[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
BEN # 180
BBBBB EEEEEE NN N ISSN 1188-603X
BB B EE NNN N
BBBBB EEEEE NN N N BOTANICAL
BB B EE NN NN ELECTRONIC
BBBBB EEEEEE NN N NEWS
No. 180 December 12, 1997
aceska@victoria.tc.ca Victoria, B.C.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dr. A. Ceska, P.O.Box 8546, Victoria, B.C. Canada V8W 3S2
-----------------------------------------------------------
SEQUESTRATE FUNGI ONCE MORE
From: Adolf Ceska <aceska@victoria.tc.ca>
I apologize to Ian Gibson and Tony Trofymow for misspelling
their names in BEN # 177.
Although "truffles" were mentioned in the title of Bryce
Kendrick's series, the article dealt entirely with basidio-
mycetes (subphylum Basidiomycotina). The true truffles, formerly
placed in the order Tuberales, belong to the Ascomycetes (sub-
phylum Ascomycotina) and they certainly did not evolve from the
families mentioned in BEN # 178. Kendrick (1992, fig. 4.11, page
58) derives hypogeous truffles (genus Tuber) from the epigeous
cup fungi, e.g., Peziza, through the following line:
Peziza-like -> Genea-like -> Geopora-like -> Tuber
The order Elaphomycetales ("deer truffles") with a single genus
Elaphomyces is another group of hypogeous ascomycetes. Elapho-
myces lacks hymenium, and has spherical non-shooting asci that
are produced randomly throughout the interior of the ascoma.
"Since it no longer offers much in the way of visual clues about
its possible epigeous ancestors, Elaphomyces may be the oldest
of the hypogeous ascomycetes" (Kendrick 1992, p. 59).
Kendrick, B. 1992. The Fifth Kingdom. 2nd Edition.
Mycologue Publications, 8727 Lochside Dr., Sidney, BC,
Canada V8L 1M8
A RULE OF THUMB FOR BOTANISTS: THE 1 IN 20 RULE
From: Dr. David H. Wagner <103132.2716@compuserve.com>
originally published in the Oregon Flora On-Line Newsletter
Volume 1 Number 3 - Oregon State University - July 1995
There have apparently been instances in the past where well-
meaning botanists have destroyed plant populations through over
zealous collecting. The case most familiar to me concerns one of
the world's rarest ferns, the pumice grape-fern, Botrychium
pumicola. A student searching for new sites found two in-
dividuals of this species on Oregon's Tumalo Mountain in 1954
which he collected to make herbarium specimens. In the late
1970s I searched the top of Tumalo Mountain with friends. We
were experienced fern hunters, but we found no Botrychium. I
strongly suspect that the two plants removed in 1954 eliminated
the population at this location. Today we would hope that
botanists finding only one or two plants at a site would docu-
ment their discovery with photographs and notes. Good
photographs and careful field notes are increasingly acceptable
for recording plant discoveries.
Nevertheless, from time to time, a field worker may encounter a
small population of a plant and feel it is necessary to collect
a bit of it for positive identification and documentation. The
Native Plant Society of Oregon's Guidelines and Ethical Codes
for botanists urges that a collector use good judgement and
rules of thumb when deciding whether or not to collect. But in
this case, what is a good rule of thumb? During the past 10
years, I have been using what I call the "1-in-20 Rule."
The 1-in-20 Rule dictates that a botanist never collect more
than one out of twenty plants. It means NOT collecting ONE plant
UNTIL you have found at least TWENTY. Only if twenty are found
should you consider collecting one plant. And forty should be
present before two are taken, and so on. The rule applies to
parts of plants, also: remove no more than five percent (one-
twentieth) of a shrub, one fern frond from a clump of twenty, 5%
of a patch of moss, 5% of seeds from a plant. I use the 1-in-20
Rule whether I am collecting voucher specimens for the her-
barium, doing rare plant work, or gathering common species for
classroom use.
The 1-in-20 Rule does not obviate the need for good judgement.
Only when a botanist has the knowledge to assess whether col-
lecting is both ecologically justified and legally permitted
should a specimen be taken. Any pertinent factor relating to the
survival of a population needs to be superimposed on the 1-in-20
Rule. The main value of this rule of thumb is to provide a clear
point of reference from which to begin assessing a situation. It
helps a botanist determine how much time should be spent inven-
torying before sampling is appropriate. I suggest the 1-in-20
Rule as a minimal criterion to be met before any taking of a
plant be considered.
There is at least a modicum of scientific logic behind this
rule. Statistically, a population sample of nineteen is not
significantly different from a sample of twenty. One population
geneticist I consulted advised me that contemporary statistical
theory would support the 1-in-20 Rule. Another pointed out,
however, that repeated collecting would tend to reduce every
population to nineteen individuals. This caution serves to
emphasize that the 1-in-20 Rule is a rule of thumb, not a
license to ravage.
An interesting line of argument in support of the 1-in-20 rule
has developed since I first published the idea in the Bulletin
of the Native Plant Society of Oregon in 1991. First, I received
a letter from James Grimes of the New York Botanical Garden
querying whether or not I had picked up the idea from a similar
article he and others had published in the newsletter of the
Idaho Native Plant Society a few years before. I honestly cannot
recall seeing their note. Then, last year, four botanists from
Australia and New Zealand published an article in the interna-
tional journal, Taxon, which made essentially the same recommen-
dation. Thus, three botanists or groups of botanists, deliberat-
ing independently, have arrived at the same standard. I submit
that this concurrence from three separate sources speaks
strongly for the sensibility of the 1-in-20 Rule.
ETHNOBOTANY OF WAPATO (SAGITTARIA) IN BRITISH COLUMBIA
From: Terry Spurgeon <tspurgeo@sfu.ca>
I am an archaeology graduate student (MA) at Simon Fraser
University (Burnaby, British Columbia) working with Dr. Jon
Driver as my supervisor. Jon and I are working in the Pitt
Polder (lower Fraser River valley) at present on a research
project for the Katzie First Nation on the "Prehistoric Use of
the Alouette River Drainage". Also, I have been working in the
Pitt Polder area for more than a decade doing archaeology and
have worked closely with Katzie and continue to do so. I am a
past president of the Archeological Society of British Columbia,
so I have been around a bit.
My thesis topic is going to address "wapato" (Sagittaria
latifolia) a subject which interests me and has the support of
the Katzie First Nation as well. There has been lots of talk
about wapato but upon critical review there is less than a solid
base of facts in the ethnographic work, none locally in arch.
and plenty of apparent(?) confusion. Maybe I can cast some light
on the subject from a different perspective as botanists have
done plenty on Sagittaria.
Several Katzie women and men are interested in my pursuing the
topic, and I now have a preliminary idea of what I will do as
follows:
- ecology and nutrition of wapato (hunter-gatherer focus).
- ethnography of wapato - there is a lot of info for area but it
is not well understood archaeologically, more data may exist
and some confusion apparent.
- middle range research: model archaeological signature of
wapato, palaeobotany, cooking replication etc.
- test for wapato in pit-hearth/roasting ovens at DhRq 22 an
archeological site I have excavated in Pitt Meadows, some
other local sites if possible.
- modern relevance of study and wapato for Katzie etc.
I have done a lot of reading research already (all the usual
sources & some not so usual). Can always use more information.
Have also done some preliminary looking in Polder for wapato
(saw some) and will be recording modern locations (GPS) and
tying in with other work. This info will be kept in confidence
except for those researchers who request and the Katzie. I will
need wapato for replication, identification, SEM (seeds, pollen,
tissue etc.) and photography. Better info on distribution would
be a good start. This is not good time of year for finding
Sagittaria as tides high, water high, no blooms etc. but this is
work for next summer. Nevertheless, I am spending a lot of time
in the Polder looking and getting familiar with potential sites.
Meanwhile there is much to do in research design work, compara-
tive collections, document research, archives etc.
Thank you for anything you might be able to do for me to assist
with information, including pointing me in new research direc-
tions.
NEW BOOK: CULINARY HERBS
Small, E. 1997. Culinary herbs. NRC Research Press, Ottawa, Ont.
Canada. 710 p. ISBN 0-660-16668-2 [hard cover] Price: $79.95
(CDN$ in Canada, US$ other countries).
Ordering information: Monograph Orders, NRC Research Press, M-55,
National Research Council Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0R6
Phone: 613-993-0151, Fax: 613-952-7656
e-mail: research.journals@nrc.ca
web: http://www.nrc.ca/cisti/journals/mgraphs.html
This book is a comprehensive guide to culinary herbs grown in
Canada and northern United States. It provides information on 85
genera and 125 species of culinary herbs including many
references to less common herbs (e.g., wasabi, culantro). For
each species, the author lists the scientific name and synonyms,
English names and French names, description, taxonomy and his-
tory, cultivation notes, and "Additional notes." The subsections
deal with the chemistry of plants, recipe references, medicinal
uses, etc. The book is richly illustrated with over 400 line
drawings. The author used many excellent drawings from old
botanical publications, and four botanical artists provided
original illustrations that match the quality of the old botani-
cal illustrations. The book is well researched with more than
1500 references cited. About 120 internationally recognized
experts reviewed the information. You can find their contribu-
tion to the book in many references, in the text cited as "per-
sonal communication," that bring additional, not previously
published facts. For Internet addicts, the author provides a
list of major web sites that deal with herbs. This is an excel-
lent book for botanists and laypeople alike.
A short chapter of Culinary Herbs is available for viewing at
http://www.nrc.ca/cisti/journals/40393/herbs_e.html
ALERT: WOLLEMI PINE ARTICLE IN THE NEW SCIENTIST [RE: BEN 86]
The New Scientist (6 December 1997, No.2111) published an inter-
esting article on Wollemi Pine (Wollemia nobilis) written by
Wilson da Silva. The article brings several new interesting
facts: 1) the individual plant populations, 2 groups of trees
known so far, show no genetic variation; 2) pollen of Wollemia
is very similar to the mysterious fossilized pollen known as
Dilwynites which is relatively abundant in the fossil record of
Australia, New Zealand and Antarctica; 3) Wollemia can be easily
propagated from seeds and cuttings. The article has several very
interesting colour photographs of the plant and its habitat.
HAPPY HOLIDAYS AND ALL THE BEST IN 1988 !
----------------------------------------------------------------
Submissions, subscriptions, etc.: aceska@victoria.tc.ca
BEN is archived at http://www.ou.edu/cas/botany-micro/ben/
________________________________________________________________