Locality data
Hannon (Fri, 02 Nov 2012 13:06:52 PDT)

Tony,

Yes, but for every such case how often have you been in the field with a
botanist who confidently affirmed "That is Arisaema species x"? The idea
that so many botanists are crippled without dried specimens for study is
not accurate. A good field botanist may stumble over a few plants in an
area known to him but his direct knowledge of living plants will outweigh
those plants many times over. Some plants show certain characters best when
they are dried (drying blackish, etc.) so it is not a "cop-out" to resort
to identification based on dried material.

To identify a plant in a difficult genus often includes critical comparison
with specimens in the herbarium. Many plants are not difficult to identify
either live or pressed, but some are. Perhaps we should ask ourselves what
we expect from the botanical profession, and if it is at all realistic to
expect them to function perfectly with only living plants. If your botanist
is perplexed by an unfamiliar Phlox, how well would any of us fare with
only herbarium sheets of random Zephyranthes? Are those sheets worthless
because they are difficult to match up with living examples of the same
species?

I note that medical doctors routinely ask for samples that mean nothing to
us visually. That does not invalidate their importance.

Dylan

On 2 November 2012 12:31, Tony Avent <Tony@plantdelights.com> wrote: