An energetic and interested student has elected to learn
about plant taxonomy and herbarium collections first hand by doing some specimen
curation in our university herbarium collection. Oh, the things you find; the
things you learn. It all starts
innocently enough. Give them a folder of old
specimens, and old here means 150 year-old specimens, ones that were obtained
from European botanists of the time in trade for North American specimens, a
common enough practice. Except for some
reason these were never incorporated into the collection as a whole, and
they’ve been just hanging around for a century and a half, and now the paper
the specimens are mounted on is rapidly deteriorating, so the specimens, mostly
still in good shape, need to be remounted on modern acid-free paper. This part is easy enough.
But to add these specimens into the collection several things need to be
done. First you look to see if the
species is already in the collection, and if so, then you add it to the correct
species folder, filed in a genus folder alphabetically arranged within its
family, which themselves are numerically arranged such that related
families are placed close to each other, at least in the view of plant taxonomists of 100
years ago. Hey, it’s just a filing
system, so let’s not go crazy about a few odd placements, but some families have ceased to exist, and some families have been merged, and some have been fragmented. Sometimes it's hard to decide how much should be updated. OK, back to the problem at hand. Now if you have to add a species to the list, you must make a label for a new species folder, and since those are printed on
archival gummed labels, 20 to a page, you add the species name to a list until enough are accumulated. Of course in 150 years, a lot can change, so
you must check to see if this species still has this name or if now this name
is a synonym of another species name.
Fortunately several databases exist for looking up plant names, e.g., here.
Then you check this specimen against specimens already in
the collection, or against some image files, to see if visually it looks like
the plant was identified correctly in the first place. So in this instance, the old specimen had an
invalid name that is a synonym for Anemone
numerosa, European wood anemone, which is most certainly a correct ID.
This species was in our species list, but that seemed a bit strange, so
checking the three specimens already filed there, some more problems were
encountered; they weren’t the same plant!
North American specimens, initially so named are now called Anemone quinquefolia, which also was in
the species list. So these N. American
specimens were moved to the correct species folder and the old folder was now
ready for the old European species. But
in the process one of the A. quinquefolia
specimens from about 110 years ago was also obviously misidentified, but this
was an easy one because it was Isopyrum
biternatum, false rue anemone, except now this species is placed in the
genus Enemion, which really messes
with TPP’s memory banks, but you add a new genus label and a new species label to the list to relabel their folders. So did you get all that? Everything that was necessary to solve filing this one specimen! Whew.
The very next old specimen is labeled Anemone sylvatica, and no such species exists or has ever
existed. Did the collector mean sylvestris instead of sylvatica? This will take some more problem
solving. This is how it goes at times:
mis-named, mis-filed, mis-identified, but this is how you learn. By solving the problems. Now TPP only needs another 10 students with the same aptitude and interest.
3 comments:
Dearest Phactor,
as it is a post about plant taxonomy, I feel that I should point out that the european wood anemone is Anemone nemorosa ...not numerosa.
"nemorosa" = growing in woods.
thanks for another interesting post,
BrianO
Guess you can "count" on BrianO to catch those mistakes!
all too familiar :( but a great post, made me chuckle!
Post a Comment