Plant Science Bulletin archive

Issue: 1962 v8 No 2 SummerActions


A Publication of the Botanical Society of America, Inc.


The Hunt Botanical Library


Hunt Botanical Library

On October 10, 1961, Carnegie Institute of Technology formally opened to scholars and the public the Rachel McMasters Miller Hunt Botanical Library, situated on the fifth (and top) floor of the new Hunt Library building. The building and all the accommodations for the botanical library are the gift of Mr. and Mrs. Roy A. Hunt, of Pittsburgh.

Mrs. Hunt's collection of botanical books, of botanical prints and paintings, and of portraits and autograph letters of botanists, are well known to connoisseurs of botanical literature. The number of botanical bibliophiles who visited and consulted the collections when at Mr. and Mrs. Hunt's residence in Pittsburgh is considerable. This collection, believed to have been the largest private one of its kind, had its beginnings more than 6o years ago when Mrs. Hunt was a young girl in her teens. From that time on she has been a devoted and meticulous collector of works in the fields of botany, early agriculture, horticulture, and kindred subjects. At the time her library was transferred last July to its new quarters the collection numbered about 8,000 volumes plus nearly 2,000 watercolors of botanical portraits and as many botanical prints.

The value and botanical significance of the holdings in this library rest very largely in works published prior to 1850. Its holdings are excellent in the subject areas of the herbals, the sumptuous color plate works, the 16th–18th century works in agriculture, and in medical botany. The holdings relate primarily to the fields of systematic botany and horticulture. Floristic works that are illustrated are generally to be found regardless of date of publication, but those of the late 19th and 20th century that are not illustrated have only recently begun to be added. In general, for works of the mid-18th century onward Mrs. Hunt was guided considerably by the quality and presence of illustrations when adding titles to her collection. This means that the costly classical works now so difficult to obtain are invariably present. Inasmuch as it was a collection of fine and beautiful books it is understandable that very few periodicals were added.

At the time Mr. and Mrs. Hunt agreed to give the Hunt Library building, which serves as the general library for the entire university, it was agreed in principle that the Hunt Botanical Library would be endowed to a degree that will maintain its normal operation, and that its special research projects and associated publishing activities would be financed by The Hunt Foundation. The program for the Hunt Botanical Library benefits from the counsel and guidance of an Advisory Committee that meets at the library twice annually. This committee is composed of the directors of The Hunt Foundation, plus six botanists. Currently the botanical members are Mr. John S. L. Gilmour, Dr. Mildred E. Mathias, Dr. Rogers McVaugh, Dr. Harold W. Rickett, Dr. Reed Rollins, and Dr. Frans A. Stafleu.

It has been the objective of Mr. and Mrs. Hunt and their four sons, who collectively compose The Hunt Foundation, that this library should embark on a research program centered on studies of botanical and horticultural literature. The establishment of a program to meet these objectives means that this library will become, in effect, an inter-national center for bibliographical studies of the literature in these fields. A rather considerable acquisition program is now in progress to meet the requirements of existing re-search projects. At the same time, there is no thought or intention of endeavoring to build up this library to a point where it would compete in size or magnitude with any of the half-dozen or more largest botanical libraries in this country.

Basically the research program is five-fold: (1) completion of the Catalogue of Botanical Books in the Library of Rachel McMasters Miller Hunt, (2) activation of the Hunt Facsimile Series, (3) establishment of the Hunt Monograph Series, (4) activation of a project whose objective is to pro-duce a comprehensive and analytical catalogue of all of the works in systematic botany and allied subjects published during the period 1735–1850, a work to occupy several volumes and to be known as Bibliographia Huntiana, and (5) publication of a yearbook to serve as a medium for studies by the staff and scholars elsewhere in the area of botanical bibliography and to be known as Huntia.

The Catalogue of the Hunt Botanical Library was begun in 1953. Volume I, accounting for holdings published from the beginning of printing to 1700, was published in 1958. Volume II, accounting for holdings of the 18th century, was published in 1961. Volume III is now in progress and will probably account for holdings published up to 183o, with Volume IV being the final volume of the main series and accounting for holdings for the period 1831–1850. There will be two Supplement volumes to account for acquisitions received since the original volumes were published and for works either omitted from the original volumes or merely listed by short title. It is expected that the complete Catalogue will be published by 1970. This Catalogue has been published privately by The



Smithsonian Institution
Washington 25, D. C.


HARLAN P. BANKS    Cornell University

NORMAN H. BOKE   University of Oklahoma

SYDNEY S. GREENFIELD    Rutgers University

ELSIE QUARTERMAN    Vanderbilt University

ERICH STEINER    University of Michigan

JUNE 1962   VOLUME 8


CHANGES OF ADDRESS: Notify the Treasurer of the Botanical Society of America, Inc., Dr. A. J. Sharp, Department of Botany, University of Tennessee, Knoxville 16, Tennessee.

SUBSCRIPTIONS for libraries and persons not members of the Botanical Society of America are obtainable at the rate of $2.00 a year. Send orders with checks payable to "Botanical Society of America, Inc." to the Business Manager, Dr. Lawrence J. Crockett, Department of Biology, The City College, Convent Avenue and 139th Street, New York 31, New York.

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR PUBLICATION should be typewritten, double-spaced, and sent in duplicate to the Editor. Copy should follow the style of recent issues of the Bulletin.

Hunt Foundation in a limited edition of 500 copies of the regular edition and 250 copies of a deluxe ediiton (on hand-made paper). The distribution pattern for it was determined in 1957, and in general copies have been provided all of the leading botanical and bibliographical centers of the world. The work is not for sale.

The Hunt Facsimile Series is designed to account for occasional facsimile productions as selected by the Advisory Committee. The first will be L'Heritier de Brutelle's Sertum Anglicum (1788), a rare work illustrated by Redoutc and by Sowerby, and accounting for many new genera and species. When selecting titles to be included in this Series, the Advisory Committee is guided by picking works that are not likely to be reproduced by commercial firms, by selecting works that are illustrated either in black and white or in color, and works that will have general botanical interest or horticultural interest, as well as utility to the taxonomist. Through partial subsidization by the Hunt Botanical Library it will be possible to bring the works out at cost or below cost, so that they may be available to the working botanist who has need for them. Each work brought out in this series will be accompanied by scholarly introductions designed to account for the biographical back-ground of the persons who wrote and illustrated the work, for the bibliography of the original work and its production, for an analysis of the illustrations and the modern nomenclatural equivalents for the plants concerned, and to provide a general study of the work itself in the light of modern knowledge of its subject matter. In the Serum Anglicum, for example, the original work consists of about 40 pages of text and 35 pages of plates. The facsimile edition will reproduce these with new introductions, an English translation, and indices; this new material to occupy in excess of 150 additional pages. The work will be made available through the International Association of Plant Taxonomy to its membership at a substantially reduced price, and at list price subsequently from the British firm of Wheldon and Wesley, and from the Hunt Botanical Library. The work is expected to be published in December 1962 with pre-publication notices made available in October.

The Hunt Monograph Series will provide, for the most part, for the publication of new works. The volume scheduled for production in 1963 will contain three studies of Michel Adanson, famed for his Families des Plantcs (1763), followed by a second work on the same subject in 1964. Also scheduled for 1964 is the publication of Part II of E. L. Greene's Landmarks of Botanical History, the manuscript of which has been turned over to the Hunt Botanical Library by Notre Dame University. At the same time, the publication of this work will be accompanied by the reproduction of Part I of the same title, together with a biographical account of the author and an appraisal of his taxonomic contributions. The two parts, and the introduction, will be published in a single volume.

The project to produce a bibliographia botanica, in effect a new Pritzel for the period 1735-1850, and to he known as Bibliographia Huntiana, will be treated later in a separate announcement. Work on the project is in progress and it is estimated that a minimum of six-eight years will be required to assemble the raw material.

Huntia, the yearbook of this library, will serve as a publication medium for research studies of the library staff, and its pages will be open to bibliographic contributions in the fields of botany and horticulture by scholars elsewhere. The first issue is scheduled for production in October 1963. The qualities of typographical design, printing, and illustration reflected in the Hunt Catalogue are expected to be maintained in this yearbook. It will be available by exchange and by subscription.

In addition to these formal projects the Hunt Botanical Library is developing Mrs. Hunt's collection of portraits of botanists. The original collection is very largely one of botanists of the mid-19th century and earlier, and is represented by steel engravings, woodcuts, and similar forms of reproduction. To complement this, the library is currently initiating a program whereby it will serve as a central repository for photographic likenesses of botanists of the world. The collection of botanical paintings is likewise largely the work of artists of the mid-19th century and earlier. In developing this collection, it was Mrs. Hunt's objective to have at least one original of every botanical artist whose work was represented in the books of the library. Currently the library is building the collection of contemporary botanical art and illustration. The collection of autograph letters of botanists numbers more than r,000 representing more than boo botanists. The earliest is a letter by Tournefort and few have been added originating later than 1900. The library continues to develop this collection and is always interested in obtaining letters of botanists or collections of same. Manuscripts written by botanists also comprise a part of this library. Recently the library was fortunate to acquire many of the manuscripts and letters of the late Agnes Arber. Several collections of

lesser significance have also come to hand. Additions of this nature are always welcome.

The facilities of the library are open to all botanists who can use them. The library does have a policy of not lending any of its books. This is essential to assure one that the books are always available to staff members and to visiting scholars. The library is normally open Monday through Friday and visitors are welcome.

Notes from the Missouri
Botanical Garden


Missouri Botanical Garden

During the last years there has been a very decided revival of interest in botanical gardens in America as evidenced by the creation of so many new ones all over the country. The reason for this revival of interest lies partly in the fact that the whole idea of the university-connected botanical garden as a repository of plant species has been replaced by the concept of a functional botanical garden. This type of garden combines the park aspects of the park with the botanical aspects of good collections of living plants, research facilities, and research projects connected with horticulturally important materials, and proper education programs for children and adults. Whereas most of these functional botanical gardens are created independently of universities, in most cases they have ties with institutions of higher learning. The first and best example of such a functional botanical garden connected with a university is that of the Missouri Botanical Garden, or Shaw's Garden, where Henry Shaw, its founder, also created the Henry Shaw School of Botany at Washington University and established a close connection between these two institutions.

In the course of the last decennia the income from the endowment which Henry Shaw left to the Missouri Botanical Garden could not keep up with the increasing costs of maintaining such a garden, and at first it was tried to keep expenditures within the limits of the endowment income. When it became obvious that this resulted in deterioration of the once so beautiful Garden, the Trustees adopted a new policy, namely, that of temporary deficit budgeting. It was believed that if only the Garden could be brought into a physically attractive condition and would again provide inspiration and beauty to the visitors, then contributions from the visiting public and from the community could be obtained. With the exception of research projects financed by the National Science Foundation, the Missouri Botanical Garden has never received support from tax money, and as long as it remains a private institution it cannot receive any state or city funds for its operation.

The accompanying graph is very instructive. It shows the actual budget for the Garden and all its activities, and the costs are broken down as endowment income, operational income, and deficit. The deficit could be assumed because of accumulated surpluses of earlier years and the operational income refers to income from admission to the new green- house (Climatron), from a membership organization (The Friends of the Garden), and from fund drives and other similar activities by many supporting organizations. The remarkable fact about this graph is that the operational income is each year augmented with the amount of the deficit in the previous year. Therefore this deficit budgeting was adopted not just to close financial gaps, but it was rather incentive money used in the amelioration of Garden and public facilities. This resulted in an unprecedented increase in the attendance by the public and this in turn %vas the basis for an increase in our operational income.


For persons who believe that such an increase in public interest can only come by cheapening the type of displays and by catering to the lower instincts of the public, such as the television interest seems to have done with the greatly increased crime and fight programs, it should be stated here that our educational work has been increased and deepened, that more and more educational exhibits accompany the popular flower shows, and that our newest green-house, the Climatron, is used in part for research purposes. I am thoroughly convinced that the public is interested in any type of scientific information which can he given to them and they enjoy being considered as grown-ups. Yet our new educational exhibits find perhaps even more appreciation in the eyes of children than grown-ups.

When I took the position of Director at the Missouri Botanical Garden, the greenhouses were in very poor condition and the only practical solution to their improvement was to tear them down. This either could be done without re-building them or new greenhouses had to replace the old ones. It was fortunate that the critical point in the condition of the greenhouses was just reached while so


many improvements and completely new developments had occurred in the general field of greenhouse construction and operation. Therefore, instead of building a conventional greenhouse in place of the first houses to be torn down, a completely air-conditioned greenhouse was designed.

By using air-conditioning it is not necessary to shade the greenhouse at all so that full advantage can be taken of the sun's rays at any time of the year. Even in the middle of summer the greenhouse does not get too warm so that sensitive plants such as tree ferns do not need shade. A new principle in air-conditioning is utilized in that instead of trying to maintain an even temperature throughout the greenhouse we have aimed at producing a temperature gradient. In this way the optimal growing conditions for a number of different plants can be produced. By having two different air-conditioning systems, one operating during day and the other during night, we are able to produce gradients in day and in night temperatures independent of each other. Since the greenhouse is a large geodesic dome with a diameter of 175 feet, we have approximately four different sectors in the building. In the southeast sector both day and night temperatures are high. In the northwestern section both day and night temperatures are lower, corresponding with a tropical mountain climate. In the south-western section the days are relatively cool and the nights warm, comparable to an oceanic climate, and in the north-eastern sector the days are warm and nights are cool, comparable to a dry tropical climate.

The plants in the greenhouse are arranged as much as possible according to their country of origin and according to ecological principles. The southeastern sector, with the lowland tropical climate, has been planted mainly with materials coming from the Amazonian region. In this planting also, ecological factors have been taken into consideration, inasmuch as the first trees planted belong to the fast-growing secondary forest, such as Cecropia, Ochroina, and Triplaris. In their shade the slow-growing trees of the primary forest have been planted in addition to the vegetation normally found in the undergrowth of the rain forest.

Particular emphasis is laid on producing the optimal growing conditions for epiphytes, and especially for orchids, to enable us to grow our large orchid species collection to perfection. Whereas part of this collection is planted in pots, a considerable number are placed on artificial trees consisting of galvanized steel tubing covered with osmunda fiber. As much as possible, the orchids from a geographic and climatic region are placed together on a single artificial tree, and those trees are placed in those sections of the Climatron which correspond most with the specific climate of the region of origin. During the first year and a half of operation, growth in the Climatron has been excellent and in the near future we hope to have good collections of not only orchids, gesneriads, bromeliads, and other epiphytes, but also of biologically interesting plants. I would like to urge everyone who has some interesting plants to let us have some of their living material to try out in the Climatron.

Because the Climatron only represents the different tropical climates, we are now planning to construct green- houses in which other climates can be reproduced, again using the newest information about greenhouse air-conditioning. I believe that a group of such greenhouses, containing a significant collection of plants in ecological and geographic groupings, will be a great stimulus for the development of botany, and for arousing an interest in plants among children and students. In this way, the botanical garden can play a very significant role in the development of botany in the future.

International Symposium on the
Methodology of Plant


Duke University

This symposium was arranged by Dr. F. E. Eckardt and was held under the presidency of Professor L. Emberger, Director of the Botanical Institute of the University of Montpellier on April 7 to 12. The symposium was sponsored by the International Union of Biological Sciences and by UNESCO which provided interpreters and head phones for simultaneous interpretation. It met in the new and attractive building which houses the Botanical Institute. The Institute is located at one end of the Botanical Garden which has been in existence since the 16th century. Many well-known botanists worked at this garden, including Bauhin, Rauwolf, two de Jussieus, and A. P. de Candolle.

The symposium was planned to deal principally with methods useful for studying plants and plant habitats in arid and semiarid conditions, but most of the material presented was equally applicable to plants in moist habitats. It attracted much more attention than had been anticipated with the result that about 6o papers were crowded into four days and many others were declined for lack of time. Because of the large number of papers the time allowed for presentation was only 20 minutes, with an additional to minutes for discussion. In many instances discussion had to be terminated just as it was becoming interesting. Nevertheless, the meeting was quite successful because several approaches were presented to each of the principal problems. Furthermore, the participants extended their acquaintanceships among other workers and carried on a lively exchange of ideas at coffee breaks and outside of the regular sessions. Perhaps the symposium did not solve as many problems as some of the participants may have hoped or expected, but it certainly resulted in a much better understanding of the nature of many of the problems discussed.

The program was divided into three sections, dealing with measurement of environmental factors, of processes of plants, and of processes of plant communities.

The section on environmental factors included papers on measurement of radiation, wind, humidity, potential and actual evapotranspiration, soil moisture, and precipitation. It is impossible to mention all of the papers. Measurement


of radiation and the radiation balance near the surface of the earth was discussed by several workers. Apparently sufficiently precise estimates can be made by several methods to calculate water loss and potential dry matter production fairly accurately. Considerable attention was given to estimation of potential evapotranspiration from meteorological data. Van Bavel described a lysimeter which permits unusually accurate measurements on a 3000 Kg. soil block. Stanhill stated that potential evapotranspiraion can best be estimated from measurements of evaporation from a standard class A evaporation pan. He suggested that more research should be done on the environmental and physiological factors which reduce actual rates of evapotranspiration below potential rates. The writer agrees that this will be very productive. Swinbank claimed that potential evapotranspiration is a useless term because it cannot be defined precisely, but Slatyer defended its usefulness as a reference. Taylor presented a mathematical treatment of movement of soil moisture and Schein discussed the measurement of dew. Rainfall interception was discussed by Slavik and by Slatyer.

One noticeable problem is the variety of terminologies used by various meteorologists and soil scientists. The variety of their terminologies seems to exceed that of plant physiologists for diffusion pressure deficit or water potential. Some attempts were made to establish the synonymy of some of the terms used, but it obviously will be many years before a reasonably uniform terminology will be accepted.

The section on study of plant processes included measurements of transpiration, plant water stress, stomatal behavior, carbon dioxide uptake, and drought resistance. The apparatus for measuring transpiration and photosynthesis ranged from small cuvettes for individual leaves to large plastic enclosures for one or several plants. Most investigators use infra red gas analyzers for measurement of CO2, but Slavik and Catsky described a relatively simple colorimetric device for field use. Alvim described a new and simple type of porotneter for use in the field to facilitate measurement of stomatal aperture as an indication of water stress. Oppenheimer discussed measurement of stomatal aperture in conifers by modified infiltration techniques.

Several people discussed measurement of water potential (DPD) and relative turgidity or water saturation deficit. Water potential can be measured with satisfactory precision by vapor equilibration, electric hygrometers, and the Schardakow method, at least in the lower range of water stress. Improvements in the leaf disk method of measuring relative turgidity were described by Catsky and Slatyer, and Kramer suggested that entire leaves have advantages over leaf disks for measurement of relative turgidity or water saturation deficit.

The section on plant communities dealt chiefly with estimation of evapotranspiration from plant cover and measurements by use of lysimeters. Dry matter production in different parts of the world was discussed by Lieth and dry matter production of a forest was described by Woodwell.

In addition to the four clays of scientific sessions there was an afternoon trip to a nearby agricultural experiment farm where research on a variety of crops is carried on. There also was a Sunday bus trip through the Rhone delta and into Provence which gave a good idea of the agriculture and vegetation of the region. A large reclamation and irrigation project is under way to provide enough water to divert large areas of land from grapes to other crops. This includes a pumping station near St. Gilles which elevates water from the Rhone River to a canal in which it can be distributed to areas which cannot be reached by gravity flow. This trip also included visits to such historic places as Arles, Les Baux, the ruins of a Roman town near St. Remy, Avignon, Pont du Gard, and Nimes. The remains of Roman works in Arles and Nimes and the Pont du Gard are impressive reminders of the time when Rome ruled this area and Nimes was an important city of the Roman Empire.

Over zoo persons from about 20 countries were registered and many other unregistered persons attended. This provided a wonderful opportunity to make or renew acquaintanceships with workers from all over the world. In fact this opportunity to meet and talk with workers from other countries probably is more important than the content of the formal sessions.

The writer feels that the ideal arrangement for meetings of this type would be to circulate the papers in advance. The author could then give a short summary of his important points, followed by two or three persons designated to discuss them. Most of the time could then be devoted to discussion which usually is the most profitable and stimulating part of the meeting.

Perhaps we should close this review with a word of warning. Pleasant and profitable as they are, we may be having too many international conferences. This was the third international conference attended by the writer since September r, and a fourth is scheduled for next August in Australia which will include several persons who were at Montpellier. Valuable as they are, too many meetings can become a hindrance rather than a stimulus to the research of the participants. The writer hopes that after the next conference he can settle down in his laboratory for a few months to digest the new ideas and attempt to apply some of them to his research.

A Proposal to Modify the Organization of the Physiological Section of the Botanical Society of America 1

For many years past the Physiological Section of the Botanical Society of America has joined with the American Society of Plant Physiologists as co-sponsor of the sessions for contributed papers in plant physiology at the annual American Institute of Biological Sciences meetings which both societies attend. Numerically, the papers submitted from the Physiological Section have contributed a very small

1Report prepared by John G. Torrey, Chairman; Carlos Miller, Vice Chairman; and Peter M. Ray, Secretary; Physiological Section, Botanical Society of America.


proportion of the total number; frequently, such papers could have been submitted through either channel since individual memberships overlap considerably.

For convenience and coherence in program planning, a working arrangement was evolved over the years whereby titles and abstracts of papers contributed by members of the Physiological Section were brought together by the Secretary of the Section, and then were sent to the Secretary of the A. S. P. P. whose responsibility it was, together with the local campus representative, to schedule all physiological papers and to arrange abstracts for publishing. The success of these sessions for contributed papers attests to the wisdom of such co-sponsorship by the Physiological Section. How-ever, the existing mechanism is cumbersome and inefficient, leading to duplication of effort, overlap of responsibility and general confusion.

The co-sponsorship of sessions for contributed papers is the major activity of the Section and has been for the past five years or more. Another, lesser, activity is an annual business meeting at which, each year, new officers are elected, whose functions are, I) to act as middle-men for contributed papers as described above, and 2) to arrange to meet the next year to perpetuate the Section.

During the past two years, the duly elected officers of the Physiological Section have discussed at length the proper role of the Section in representing the field of plant physiology within the Botanical Society of America and the present position of the Section in relation to the American Society of Plant Physiologists. The matter has had continuing discussion at the business meetings for at least the past five years.

In August 1961, at the A. I. B. S. meetings at Purdue University, the Section met to formulate a plan of action. During the discussion, it was recognized that there exist potential specialized areas in which the Section might serve if sufficient enthusiasm and interest could be aroused; it was likewise recognized that other existing agencies could equally well or better serve in these ways if efforts were channelled into them. It was clear that the organized strength of plant physiologists resides in the established American Society of Plant Physiologists and that the latter Society had been acting, in fact, as the organized body of physiologists for both Societies for a number of years. There was general agreement, however, that the physiologists should continue to maintain an appropriately strong position in the Botanical Society of America, to advise and consult in the affairs of the Society and its Journal, and to help in its future development, for the good of the Society as well as that of individual physiologists. Exploration was made of the possible mechanisms whereby the goals could be achieved of strengthening the procedures for planning the sessions for contributed papers, eliminating duplication of effort, and yet- retaining an active voice of physiologists in the Botanical Society. A proposal for the modification of the organization of the Physiological Section of the Botanical Society of America was debated and then adopted at the business meeting of August 1961 with the provision that, after appropriate publicity had been given the proposal, final action on the reorganization would be taken at the business meeting of the Section at the annual A. I. B. S. meeting in 1962.

The institution of any new organization clearly depended upon initial acceptance of the proposal by the Council of the Botanical Society of America and the Executive Committee of the American Society of Plant Physiologists, and then by the membership of the Physiological Section.

In November 1961, the proposal for reorganization of the Physiological Section was sent to all members of the Council of the Botanical Society of America and to the Executive Committee of the American Society of Plant Physiologists. The proposal has received careful, thoughtful consideration by these groups. Through a series of revisions of the original proposal, agreement has been reached by these two groups as to a sound and working arrangement. This proposal as agreed upon by the executive boards of the two societies is reproduced below. The proposal will be submitted to the membership of the Physiological Section at its annual business meeting at the time of the A. I. B. S. meetings in Corvallis, Oregon in August 1962, and if approved, will be placed in effect as soon thereafter as feasible.

The proposed modification in the organization of the Physiological Section has the following important advantages: I) it establishes a strong liason agent acting for the physiologists between the American Society of Plant Physiologists and the Botanical Society of America. The appointment for three years assures a coherent and sustained representation. 2) it accommodates all plant physiologists who wish to present papers at the national meetings. It does this without duplication of effort, overlap of responsibility, or conflict of interests. 3) it retains within the framework of the Botanical Society of America a place for interested plant physiologists and in fact strengthens the voice of plant physiologists within the Botanical Society of America by unifying and increasing their representation.

The following proposal to modify the organization of the Physiological Section of the Botanical Society of America has been agreed upon by the executive boards of the two societies concerned and will be voted upon by the member-ship of the Section in August 1962 at Corvallis, Oregon.


  1. The Physiological Section of the Botanical Society of America has gradually become in function only a minor adjunct to the American Society of Plant Physiologists, and this position is unlikely to change;

  2. This situation causes unnecessary duplication of effort, and difficulty on the part of the elected officers of the Section and of the A. S. P. P.; and yet

  3. It is desirable that some active representation of plant physiologists be retained within the Botanical Society, as an indication of the Society's interest in plant physiology and as a means by which plant physiologists can have a voice in the Botanical Society Council,


(I) The Physiological Section be retained in title and that members of the Society continue to designate their


interests in plant physiology by electing membership in the Physiological Section in the present manner.

  1. The election of officers of the Physiological Section be discontinued.

  2. The Executive Committee of the American Society of Plant Physiologists appoint to the Council of the Botanical Society of America for a term of three years a Physiological Representative from among the membership of the A. S. P. P. The Representative designated must be a member of the Botanical Society of America and will be a member of the Physiological Section.

  3. The Secretary of the American Society of Plant Physiologists be designated to receive directly titles and abstracts of papers from physiologists of the Botanical Society of America for inclusion in programs of contributed papers sponsored by the A. S. P. P., and that publication of such abstracts be handled together with other abstracts published by the A. S. P. P.

5) The balance in the section treasury be donated to the American Society of Plant Physiologists to defray future costs of printing abstracts contributed by physiologists of the B. S. A.

(6) The Secretary of the A. S. P. P. send a copy of the abstracts of papers in the plant physiology meetings to any member physiologist of the B. S. A. who sends the Secretary the current year's charge for abstracts.

Book Reviews

Plant taxonomy, methods and principles. Lyman Benson. i–ix + 494 pp. 1962. The .Ronald Press Company, New

York. $11.50.

In the preface of his earlier textbook, Plant Classification, published five years ago, Dr. Benson remarked that two taxonomic books on vascular plants are needed—an elementary textbook, and an advanced textbook. Plant Classification was designed for a college course without pre-requisite. The present volume, Plant Taxonomy, Methods and Principles, is the advanced textbook of which the author spoke and was "primarily written as a textbook for students who have already acquired some familiarity with plant classification."

The major point which the author makes early in the book is that the goal of taxonomic botany is organization, and that in order best to achieve this goal the taxonomist is concerned with the following pursuits: (i) exploration for data, (2) classification, (3) choice of names, (4) description and documentation, and (5) treatises and monographs. Each of these serves as a heading for one of the five separate parts of this book, in itself well organized and written.

Exploration for Data is the largest part of the book and covers more pages than all of the other parts combined. The following- enumeration of the individual chapters in Part I illustrates the author's wise contention that the taxonomist should not restrict himself only to certain disciplines in approaching a problem, but should utilize data available from every pertinent field: Herbarium Studies; Field Observations; Data from Microscopic Morphology;

Data from Paleobotany and Their Interrelationship with Biogeography; Data from Chemistry, Plant Physiology, and Ecology; Data from Cytogenetics; and Synthesis of Data. Numerous examples from current research are presented in each chapter, more to introduce the student to different kinds of approaches to various problems than to explain in detail any of these separately. Although this may stimulate the student to pursue the subject on his own, some explanations seem too shortened and simplified to give him even a good starting point. This applies especially to the section on chemistry in one chapter, in which discussion of plant serology fails even to mention such key words as "antigen" and "antibody" in explaining the reaction. A more recent application of biochemistry to taxonomy has been the use of paper chromatography. It is regrettable that this interesting phase was not discussed in the text rather than treated only as a reference in the bibliography.

One of the finest parts of the whole book is Choice of Names. Following a concise explanation of popular and scientific names, and the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, there is a chapter on the application of the Code which presents a number of nomenclatural problems. These will provide good practice for those who are being introduced to taxonomic nomenclature for the first time. Unlike Dr. Harold St. John, in his book Nomenclature of Plants, the present author gives answers to the problems which he presents.

The chapters which constitute the final part of the book, Treatises and Monographs, cover important aspects often omitted from textbooks, e. g., the visiting of herbaria, and the borrowing, returning, and handling of specimens. In the last chapter the author discusses many of the phases involved in writing the results of research and preparing the manuscript for publication.

Of dubious value to the book as a whole is the concentrated selection of examples from the Ranunculaceae and Cactaceae which, of course, are specialties of the author. The examples are good ones and are authoritative, to be sure, but a much wider variety of families would certainly be more appealing and less monotonous to the beginning taxonomy student.

The criticisms which I have offered are minor, however, in comparison with the over-all quality and value of this book. It is excellently written and profusely illustrated and fills a gap between the elementary botany textbook and taxonomic work geared more to the professional level. It should find wide acceptance by taxonomy students and teachers alike.—THozrAs R. SoDERSTROni, Smithsonian Institution.

News and Notes



celebrate its Golden Jubilee next year, and the staff is desirous of welcoming distinguished botanists to take part in the celebrations to be held in September and October 1963. The highlight of the proceedings will feature a


botanical tour to last about three weeks which will take visitors through all the main vegetation types of South Africa. The tour will be preceded by a week of lectures, discussions and symposia on botanical and allied subjects. Interested persons should address the Director, National Botanic Gardens of South Africa, Kirstenbosch, Newlands, C. P., South Africa.


nounces the following additions to its staff: Theodore Delevoryas, formerly of the University of Illinois, as Associate Professor (Paleobotany); Bruce C. Carlton, formerly of Stanford University, as Assistant Professor (Biochemical Genetics) ; James Cronshaw, formerly of the C. S. I. R. 0., Australia, as Assistant Professor (Electron Microscopy); G. Benjamin Bouck, formerly of Harvard University, as Instructor (Electron Microscopy) ; Beatrice M. Sweeney, formerly of Scripps Institute, La Jolla, California, as Lecturer (Algal Physiology).

The HUNT BOTANICAL LIBRARY is planning to expand its collection of about 400 engraved likenesses of persons who have contributed to the science and literature of agriculture, botany, materia medica, and horticulture. The present collection is one of the larger assemblages of its kind in America; a number of those in Europe are far more complete than any of those in this country.

The purpose of maintaining a comprehensive collection of portraits is to round out the documentation on the individuals concerned. Such a collection becomes a research tool for the historian and a source of data for biographers and bibliographers. Although the present collection is largely of 16th through mid-19th century people, present plans call for adding portraits of the 19th and zoth century. All botanists and horticulturists are urged to contribute or loan photographs of themselves for inclusion in the collection. Persons having collections of photographs of botanists and horticulturists, or who know of the existence of such collections, are invited to write to the Director, Hunt Botanical Library, Carnegie Institute of Technology, Pittsburgh 13, Pennsylvania.

It has been announced by Professor Harold Bold, Chair-

man, that ASSISTANT PROFESSORS R. L. AIRTH and R. E. ALSTON of the Department of Botany, University of Texas, have been recently promoted to Associate Professorships.


In ceremonies during May, DR. WILLIAM H. WESTON, JR. was awarded the Outstanding Civilian Service Medal by the Department of the Army at the Quartermaster Research and Engineering Center, Natick, Massachusetts. The medal and citation, presented on behalf of the Secretary of Defense, reflect an appreciation of Dr. Weston's contributions to the research planning and achievements of the Quartermaster Corps over the past zo years. Dr. Weston is Emeritus Professor of Botany at Harvard University.

DR. WILLIAM W. SCOTT, Associate Professor of Botany at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, was honored at the fortieth annual meeting of the Virginia Academy of Science with the receipt of an award for meritorious and original research in competition for the J. Shelton Horsley Award. Dr.

Scott's paper, A monograph of the genus Aphanomyces,

was one of over two hundred presented at this year's meeting.

On September 1, DR. JoHN E. EBINGER, presently with the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station in New Haven, will take up the position of Assistant Professor of Botany at Roanoke College. His duties will include teaching in general botany, plant taxonomy and ecology, and acting as curator of the herbarium.


fessor and Head of the Department of Botany, State University of Iowa, effective June 1962, to become Professor of Botany at the University of Texas. PROFESSOR ROBERT L. HULBARY will take over the chairmanship of the Iowa Department of Botany in September.

DR. GEORGE W. GILLETT has received a Fulbright award for research and teaching in evolution and plant taxonomy at the University of Turku, Finland, during the academic year of 1962-1963. In September 1963, he will join the faculty of the Department of Botany at the University of Hawaii where he has accepted an Associate Professorship. His work at Hawaii will include the development of an herbarium and the responsibility for the program in plant taxonomy and biosystematics. Currently he is Assistant Professor of Botany at Michigan State University.

DR. ARTHUR L. COHEN, Professor of Biology, Oglethorpe University, Atlanta, Georgia, will take up a position in the Department of Botany of Washington State University beginning in July. His chief occupations at Washington will be to set up an electron microscope laboratory, to consult and advise on the use of the instruments, and to develop a course in electron microscopy. Dr. Cohen expects to continue his own research on morphogenesis in the myxomycetes and later to direct graduate research.

DR. VERNON I. CHEADLE, for the past year Acting Vice Chancellor and Professor of Botany at the Davis Campus of the University of California, became Chancellor (chief administrative officer) of the Santa Barbara Campus on July I, 1962. He hopes to have a little time for research and, accordingly, will take all his collections to Santa Barbara.

DR. STEVE J. GRILLOS, formerly botanist in the Department of Biological Sciences at the University of the Pacific, has recently been appointed Associate Professor of Biology at the newly established Alameda County State College in Hayward, California. The botany program is just being developed and Professor Grillos has the major responsibility of organizing the project. A department to encompass this program has not yet been established but besides teaching curricula, plans for a plant collection are also under way.

DR. AND MRS. JOHN H. MILLER are leaving the Department of Botany at Yale University. As of July I their new address will be, Department of Bacteriology and Botany, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York.

DR. SYDNEY S. GREENFIELD, Chairman of the Department of Botany at Rutgers Newark College of Arts and Sciences, has been elected Chairman of the Faculty of Botany of Rutgers—The State University, for the term 1962-1964.

Back to overview