiythingwesawinlab! Beadvisedthatyouwill need Box200, Ft. Collins, CO 80522.
to pay an entrance fee atthe gate, ifyou aren’t amemberofDBG.
Volume 32 Number 3 Aquilegia Page 3
MARR AND S^EINKAMP GRANT REPORTS
CO
Willow {Salix spp.) Clipping in Breckeiiridge, for Cross-country Ski Trails
by Catherine Kleier, Christy Carello, and ski paths. Willows within the path ofcer- area; thus, this treatment is called
AudreyHoffa tain cross-country ski trails have been “clipped.” The control drainage had never
trimmed after substantial snow fall to been mowed, and it was called
Introduction maintain trails that are free of shrub tips “undipped.” The quadrats were located
Willows {Salix spp.) are dominant emerging from the snow. roughly ten meters apart through each of
shrubs in western ecosystems, particularly In this study, the management activity the drainages. Although a random place-
riparian areas, andColoradohas29 species ofclipping willowpresented anopportuni- ment may be more statistically robust, this
within genus Salix (Dorn & Dorn, 1997). ty to investigate the role ofselective clip- was not possible, due to the five meter
Since the disappearance of wolves from ping on the growth, reproduction, and wide path that was mowed through the
Colorado,willowshaveshownadecline in waterstatus ofwillow. Clipping ofwillow clipped site, hiorderto remain consistent,
growth and fitness due to heavier grazing inthisexperimentserves as aproxyforelk our test plots had to be within this mowed
from elk and deer (Hebblewhite et al, grazmg and provides an opportunity to area, and so we chose to place our
1995). Ifwillows are being grazed more determine willowresponses in growth and undipped plots along atransect, as well.
heavily, then understanding their response fitness to grazing. We hypothesized that Within each quadrat, we placed ‘A inch
to grazing is an important management willow would show a decrease in growth diameter aluminum tags on all willow
question. Additionally, willows are a pri- rate due to clipping and that the clipping plants. Because we could not determine
maiy food source for beaver {Castor wouldreduceabove-groundbiomass; thus, ramets from genets, we did our best to tag
fiber)', thus,whenthere isawillowdecline, transpirationwouldbedecreasedandshoot all plants that were potentially separate
beaver populations also fall (Nolet, 2005). water potential would be greater. To test individuals. Tags were placed in the node
Beavers keep water tables high, so a lack these hypotheses, we measured growth, of a branch, to ensure that branch length
ofbeavers couldpresentwillowwithwater number ofcatkins, and water potential in would be consistently measured each
stress, Alternatively, herbivory decreases clipped and undipped quadrats. month. We tagged 76 plants in the ten
leafarea, which in turn reduces transpira- Understandingthe effects ofsuch clipping undipped plots and 99 plants in the ten
tional waterloss and increases shootwater areimportantinamanagementcontextand clipped plots. Density in the plots varied
potential (Johnston et al., 2007). alsoto furtherourunderstandingofwillow fromthreeto 14 stems per square meter.
Willows also occur in areas of high ecology in general. At the end of May, June, July, and
recreational traffic. Cucumber Gulch is a August we sampled all plots in both
wildlife preserve locatedbetweenthetown Materials and Methods clipped and undipped sites. We measured
ofBreckenridge and the Breckenridge Ski Cucumber Gulch is a preserve of 77 overall plant height as distance from the
Resort in Colorado. The wetlands within acres, and it contains several vegetation groundto the tallest tip, and branch length
this preserve represent an endangered types; however, ourworktook place in the as the distance from the node where we
habitatand have been designated anARNI shrub-wetland habitat. These habitats are placed the aluminum tag to the tip ofthe
(Aquatic Resource of National dominated by willows {Salix spp.). The branch. We also counted any catkins that
Importance) by the Environmental altitude is approximately 10,000 feet and we foundonthe plant. Eachtime we sam-
ProtectionAgency. Because ofits ecolog- our sites were located between 39° 29’ pledthe plots,wemeasuredwaterpotential
ical significance, the Town of 496.099” N and 106° 03’ 889.595” W. of one individual from each plot at each
Breckenridge has consistently supported In May 2006, we designated ten 1 vc? site. All water potential measurements
AM
conseiwation monitoring of the preseiwe. quadrats in two drainages in and near were made between 10;00 and 12:00
However, these conservation activities are Cucumber Gulch. The test drainage had PM on sunny to partly-sunny days. We
balanced by recreation, and the willow been mowed every November for seven clippedonebranchfrom eachplotandthen
community surrounding the wetland has years to clear willow and enable cross- measured it using a Scholander-type pres-
been altered for winter-time cross-country country ski trails through the open willow sure chamber.
Page 4 Aquilegia Volume 32 Number 3
Results
Through all months, there were clear
differences between the clipped and
unclippedplots interms ofoverall growth.
Unclipped plots had taller plants May
Clipped
through August, and these plants also
Undipped
showed longer branch lengths; however,
the plants in the clipped plots started
smaller, thus we measured growth rate
from one monthto the next.
We measured three growth intervals:
Growth interval
May to June, June to July, and July to
August. Forplantheight,therewasno dif- Figure 1. Difference in growth rate ofoverall plant height during three
intervals ofthe 2006 growing season between clipped and undipped
ference in growth from the May to June willow shrubs {Salix spp.), where N = 76 for undipped and 99 for
interval, but unclipped plants had a much clipped. Bars show standard error ofthe mean.
higher growthrate forthe June to July and
July to August intervals (Figure 1). For
branch length, the unclipped plants n
showedahighergrowthratefortheMayto -r
June and June to July interval, but the % =T=
2 Clipped
clipped plants showed less of a negative G)
£ Undipped
growth rate for the July toAugust interval GC)
<l>
than did the unclipped plants (Figure 2).
I T1 1—T^
For both plant height and branch length,
the greatest difference in growth was seen May-June June-July July-August
inthe greater growth rate ofthe unclipped Growth interval
plants forthe June to July interval.
Figure 2. Difference in growth rate ofoverall branch length during three
Reproduction and water potential intervals ofthe 2006 growing season between clipped and undipped
showed some differences between sites as willow shrubs {Salix spp.), where N = 76 for undipped and 99 for
well. Catkinnumberwasalwaysgreaterin clipped. Bars show standard error ofthe mean
the unclipped plants than in the clipped
plants, and the highest catkin numbers for
0.45
both groups were seen in May (Figure 3).
o 0.4
Shootwaterpotentialwashigher(lessneg- a. 0.35
G
ative) in the clipped plots in May and a. 0.3
icn 0.25 Clipped
August, though in June unclipped plots £
0.2 Undipped
fulj
showed higher (less negative) shoot water G 0.15
G)
potentials than clipped (Figure 4). There g 0.1
was no difference between clipped and 1 0.05 ri U^l
0
unclippedplots in July. May June July August
Later in the summer, we observed that Month
we hadtaggedtwo differentspecies: Salix Figure 3. Mean number ofcatkins found on willow shrubs {Saiix spp.)
geyeriana and Salix planifolia. These throughout the 2006 growing season between clipped and undipped
species were indistinguishable to us when treatments, where N = 76 for undipped and 99 for clipped. Bars show
standard error ofthe mean.
we placed the tags, and itmay be possible
“Willows” continues on page 8
Volume 32 Number 3 Aquilegia Page 5
“Willows” continued from page 7
that they hybridize. In August, we were
May June July August
ableto distinguishthe species, andretroac-
tively investigated differences in growth.
Intheunclippedcontrolplot,therewere42
S. geyeriana, 29S.planifolia, andfourthat
Clipped
were marked as potential hybrids. Forthe
Undipped
clipped treatment plot, there were 26 S.
geyeriana, 67 S.planifolia, andfouragain,
that were potentially labeled as hybrids.
Because there were differences in species
numbers between the two sites, it was
imperative to determine if growth rates
were different. Within the unclipped site, Figure 4. Mean difference in waterpotential between clipped and
therewas no difference ineithertotalplant undipped willow shrubs (N = 10) throughout the 2006 growing sea-
son. Bars show standard error ofthe mean.
height or branch length. Within the
clipped site, there was no difference in during the peak growing season (June to thetwotreatments. However, inbothMay
July) than did the clipped shrubs. The andAugust, dipped plants showed ahigh-
plant height, but branch length did differ,
with S. planifoUa having a mean branch compensatory growth hypothesis may not er (less negative) shoot water potential.
be acting here because willows are peren- This trend was reduced in June, when
length of 15.87 inches and S. geyeriana
having a mean branch length of 21.12 nial plants, and because the grazing pres- shoot water potentials were lower (more
inches. To determine ifthe difference was sure on this area is less than the prairies negative) for dipped plants. This result
duetoarandomdifferenceinbranchesthat ,where the compensatory growth hypothe- may be due to warmer ground tempera-
were selected or to real differences in sis was first determined (Crawley, 1997). tures during this month before leaves had
growth, we compared the amount of Additionally, the subalpine climatemaybe fullyemergedinthe dippedplants, though
growth from July to August between the toosevereto supportcompensatorygrowth this was nottested.
in that the growing season may be too Although these results are interesting
different species at the clipped site.
Between July and August, S. geyeriana shortto enable plants to catch up. and point to possible diminishing willow
had ameangrowth of-0.019 inches andS. Reproductive output also failed to show numbers in Cucumber Gulch over time,
planifoUa showed a mean growth of - any sort of compensatory response. therewere some errorswiththis pilotproj-
A Clipped plants showed lower fitness than ectthat should be highlighted before man-
0.92inches. two-tailedt-testforunequal
variance reported a p-value of 0.14, indi- unclippedplants. Attheheightoftherepro- agement decisions are made. First, we
cating that there was no difference in ductive season (May), the undipped plants were unable to completely identify willow
growth betweenthe two species. showed nearly six times the number of shrubs to species early inthe growing sea-
catkins asthe clippedplants. InJune, when son; therefore, there aretwo species inthis
undipped plants had lost over halfoftheir study. There could be interspecies differ-
Discussion
The compensatory growth hypothesis catkins,theaveragenumberswere stillwell ences in physiology that would interfere
was not supported by these data with wil- above the average high for the dipped withouroverallfindings. Second,thecon-
lowina subalpinewetmeadow. The com- plants. This is significantbecause it shows trol plots for this study were located in a
pensatory growth hypothesis would sug- the dipped plants have amuch hardertime different drainage, and conditions there
gest that the clipped shrubs would com- reproducingthanthe undippedplants. could have attributed to the differences
pensate for being clipped and thus show a Water relations were less dear between foundbetweentreatments. Last, duetothe
greater rate of growth or fitness, but this dippedandundippedwillow. Early inthe nature ofthe experimental plots all being
was not the case. On the contrary, the growing season, we observed standing located within a swath ofclipped willow,
unclipped shrubs showed greater growth water in many ofthe plots, so it’s surpris- there is a certain degree ofpseudoreplica-
ing that there was any difference between tion in the design that could not be avoid-
Page 6 Aquilegia Volume 32 Number 3
ed, but shouldbe pointedoutnevertheless. field guide. Golden, CO: U.S. Forest Strauss, S. Y, and A.A. Agrawal. 1999.
In a previous study, areas with willow Service Rocky Mountain Region. The ecology and evolution ofplant tol-
showed greater diversity than those with- Hebblewhite, M., C.A. White, C. G. erance to herbivory. Trends in Ecology
out willow, and diversity was greater in Nietvelt, J. A. McKenzie, T. E. Hurd, J. andEvolution 14\ 179-185.
areas of unclipped versus clipped stands M. Fryxell, S. E. Bayley, and PC. Weber, W. A. 1976. Rocky Mountain
(Kleier et al, 2006). Because willow is Paquet. 2005. Humanactivitymediates Flora. Boulder, CO: Colorado
such an important part ofthis community a trophic cascade caused by wolves. AssociatedUniversity Press.
and because the present study certainly Ecology 86: 2135-2144.
shows thatthere are potential effects from Kleier, C. C., C. Carello, and A. Hoffa. Catherine Kleieris is associated with the
clipping willow for cross-country ski 2006. Willow (Salix spp.) disturbance Department of Biology, D-8, Regis
trails, furthermonitoring is planned. in a subalpine forest. Poster presented University, 3333 Regis Blvd., Denver, CO
at the annual meeting ofthe Ecological 80221. Christy Carello andAudrey Hoffa
Literature Cited Society ofAmerica, Memphis, TN. are from the Department of Biology,
Crawley, M. J. 1997. Plant-herbivore Nolet, B. A., E. Broftova, I. M. A. Metropolitan State College of Denver,
dynamics. InM. J. Crawley(Ed.),Plant Heitkonig, A. Vorel, and V. Kostkan. CampusBox53, P.O. Box 173362, Denver,
Ecology (pp. 401-474). Oxford, 2005. Slow growth of a translocated CO. 80217-3362.
England: Blackwell Science, Etd. beaverpopulationpartlyduetoaclimatic
Dom, R. D., andJ. E. Dorn. 1997. Rocky shiftinfoodquality. Oikos, UP. 632-640.
Mountain region willow identification
2008 CONPS Grant Recipients
Steinkamp Awards
Dr. Eara Kueppers and Dr. Ramona Butz. University of California, Merced. Global Observation Research Initiative in Alpine
Environments (GEORIA) atthe Rocky MountainBiological Eaboratory (RMBE) $1,000
KrissaA. Skogen(Doctoral student). University ofConnecticut. Primroses, pollinators andpracticality: Identifying landuseprior-
ities bythe effect ofhabitatfragmentation onpollinator declines and plantreproduction. $800
MarrAwards
DeniseWilson (MIS student). University ofColorado, Denver. Epipactisgigantea - Pollination
Syndromes atthree Colorado elevations. $600
GenevieveWalden (MS student). SanFrancisco State University. Phylogenetic analysis ofsection-
al and species level relationships withinPhacelia (Boraginaceae) inferred from chloroplastndhF
andnuclearrITS sequence data. $500.
Phacelia congesta
BenR. Grady (Doctoral student). University ofWisconsin. Speciation andEdaphic Endemism in @
ClarenceA. Rechenthin
A
Eriogonum (Polygonaceae): Molecular SystematicApproach. $500. USDA-NRCS PLANTS
Database
Congratulations to Linda Kothera!
Einda’s research onPhysaria bellii, funded inpartby a CONPS research grant, has resulted in apublication in a scholarlyjour-
nal. “Assessing the threat from hybridizationto the rare endemicPhysaria bellii Mulligan (Brassicaceae)” by EindaKothera, Sara
M. Ward, and ShannaE. Carney was published inthe prestigiousJournal, Biological Conservation (Volume 140, pgs. 110-118). A
summary canbeviewed at: http://conps.org/research%20grant%20reports/research_grant_report_Einda_Kothera.html.
Thankyouto all who have contributedto the Marr and Steinkamp funds. As you can see, your donations make a difference.
CONPSResearch Grants Committee
Volume 32 Number 3 Aquilegia Page 7
.
WHO IN THAT NAME?
’S
William Weber
by AlSchneider “Today [1951 mindyou!] there isunity, butnotharmony,
as concerns nomenclatural legislation, trends, and prac-
Dr. Weber, who is Due? Due was my male papillon andmy field tices amongplanttaxonomists. Those lacking scientific
..
companion for 12 years until he died on January 8, 2000. Having perspective,andconcernedabouttemporarilydiscomfort-
hadthebest,Idon’tneedanother,butIdohavesevenBordercollies ing changes in plant names, would freeze the nomencla-
throughmy daughterHeather; theygiveme allthe dogloveIneed. ture ofplants as itnowstands and allowno furthername
changes; others, inthe ‘interest ofstability,’ would advo-
What are your favorite plants? I don’t play favorites. This cate nominaspecifica conservanda.. There is no unifor-
tends to blunt ones interest inthe rest. mity inpractice inthe delimitation and choice ofsubspe-
cific categories, and while not a part per se of plant
What plants do you think are the most difficult to identify? nomenclature,thevacillationsandfluctuations inconcept
The ones thatyouknowleastabout. Probably forthe amateur, it of these categories as encountered in the literature do
depends on one’s equipment. For bryophytes, for example, you affectthe stability ofplantnames. Ithas beenurgedthat
need two microscopes and the ability to hand section a single application of the rules be tempered by judgment
moss leaf Difficulty in identification usually is a matter ofnot (Gleason, 1947). The entire question ofthe influence of
having looked closely enoughto recognize small differences. the experimental method in taxonomy on the nomencla-
tureofthefuture isrepletewithdynamicpotentialsandis
Why do so many different scientific names exist for the same responsible in part for the introduction into the Rules of
plant? What should we do when faced with a number ofsci- the categories nothomorph, apomict, and clone. The
entific names forthe same plant? Would you favorthe estab- influence ofincreasing cytological andgenetical findings
lishment of an international body to arbitrate botanical surely will be reflected to a greater extent in future
names? This question is, inmost instances, moot. As amateurs, nomenclatural regulations andpractices.”
youmustcomeandmeettheprofessionalhalfway. Todothisyou As amateurs, you are perfectly entitled to use the names you
haveto understand some things aboutnomenclature and its histo- please, providedthatthey are legitimate accordingtotherules. If
ry. I recommend first that you Google “International Code of youareold,yougrewupwithnamesthatforreasonsyoumaynot
Botanical Nomenclature (Saint Louis Code) Electronic Version.” be aware ofdo not reflectthe latest understanding ofprofession-
Names must be recognized as representing points ofview ofthe als. These may be right or wrong, butthe fact is that we profes-
persons using them. Names will continue to be various and con- sionals (Ihavealsobeenanamateurspirituallyallmylife)usethe
fusing to people who don’t understand that in science no one is Rules as our guides. The species are relatively well understood
required to accept a name frozen by some board. Concepts con-
stantlychange as information is added. Nothinking scientistwill Selaginella
selaginoides
tolerate being forcedto accept some else’s opinions. USDA-NRCS
Amateur botanists should go to one ofthe older standard taxo- PLANTS
nomictextsthatdonotconfuseyouwithcladistics,numericaltax- Database /
Britton, N.L., and
onomy, chemotaxonomy, DNA, bar-coding ofspecies names, and
A. Brown. 1913.
other fads that are sometimes half-baked and premature, but cap- An illustrated
ture the imagination offolks who are vulnerable. flora ofthe north-
ern United
I recommend highly the book from which I taught in the States, Canada
1950s: TaxonomyofVascularPlantsby George H. M. Lawrence and the British
Possessions.
(1951). His chapter on Plant Nomenclature is priceless today. Vol. 1: 49.
Here is a paragraph:
Page 8 Aquilegia Volume 32 Number 3
and their specific epithets may remain stable, but we are free to
use the generic category to reflect our understanding of the
groups. Ifyouthinkthatthevascularplants are undergoingsome
revolutionary changes (Scrophulariaceae, for example), the FNA Deadline Approaches
treatmentofthe buttercups hasnotchanged sinceBenson’smono- SwhmitAquilegia Contributions by 15 October
graph m the forties. What is asubgenus ifnotagenus indisguise Articles notexceeding 750-1500 words inlength are espe-
thathappens to be ignored or ‘lost’ in the detail ofthe newtreat- ciallywelcome. Previously published articles submitted for
ment. I will have a lot more to say about FNAlater. reprinting require permission. Include author’s name,
address, and affiliation; anonymity may be requested.
Why do you emphasize chromosome numbers? Because dif- Followtheformatfromprevious issuesclosely. Spell check.
ferences inchromosome numbers are oneway ofmany bywhich
barriers to interbreeding are developed between populations.
Whydoyou seemto favortheideasofEuropeans? Because so
much ofourflora turns outto be MiddleAsiatic, and because the ^Dem Pawnee Medicinal Herbs
Europeanshavebeeninvolvedforcenturieswiththetaxafound in
the soutliem Rockies, either in tlie Holarctic or the mountains of by DonaldHazlett
Middle and SouthwestAsia. NoAmericanbotanists havebeen as
deeply involved with the flora ofColorado as I have, for I have Formanythings that ail ya, there’s aPawnee herb out there.
been free to study not only the flowering plants, but the lichens One can kill Streptococcus^ and one can strengthen hair^.
and bryophytes. IfI had another life to live, I would probably Some are also used inMexico: ayer and hoy en dia^.
tacklethe fungi and the algae. Examples arepoleo^ andmucilaginous chia^.
The wisdom ofcultures now subdued, are still inthe souls herbs
How did these Eurasian plants get here? They didn’t. They we use.
were here inhabitats theyoccupythatexistedhere before the sep-
aration ofthe continents. There are remnants ofourflorathat are The stewards ofPawnee public lands, nowhave trendytasks at
relictual in northern Michigan, Quebec, and the northern hand.
Appalachians. Fernald wondered how they got to these eastern Like kill orat leastto control ‘demweeds.
outposts. They didn’thave to. Theywere there. Orprotect raptors and meet prairie dog needs.
Atthe same time 4-wheelers roamsiltstone hills.
Literature Cited And cattle drink at squeaky windmills.
Gleason, H.A. 1935. Plants ofthevicinity’ofNew York(1st ed.).
HafnerPublishing Co., NewYork, NewYork, USA. With a focus on multiple use, raptors and critters, we ignore or
Lawrence, GH.M. 1951. Taxonomy of Vascular Plants. don't yet care.
MacMillan,NewYork, NewYork, USA. That for many things that ‘ailya, there’s aPawnee herb out
there.
Bill is revising his Colorado Floras andwelcomes comments on
pasteditions. Sendto [email protected] ^ Argemonepolyanthemos (Fedde) Ownbey
^ Sphaeralcea coccinia (Nutt.) Rydb.
^ translationnote: ayer=yesterday, hoy en dia=nowadays
^ Menthaajwensis L.
^ SalviareflexaHornem.
Volume 32 Number 3 Aquilegia Page 9
CONSERVATION CORNER
Colorado and Southern Rocky Mountain Online Herbarium Collaboration
by Sarada Krishnan and Cindy Tejral • Top three uses ofherbariawere for iden- and running. Itwill take significant efforts
Newlander
tification, to view morphological fea- from the institutions involved, as well as
tures, andto see location data. professionals and volunteers from the
The Denver Botanic Gardens, partner-
• Only slightly fewer than 50 percent had botanical community,tomakethisprojecta
ingwithCSU,theUniversityofWyoming,
used an online herbarium before. reality. For more information about this
andCU,receivedaplanninggrantfromthe
• Almost 75 percent of the respondents collaborative project, please contact Cindy
Institute ofMuseum and Library Services
stated that they would use an online [email protected].
(IMLS)forthedevelopmentofanintegrat-
herbariumofColoradoandthe Southern
ed, onlineherbarium ofplants ofColorado
Rocky Mountain Region that featured Sarada Krishnan is Chair of the
and the Southern Rocky Mountain region. specimen label data, images, and geo- Conservation Committeefor CONPS and
Through this project, herbarium specimen
referencedmap points. Director of Horticulture at the Denver
informationwillbe sharedandmade avail-
• Most respondents believed that the most Botanic Gardens. Cindy TejralNewlander
able to awider audience.
important features to be included in an is Plant Records Manager at the Denver
The online herbariumwill include spec-
onlineherbarium,excludingimageswere Botanic Gardens.
imendatawithassociatedimages, distribu-
maps, species descriptions, andthe abili-
tion maps, and associated literature. The
tyto querymultiple items atonetime.
creationofthisdigitalherbariumwill serve
• Images were more important to respon-
as a model for other institutions that wish
dents than geo-referencedmap points.
to combine shared resources and physical
• Respondents favorhaving dynamic
specimens into an onlinetool. This online
images and the ability to down-
herbarium will significantly improve
load images over other image
access to desired information about speci-
choices.
mens to diverse audiences ranging from
The feedback gained from this
scientists to hobbyists, with the ability to
survey will help guide the design of
access several herbarium databases at
this virtual herbarium.
once. Theultimategoalofthisprojectisto As this project progresses, institu-
documentbiodiversitywithintheregionby
tions and individuals will be encour-
providing a platform and opportunity for
aged to contribute specimen-based
museums and other institutions to present
data, including images of preserved
their own collections data and to make
specimens and ofvoucher specimens
these data available forpublic use.
living in their natural habitat as well
To startofftheproject, anonline survey
as other resources and expertise to
was completed by more than 450 people,
this online repository. Once estab-
including professionals in the fields of
lished, this project will have great
botany and horticulture, curators, taxono-
implications for research, education,
mists, conservationists, scientists, ecolo-
resource management, and conserva-
gists, educators, amateurbotanists, botani-
tion by organizing a large amount of
cal illustrators, volunteers, teachers, stu-
data in a single location.
dents, faculty, andgardeners. Listedbelow
Currently, funding for this project
are some ofthe findings:
isfortheplanningphaseand, oncethe
• Most ofthe respondents used herbaria in
model is established, itwilltake some
the past sixmonths.
time to get the digital herbarium up
Page 10 Aquilegia Volume 32 Number 3