The Plant Press

Chair With A View: Herbaria in the age of the Anthropocene and big data

From Plant Press, Vol. 27, No. 2, April 2024.

By Jun Wen.

The recent proposed closure of the Duke University Herbarium has rocked the scientific community. The Duke Herbarium holds a world-class collection of ~825,000 specimens of plants, fungi, algae, and lichens, representing major branches of the tree of life. It is well known for its depth and breadth of collections from southeastern USA, an important biodiversity hotspot, as well as global holdings, especially the Neotropics. The Herbarium has helped train generations of outstanding plant biologists.

Herbaria and the associated collections play important roles in research and training in biological sciences. They provide an invaluable record of the distribution of plants throughout the world and through time, and they have been used in many types of studies including systematics, biogeography, ecology, conservation, climate science, genetics and genomics, and monitoring and managing invasive species (Wen et al. 2015, J. Syst. Evol.; https://doi.org/10.1111/jse.12181). Collections are the only direct documentation of the biological, physical, and cultural diversity of the planet: past, present, and future (Funk 2018, J. Syst. Evol.; https://doi.org/10.1111/jse.12315). Yet herbaria and collections-based research are often under-appreciated and sometimes under threat. Herbaria are also important platforms to connect people with nature, and educate the public on critical issues on biodiversity, conservation, medicinal plants, food, agriculture, and health.

The United States National Herbarium in Washington, DC, includes more than 5 million plant specimens. (photo by Chip Clark)

The decision to close the Duke University herbarium is very short-sighted and disappointing, especially at the time when the field of systematics is becoming highly relevant to society and is experiencing a major revolution with the development of collections-based big data (genomics and informatics) (Wen et al. 2023, Pleione; http://pleione.ehsst.org/journals/Pleione172/001%20Collection%20Based%20Integrative%20Systematics.pdf). Today, herbaria are far beyond being repositories for systematics and biodiversity science. They are also a genbank (we can get genomes from specimens that are over 100 years old), an ecobank (each specimen holds ecological data points on its environment), and a morphobank (each specimen renders rich morphological information and is being studied via machine deep learning in biodiversity science). These recent advances in the use of collections are opening many new opportunities for the scientific role of herbaria in the age of big data (Davis 2022, Trends Ecol. Evol.; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2022.11.015). Herbaria and collections should be well preserved and continue to be supported and developed. We are still in the infancy of understanding the biodiversity of our planet, and herbaria will be critical for exploring biodiversity, climate changes and the impacts on humans in the current epoch of the Anthropocene.

The Plant Press newsletter transitions to online-only publication

From Plant Press, Vol. 26, No. 1, January 2023.

By Gary Krupnick, Editor

Since 1998, The Plant Press has been the official quarterly newsletter of the U.S. National Herbarium and the Botany Department of the National Museum of Natural History. Since its inception, the newsletter has been printed and delivered free of charge to a broad international subscription base. In 2013, a companion website was launched, making full issues of The Plant Press available as PDFs online, with articles from each issue also individually blogged throughout the quarter.

When the COVID-19 pandemic hit in March 2020, production of printed issues stopped, with online publication of the newsletter being the only viable option. After many months of thoughtful discussion following our return to the museum, the editor of The Plant Press and the Chair of the Department of Botany came to the decision to fully transition to an online-only newsletter. Printing will not resume. The January 2020 issue (Vol 23, No. 1) was the last printed issue.

Eliminating print distribution has several benefits including a reduced cost for the Smithsonian, an expedited timeline for readers to access each issue, and a lessened environmental impact saving trees and reducing waste and energy costs. Going forward, every issue will be available as a PDF for download, allowing users to print their own copy should they desire to read a hard copy of the newsletter.

The PDF newsletter still has the same sections as the print version: News, Articles, New Faces, Staff Activities, Travel, Visitors, Honor & Awards, Publications, and Botanical Illustrations. Articles appearing in the PDF newsletter and the blogged articles are identical for the most part, with some online blogged articles having more imagery and hyperlinks.

To access the newsletter online, please visit The Plant Press at https://nmnh.typepad.com/the_plant_press/. Downloadable PDFs of every issue are available under the “Printed Issues” tab at the top of the screen.

To receive quarterly PDF issues by email, please subscribe to The Plant Press listserv by sending a message to [email protected] containing only the following in the body of the text: “SUBSCRIBE PLANTPRESS-NEWS Firstname Lastname” (replace “Firstname Lastname” with your name). Leave the subject line blank.

To have individual blog articles delivered directly to your inbox, you can now set up a subscription service for notifications. On the website, in the box in the upper right, enter your email and click “subscribe”. The new email service is powered by follow.it, which has replaced feedburner, a former service shut down by Google in 2021. Follow.it is provided free of charge and subscribers can set email delivery settings at a frequency of their choosing.

Living in harmony with nature: Winners, losers, and the Convention on Biological Diversity

From Plant Press, Vol. 25, No. 2, April 2022.

By W. John Kress.

A recently published scientific paper documents the imminent decline of thousands of species of plants as a result of the degradation and deterioration of natural environments caused by human greed and recklessness (Plants People Planet; https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10252). As coauthors of that paper, Gary Krupnick and I worked to compile and analyze mountains of data on every species of plant for which we could find information about its current status on the planet.

We categorized each species as a “winner” or “loser” according to how it has responded to the “Lords of the Biosphere,” as our own species has been called by Professor John McNeill of Georgetown University. Plants that are useful to people, such as crops and plantation timber trees, or take advantage of environments altered by humans, such as invasive species, stand a good chance of surviving the current perils facing the planet, which include unrelentless habitat destruction, out-of-control climate change, rampant pollution, and escalating diseases. Such species will be the winners that survive the hazards of the Anthropocene to flourish once again in a future, perhaps hundreds or thousands of years from now, when humans will have less impact. Species that are not useful to people and inhabit threatened ecosystems or are exploited for their useful properties, such as wild medicinal plants, will be the losers. These species will succumb to human-dominated habitats, will decline in number, and may eventually go extinct.

Losers that are useful to humans tend to be overexploited wild species that may be medicinal, ornamental or used for timber. One such species is Ceratozamia kuesteriana, is a cycad threatened by habitat loss and over-collecting. Endemic to the Sierra Madre Oriental of Mexico, the one remaining population of this species numbers less than 300 plants. Credit: this image is in the public domain.

Although our conclusions were not what we were hoping for, we were not surprised by the results: among the tens of thousands of plant species we analyzed, the losers by far outnumbered the winners. No, it was not a good outcome. In fact, the result is extremely discouraging, and another indicator that humans, the world’s biodiversity, and the planet are on a dangerous and tragic trajectory if we do not change fast.

It is no coincidence that a week after this publication went to press (although certainly not because of this paper) thousands of international delegates and concerned observers met in Geneva, Switzerland, to prepare for the 15^th meeting of the Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), which will convene in Kunming, China, later this year. The long-anticipated meeting in Geneva, which is really three separate meetings taking place at the same time: SBSTTA-24 (called the Twenty-fourth meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice), SBI-03 (Third meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation), and WG2020-03 (Third meeting of the Open-ended Working Group on the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework), took place over a two-week period, from March 14 -29, to facilitate long-term discussions on how to prevent further loss of biodiversity while at the same time making the benefits of Nature available for human well-being. I participated in the Geneva meetings over those 16 long days as a virtual official Observer representing the Earth BioGenome Project.

Editor’s Note: In like a (dande)lion

From Plant Press, Vol. 22, No. 2, April 2019.

By Gary Krupnick

As 2019 came roaring in, the Department of Botany faced a number of challenges.

Staff and visitors to the National Museum of Natural History were met with a sign announcing the closure of the museum due to the January 2019 government shutdown. (photo by John Boggan)

The year began belatedly due to a 35-day partial government shutdown, the longest in U.S. history, that shuttered the Smithsonian Institution, including every museum and the National Zoo. Our Department’s federal staff was furloughed and all research, management, and other work was curtailed. Botany contractors were prevented from working, and visiting scientists were turned away. A skeleton crew was excepted to protect the buildings and ensure the safety and security of specimens and artifacts; we are grateful for their service, while they worked without pay. Retroactive pay provisions were eventually granted for the federal workforce, but regrettably, the department’s many contractors were left without pay for that same time period. Needless to say, much excitement filled the air as workers finally returned to the National Museum of Natural History (NMNH), with smiles on their faces, on January 28th.

The second significant challenge facing the Department of Botany was the shuffling of chairs. Late last year, Vicki Funk was selected to serve as the Acting Associate Director of Science for NMNH, but she has since chosen to step down from that role to focus on her health. Laurence Dorr then agreed to serve as Acting Associate Director of Science while the Museum moves forward with an effort to permanently fill the position. With Dorr on the Executive Team, Eric Schuettpelz has stepped in as our new Department of Botany Chair. The Department is appreciative of both Dorr and Schuettpelz for their service to the Museum, and we all wish the best for Funk.

With the Botany staff back at work and our administration settling into their new roles, we are excited about the year ahead. Be sure to read Julia Beros’ cover story about the reorganization of the US National Herbarium Bryophyte Collection. This overhaul has the potential to lead to amazing discoveries and important evolutionary insights in mosses, liverworts, and hornworts. Finally, if you happen to be in Washington, DC on Friday, May 17, be sure to register for the 17th annual Smithsonian Botanical Symposium <http://sbs19.eventbrite.com>. The theme this year is on plant domestication, and we promise a day of exciting talks, engaging conversations, and insight into the plants that are most essential to human life.

Chair with a View: Working hard

From Plant Press, Vol. 22, No. 1, January 2019.

The staff of Smithsonian’s Office of Facility Management and Reliability works to maintain, repair, and service the historic buildings and grounds of the Smithsonian Institution. Supporting the Department of Botany are LeAnthony Bennett (Supervisor), Jose B. Lobo, Nataya Ross, Keith Pollard, Chaddie Matthews, Feron L. Bazemore, and Carlos Umaña. Not present, Marilyn Blue. (photo by G. Krupnick)

I think all of us have had a job or two when we were younger that sticks with us because of some lesson or lessons that we learned. I had my share of odd jobs in high school and college. Nothing particularly inspirational, motivational or instructive. Certainly nothing that hinted at my present career. I mowed lawns, painted houses, delivered prescriptions for a drugstore, washed dishes, stocked shelves in a warehouse, worked on a bookmobile, and clerked for a grain company. Some jobs I enjoyed more than others. The job I detested and quit after a few days was conducting marketing surveys. I was expected to stop people on the street in downtown Boston, people minding their own business, and try to get them to answer a series of questions about their use or familiarity with certain commercial products. The information was preliminary to an advertising campaign. It took me almost no time to realize that marketing and sales would not be my future.

The job I took the summer after my first year in college had an unusually strong impact on me because it showed me how very hard people could work when they have goals. I bottled milk for a dairy. It required an odd combination of stamina (standing for long periods), boredom (watching endless gallons of milk move down a conveyor belt), and agility (reaching in to fix something quickly before the stacking machine could crush my hand). (OHSHA was in its infancy). Not only did the machines I operated fill the milk bottles, but they also placed them in crates, stacked the crates, and carried the stacked crates into an industrial size cooler where someone else loaded them onto tractor-trailers. The job also required an ability to ignore unpleasant odors, a useful adaptation because milk was constantly spilled on the floor and there was no time to mop it up until the end of a shift.

My coworkers were almost all immigrants from the Cape Verde Islands. I was the chance replacement for a machine operator who had saved enough money to take the summer off to return to Africa to marry. The foreman was tough. In theory, he held his position because he was the only employee who spoke both Portuguese, or Creole, and English. In reality, I think he held his position because he could be intimidating. He was, as best I could tell, the only employee who was a veteran of the Portuguese Colonial War and he told me stories about combat in Angola. He kept order in the dairy even though I noticed that he initiated most of the roughhousing.

I worked a swing shift. I went to work at four each afternoon and worked until at least eleven when I was required to disassemble and clean the bottling machine at the end of my shift. If the last truck from Vermont with raw milk ran late I would stay until the milk was processed, bottled, and the equipment taken apart and cleaned, which meant sometimes I did not head home until five or six in the morning. I was paid $2.10 an hour, which I thought was great. I also worked six days a week, which might seem a lot except that several of my coworkers (and the person I had temporarily replaced) routinely worked seven days a week.

No one in the dairy, except possibly the chemist who checked the milk after it was pasteurized, thought of his or her job as a career. In southern New England and on Cape Cod, Cape Verdeans traditionally provided a cheap source of labor, a mean tradition going back to whaling ship days. Working long hours gave each of the men (they were all men) in the dairy a chance to save and possibly start a family. Alternatively, if they were raising or had raised a family, the goal was to retire and purchase a farm in the Cape Verde Islands. I hope they all did well. I never saw a single one of my co-workers after that summer and there was certainly no easy way to communicate. Apart from the supervisor, no one spoke English and my Portuguese was limited to a few choice swear words.

Is there a moral to my story other than that it is a long-winded explanation as to why I am not terribly fond of milk? I think there are several. A number of us working in this department are lucky. We get to pursue ideas for a living and if our job is physically challenging it is only because we opt to head into the field to hunt for plants in exotic locations. Some (but not all) of us are empathetic and appreciate how much our privilege is built on the work of others who deal with support activities: housekeeping, maintenance, security, finance, and administration. I try not to forget this and although I am not demonstrative (reticent Yankee that I am), I do appreciate all the hard work done by staff that lets us turn objects into wonder.

Fire Destroys the National Museum of Brazil

From Plant Press, Vol. 21, No. 4, October 2018.

On 2 September 2018, a devastating fire destroyed the 200-year-old National Museum of Brazil (Museu Nacional) in Rio de Janeiro. The National Museum of Natural History (NMNH) has a long history of collaboration with Brazilian scientists and many of them are presently working at the Smithsonian. Reprinted below is a public statement that Kirk Johnson, Sant Director of NMNH, released in partnership with the directors of 11 other large natural museums. An effort is underway to collect digital documentation of the Museum’s collections and the galleries (images, 3D models, digital records). Researchers and visitors can send their information to any of the following email addresses: [email protected], [email protected], and [email protected].

Fire at the National Museum of Brazil, in Rio de Janeiro, on September 2, 2018.
Photo by Felipe Milanez (Sent by the photographer -- OTRS-sent) [CC BY-SA 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Standing in Solidarity with the National Museum of Brazil

On Sunday evening, a massive fire devastated the National Museum of Brazil. Founded 200 years ago, the museum is Brazil's oldest scientific institution and one of the largest and most renowned museums in Latin America, with a collection of 20 million artifacts and specimens.

It is with a profound sense of loss that our museums share our condolences with our colleagues in Brazil and the public they serve. The importance of the collections lost during this tragic event cannot be overstated. The National Museum is home to priceless artifacts and specimens that hold incalculable value to science—from major pieces of Brazil’s scientific and cultural heritage, to the historic building itself, this is a loss not only for Brazil but for the world.

Times like these are a sobering reminder that natural history matters. Natural history museums document, protect, and celebrate the natural world. Our collections are an invaluable library of moments of life on Earth—each artifact and specimen is a crucial record of how the world became what it is today and a clue into how we can protect it in the future.

While we can’t change the events of this weekend, we as natural history museums remain committed to working together to use our collections and collective scientific knowledge to generate and safeguard information that can be used by the worldwide community. As our colleagues in Brazil look to the future, we commit to supporting them in the coming weeks, months, and years.

Em solidariedade ao Museu Nacional do Brasil

No domingo à noite, um enorme incêndio devastou o Museu Nacional do Brasil. Fundado há 200 anos, o museu é a instituição científica mais antiga do Brasil e um dos maiores e mais renomados museus da América Latina, com uma coleção de 20 milhões de artefatos e espécimes. É com um profundo sentimento de perda que compartilhamos nossas condolências com nossos colegas no Brasil e com o público brasileiro em geral. A importância das coleções perdidas durante este evento trágico é incomensurável. O Museu Nacional abrigava artefatos inestimáveis e espécimes que têm valor incalculável para a ciência. Desde artefatos de suma importância para o patrimônio científico e cultural do Brasil até o prédio histórico em si, essa é uma grande perda não só para o Brasil mas para o patrimônio mundial.

Eventos como esse são um alerta para a importância da história natural e cultural do planeta. Museus como os nossos documentam, protegem e celebram o mundo natural. Nossas coleções são uma inestimável biblioteca de momentos da vida na Terra. Cada artefato e espécime é um registro crucial que nos mostra como o mundo se tornou o que é hoje e também uma pista fundamental que nos guia para respostas sobre como podemos protegê-lo no futuro.

Embora não possamos mudar os eventos deste fim de semana, nós, como museus de história natural, continuamos comprometidos em trabalhar juntos para usar nossas coleções e o poder científico coletivo para gerar e proteger informações que podem ser usadas pela comunidade mundial. No momento em que nossos colegas no Brasil olham para o futuro, nos comprometemos a apoiá-los nas próximas semanas, meses e anos.

Ellen V. Futter
President
American Museum of Natural History

George Sparks
President & CEO
Denver Museum of Nature & Science

Richard W. Lariviere
President & CEO
Field Museum

Bruno David
President
Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle

Johannes Vogel
Director General
Museum für Naturkunde

Edwin J.F.B. van Huis
General Director
Naturalis Biodiversity Center

Peter C. Kjærgaard
Director
Natural History Museum of Denmark

Sir Michael Dixon
Director
Natural History Museum London

Lori Bettison-Varga
President & Director
Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County

Camille Pisani
Director
Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences

Josh Basseches
Director & CEO
Royal Ontario Museum

Kirk R. Johnson
Sant Director
Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History

 

Chair With A View: What’s Going On

From Plant Press, Vol. 21, No. 2, April 2018.

By Laurence J. Dorr

As much as I enjoy writing, I know I would never make it as a newspaper columnist. I have trouble meeting deadlines. I wait for inspiration or for a clever hook. Then the words flow relatively easily through a dozen or more drafts. If neither inspiration nor metaphorical fishing tackle save me, then I struggle. I have written a fair number of these columns, some confessional and others sermon-like. A few I knowingly structured as telegraphed messages: I laid out what I planned to do as chair to make a select few employees understand what I wanted to accomplish. I have discarded almost as many drafts of this column as I have completed. I have an extensive folder of scrunched up and discarded word processing documents, the electronic equivalent of paper balls tossed toward the trash can.

The activities of the department are something that I have not devoted much time to describing in these columns. For this, I am perhaps remiss. We have been busy the last few years and we have devoted enormous resources (planning, staff time, and money) to improving the U.S. National Herbarium. I hope the results are beginning to be visible. To begin with, there has been a physical overhaul of the herbarium. We converted our four compactor-bays from electrical to mechanical assist controls. We have gone from endless malfunctions to almost none, and some of us are getting more exercise in the bargain. We have added over 200 new herbarium cabinets, many of them replacements for older substandard wooden cabinets and yet others constructed to address the needs of special collections such as our bulky bamboos. These new cases permit some expansion but more importantly allow decompression of sections of the herbarium where specimens now are too tightly packed. Our goal is to remove and replace all of the substandard cabinetry in the herbarium. We also have mostly decluttered our common space although we still have far too much Botany material stored in the attic. (Yes, there is an attic in the Natural History building).

[Image] The physical overhaul of the U.S. National Herbarium includes the addition of mechanical-assist controlled compactor bays and the replacement of wooden cabinets with new herbarium cabinets. (photo by Gary Krupnick)

With generous financial support from the Smithsonian’s Digitization Program Office (DPO), Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO), and from the Sant Director of the National Museum of Natural History (NMNH) we have digitized more than 1.5 million herbarium specimens, including not only capturing images but also transcribing label data. We have accomplished this while continuing to operate the herbarium as normal. In other words, we have been able to do this without closing sections of the collection. It is difficult to convey to those who only visit us electronically the enormous behind-the-scenes preparation involved in our digitization project, but it exists and one of the less obvious benefits of digitization is that we are improving the physical curation of the entire collection.

Chair With A View: A Chameleon with a Very Long Tale

From Plant Press, Vol. 21, No. 1, January 2018.

By Laurence J. Dorr

Ouch! I discovered long ago that the best way to proof read a paper was to publish it. No matter how careful one is, no matter how many times you read a manuscript, no matter how many reviewers scrutinize your work, no matter how diligently editors check every line and fact, something slips through. How can an egregious error be so expertly camouflaged in typescript, but the moment the typescript is printed and made public it slaps you in the face?

Sometimes one can point the finger of blame elsewhere. The first botanical paper I published was a pollination biology study. The American Journal of Botany had accepted the manuscript and I was proud: perhaps too much so. I pored over every word in the manuscript. I took to heart the reviewers’ criticisms and addressed them all: including correcting some minor statistical analysis. I checked the galley word by word. Then I waited until publication. I received my copy in the mail only to realize when I tore off the wrapper and opened up the journal that I had never seen proof of the running head. Of course, it read “Door – Pollination Ecology of Zenobia.” Fate teaches humility.

Sometimes there is no one to blame but oneself. The first book I published was Plant collectors in Madagascar and the Comoro Islands (1997). It grew out of a need to understand who had collected in Madagascar, where they had collected, and what happened to their collections. Not every Malagasy herbarium specimen ended up in Paris: they were and are scattered across herbaria in Europe and the United States. The Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew agreed to publish the book with the stipulation that I find more portraits of the collectors. This proved to be challenging, but interesting detective work. Finally, after the book manuscript was submitted, reviewed, accepted, and two proofs had been generated and checked, I went to Kew to sit down with the book designers and work through the final proof and composition. I remember they made a mockup of the book as it would be printed and asked me to sign the cover accepting it as final. I did. It was perfect as far as I and they were concerned. Shortly after publication Rudi Schmid, who had received a copy to review for Taxon, wrote me and asked me who had published the book: Kew or the Smithsonian? Only then did I realize that my mockup of the title page had included my Smithsonian address, intended solely as a placeholder, but inadvertently overlooked and published. The spurious title page has fooled more than one library cataloger.

After this Madagascar fiasco one kind correspondent pointed me to what I term Ida K. Langman’s lament. Langman, a bibliographer, published a massive bibliography titled A selected guide to the literature on the flowering plants of Mexico (1965). She included a page devoted to “Random thoughts on bibliographies,” which might just as well have been random thoughts on publication perfection or the lack thereof. Clearly, she understood the impossibility of completeness and perfection. Neither one exists. To focus on errors in publication and miss the value of content is like not seeing the forest for the trees.

So why the chameleon’s tale? One of the plant collectors I included in the Madagascar book was Albert Mocquerys (1860-1926). He was enigmatic. I surmised that he was a Francophone and thought that he was Swiss because his Madagascar plant collections were in Geneva. It also was apparent that he was a commercial collector, a class of collectors who are often difficult to trace because they seldom leave a publication trail or have academic affiliations. Years later when I noticed his name on plant specimens collected in Venezuela, another part of the globe where I have spent time, I decided to dig deeper (Harvard Papers in Botany 22: 17-26; 2017). In Venezuela, at least, his patron was Baron Walter Rothschild who was assembling a natural history collection at Tring focused on insects and birds. I discovered correspondence where Mocquerys wrote Rothschild that he was sending him many natural history objects from Venezuela including “Un caméléon à très-longue queue.” One sharp reader noticing my mistranslation using the incorrect homophone observed that “a chameleon with a very long tale” begs the question of who was doing the telling. Presumably not the chameleon.

What is the moral of this tale? We all make mistakes, inadvertent or unintentional, and they should not cloud our judgement of the merit of a research article or book. The same sharp reader replied when I acknowledged my error:  “Yes, I know what you mean about the proofreaders coming out of cracks in the floor like roaches once you have published something.” I think Langman would have happily included this in her “Random thoughts on bibliographies.” In my case, the roaches would probably be Madagascar hissing or warty glowspot cockroaches.

Chair With A View: Leaves of Grass

From Plant Press, Vol. 20, No. 4, October 2017.

By Laurence J. Dorr

Cultured readers will recognize this as the title of a constantly reworked book of poetry authored by the 19^th century American poet and self-promoter Walt Whitman. I must confess that as much literature as I read in secondary school and college I was never a fan of Whitman’s poetry (perhaps this means I am not cultured). Nonetheless, it is impossible not to be familiar with some of his verse. My wife recently grew quite fond of “Song of the open road”, which is from the second edition of his collection. She first became familiar with this poem courtesy of a catchy television advertisement for a luxury automobile. (The self-promoter reincarnated in an all too American way?). I surprised myself when I realized that I knew by heart several stanzas of “When lilacs last in the dooryard bloom’d”, his elegy to Lincoln that first appeared in the fourth edition of his book. I also surprised myself when I discovered that reading Whitman’s poetry was much more enjoyable now than when I was young.

The title of Whitman’s collection is a pun. “Leaves” are another word for the pages on which the poems are printed. Look closely at the library catalog entry for any unpublished Botanical thesis or dissertation and you will see the typescript described as being composed of leaves, not pages. “Grass”, which has other connotations for us now, was once printer’s slang for works of minor value, items typeset when there was idle time. Whitman’s leaves grew from 12 poems in the first edition published in 1855 to almost 400 in the final “deathbed” edition of 1891.

The U.S. National Herbarium has quite a few leaves of grass. I do not know how many we began with but we now estimate that there are 500,000 leaves or specimens in our collection (plus some 2,500 bulky bamboos). Like Whitman’s book, we also are constantly reworking our collection to make it better, more discoverable, serviceable, more “readable”, and dare I say poetic. Recently, with substantial financial support from the National Collections Program of the Smithsonian Institution we set in motion a series of changes that will vastly improve the physical and intellectual curation of the grass herbarium.

Bulky bamboo specimens sit in swing space as they await their move to new metal herbarium cases. (photo by Amanda Grusz)

XIX International Botanical Congress

From Plant Press, Vol. 20, No. 3, July 2017.

A good number of our research staff, research associates, and graduate students attended the recent International Botanical Congress held from 23 – 29 July 2017 in Shenzhen, China. It was deeply satisfying to see the department play a prominent role in all aspects of this international gathering. Certainly, the most prominent of our many departmental participants was Jun Wen who was one of the deputy presidents of the organizing committee as well as one of the scientific program committee members. She deserves congratulations and thanks for taking on these important duties. Not content merely to assist in organizing a conference of 7000 participants she also presented a keynote lecture (“Developing integrative systematics in the informatics and genomic era”), helped organize two scientific sessions, co-authored seven papers, and co-authored ten posters presented during the congress. In addition, as co-editor in chief of the Journal of Systematics and Evolution she managed to release days before the congress began an “IBC 2017 special issue: Frontiers in plant systematics and evolution”.

John Kress also gave one of the keynote lectures (“Tropical plant-animal interactions: Coevolution in the Anthropocene”) and co-organized two sessions on DNA barcoding. Vicki Funk likewise co-organized two sessions: one on Compositae and the other on “Systematic Agenda 2050”. Paul Peterson co-organized a single session entitled “Poaceae: Systematics and phylogeny of major lineages” and Warren Wagner, who was unable to attend the congress, organized a session with Marc Applehans, a former postdoctoral student, on “Biogeographic patterns and adaptive radiations in the Pacific”.  A.J. Harris, a Buck Fellow in the Department of Botany, organized two sessions with Research Associate Stefanie Ickert-Bond on “New insights on the assembly and biodiversity of the flora of North America”. Curators Ashley Egan, Eric Schuettpelz, and Elizabeth Zimmer presented papers in one or more of the hundreds of sessions offered during the congress. Similarly, resident Research Associates Konstantin Romaschenko, Robert Soreng, and Carl Taylor also presented papers, as did current post-doctoral fellows Morgan Gostel and Marcelo Pace. Graduate student Matthew Haynsen collaborated with other departmental colleagues on a poster.

International botanical congresses and the ICN (International Code of Nomenclature for Algae, Fungi, and Plants), formerly the ICBN (International Code of Botanical Nomenclature), are intimately associated. This congress was no exception. The Shenzhen Nomenclature Section preceded the congress proper and was held from 17 – 21 July 2017 at the Peking University HSBC Business School (PHBS), University Town, Shenzhen. Smithsonian representation at the Nomenclature Section has always been strong and this year was no exception. Four curators (Laurence Dorr, Vicki Funk, Paul Peterson, and Eric Schuettpelz), two resident Research Associates (Konstantin Romaschenko and Robert Soreng), and one non-resident Research Associate (Alina Freire-Fierro) participated in the discussions, debates, and votes. There were no especially contentious issues debated at the sessions of this nomenclature section. Perhaps the most radical change to the ICN was a revision of Division III of the Melbourne Code and the codification of a number of procedures that previous nomenclature sessions adopted by tradition. The Nomenclature Section continues to be ambivalent with respect to registration of names and nomenclatural acts. Registration is required for fungi, but the Shenzhen section created a special committee to report to the next congress on registration for algae and plants.

One of the less easily quantified aspects of participation at a congress of this magnitude is the facility each participant has to meet colleagues and collaborators scattered across the globe while simultaneously meeting new people and hearing or reading about new ideas. It was well worth the effort to send as many staff, associates, and students as we did. It is a wonderful investment in the future.