Plant Science Bulletin

The Plant Science Bulletin (Print: ISSN 0032-0919, Electronic: ISSN 1537-9752) is an informal communication published four times a year, with information on upcoming meetings, courses, field trips, news of colleagues, new books, and professional opportunities. It provides a means of advertising items or materials wanted. It also serves as a forum for circulating BSA committee reports, for distributing innovative teaching approaches and methods, and for discussing issues of concern to Society members such as environmental policy and educational funding.

54-3 AS A PDF | SEARCH ALL ISSUES | ANNOUNCEMENTS | CAREER OPPORTUNITIES | LAST ISSUE - SUMMER, 2008

FALL 2008

Table of Contents

   » COLLECTING FOR EDUCATION: HERBARIA AT SMALL LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGES
   » BOTANY IN BULGARIA
News from the Annual Meeting:
   » Botany 2008 Plenary Address: Solutions from Nature: How Mushrooms Can Help Save the World. Paul Stamets
   » Regional Botany Special Lecture: Science Education for the 21st Century: Using the tools of science to teach science. Carl Wieman
   » President's Address, Karl Niklas
   » Awards
News from the Society:
   » And The Survey Says: Taking the Pulse of BSA Members
   » BSA Science Education News and Notes
   » Editor’s Choice: Gynoecium Structure Tutorial Web
Announcements:
    In Memoriam
       » Arthur Galston (1920-2008)
       » R. C. Jackson (1928-2008)
       » Charles Adam Schexnayder (1926-2008)
    Personalia
   » Dr. Brent Elliott Receives Greensfelder Medal from the Missouri Botanical Garden
   » Dr. Peter H. Raven, Renowned Botanist and Environmentalist, Speaks at World’s Largest GIS
Symposia, Conferences, Meetings
   » African Journal of Plant Science (AJPS)
   » 55th Annual Systematics Symposium Missouri Botanical Garden
Positions Available
   » Department Chair, Department of Biological Sciences, Eastern Illinois University
   » Northwestern University Offers a Doctoral Program in Plant Biology and Conservation
Award Opportunities
   » American Philosophical Society, Research Programs
   » Harvard University Bullard Fellowships in Forest Research
Other News
   » International Organization Launched to Address Problems in Cultivated Plant Taxonomy
   » Brooklyn Botanic Garden Announces Summer Highlights - Reflections: Water in the Garden
   » Chicago Botanic Garden to Break Ground on Rice Plant Conservation Science Center
   » Revealing Double Lecture Explores the Shroud of Turin - Missouri Botanical Garden
    Books Reviewed
    Books Received for Review
    Student Chapters of the Botanical Society of America

This year’s annual meeting, “Botany without Borders,” provided us with an opportunity to visit with Canadian colleagues on a campus with one of the strongest botany programs on the continent. In this issue we provide a summary of some of the major addresses presented during the meeting as well as other highlights and awards from our stay at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver.

One of the symposia, “Botany on Public Lands” addressed the needs of government agencies for young botanists trained in basic botany, including traditional plant taxonomy. In future issues we will provide commentary concerning federal needs and plant conservation. In this issue we feature a perspective on the educational uses of small herbaria at liberal arts colleges. Traditional plant taxonomy is one of the areas in decline at many of our colleges and universities, including some of our finest research institutions. Perhaps this is a niche that can be filled by master’s universities and small liberal arts colleges such as Warren Wilson College, the focus of our lead article.

To capitalize on the theme “Botany without Borders” we thank the International Section of the Society for providing the inaugural article in a series focusing on botany abroad which will run for the next year. In this issue we feature Botany in Bulgaria. Our intent is to familiarize the membership with some of the opportunities for botanical research and collaboration in some of the less well-traveled countries throughout the world.

We hope this issue will be a pleasant reminder of a wonderful week for those of you who attended the annual meeting - and an informative summary for those of you who could not attend. - the Editor

COLLECTING FOR EDUCATION: HERBARIA AT SMALL LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGES

Amy E. Boyd, Biology Department, Warren Wilson College, CPO 6074, PO Box 9000, Asheville, NC 28815-9000 telephone: 828-771-2018

Natural history collections have served numerous valuable functions for both biologists and society for hundreds of years. Funk (2003) has outlined 72 different uses for herbaria, natural history collections of plants preserved, labeled, and systematically arranged for use in scientific study. These uses range from verifying nomenclature and providing material for DNA analysis to documenting minor cycles in climate and providing inspiration for painters. One of the most important uses of natural history collections today is the documentation and study of biological diversity (Gotelli 2004, O'Connell et al. 2004, Schatz 2002). In this time of severely declining biodiversity due to human impacts on the environment, scientists are pressed for time to determine the biodiversity that exists in the world, as well as the geographic distribution, geologic history, and ecology of that diversity(Gotelli 2004). Natural history collections like herbaria serve as repositories of all of these types of information, as well as centers for research on biodiversity (Ertter 2000, Krishtalka and Humphrey 2000, Snow 2005, Suarez and Tsutsui 2004).

A second important function of natural history collections has always been the training of new taxonomists and natural historians. Today, with the growing emphasis on molecular studies in research and funding, we face a crisis in the decline of taxonomists and natural historians. Just when these specialists are needed most urgently to study the declining biodiversity of our planet, we are failing to encourage students to go into studies of organismal biology and failing to support the institutions that can train them (Snow 2005, Krishtalka and Humphrey 2000).

Despite their value in the face of declining biodiversity, natural history collections today are struggling to maintain support. Universities are closing the doors of natural history museums and herbaria, ostensibly to save money despite the fact that these collections may be relatively inexpensive to maintain. Research grant priorities tend to fall on the side of molecular and medical research, leaving organismal biologists and their institutions without the funding to continue their important work (Dalton 2003, Gropp 2003, Suarez and Tsutsui 2004). Small herbaria have received even less attention, and while historically their importance has generally been limited to the institutions in which they are housed, the potential of connecting small herbaria into a large-scale database and network may lead to their value increasing and broadening in the near future. SERNEC, a collaborative of herbaria in the southeast, has recently received grant funding to work on exactly this issue (www.sernec.org).

In this paper, I report on a qualitative study of 19 herbaria at small liberal arts colleges across the U.S. My main objectives for this study were (1) to determine in what ways these small college herbaria are used, (2) to survey faculty who curate these herbaria as to what their goals, wishes, and missions are for these collections, and (3) to develop a profile of the ideal herbarium for small liberal arts colleges. After discussing the results of this survey, I will end with recommendations as to what the mission of an herbarium collection should be at a small liberal arts college and what resources could make these collections more accessible, useful, or valuable.

Colleges were chosen for inclusion in the study based on (1) the size and nature of the institution, (2) whether they had an herbarium, and (3) whether they had a faculty member who was willing to participate. I sought to include as many colleges in the study as possible. Out of the 33 schools I attempted to include in the study, 14 did not participate. Several schools chose not to participate because their collections were quite small and the faculty felt their information would not be useful to me; others were contacted but did not respond to my inquiry. The results presented below represent the 19 schools that chose to participate.

I visited five of the colleges included in the study and interviewed their herbarium curators in person. Faculty at the remaining 14 colleges were contacted via email and responded to the survey either electronically or in a phone interview, based on their preference. The questions included in the survey can be found at: http://www.warren-wilson.edu/~aboyd/herbquestions.htm.

The size of the student body at these various colleges ranged from 750 to 3500 students, with a mean of 1664. The number of biology faculty at these colleges ranged from 4 to 19, with a mean of 10. The herbarium collections at these institutions varied from approximately 500 to approximately 27,000 specimens, with a mean of 13,000. I believe that this sample mean is high relative to the actual mean size of herbaria at small liberal arts colleges; some colleges did not respond to the survey because of the small size of their collections, and other collections may have escaped my detection because of their small size. Therefore, the collections included in this survey can be thought of as generally larger and more active than the average small-college herbarium. Interestingly, I found no relationship between size of herbarium and size of student body (r2 = 0.014, F = 0.237, p = 0.632) or number of biology faculty (r2 = 0.000086, F = 0.0015, p = 0.97).

Universally, the herbaria are curated by biology faculty, though the person in charge is not always a field botanist or taxonomist. In fact, one of the herbaria is curated by an entomologist (Elzie McCord, New College of Florida) at an institution that currently does not have a botanist on the faculty. Although the majority of the faculty associated with these collections are botanists, only 53% reported having specific herbarium training, and this ranged from solely undergraduate training to Ph.D.-level experience.

Based on anecdotal conversations with faculty, the existence of an herbarium, as well as its size and quality, at these small schools appears to be mostly dependent on one (or, occasionally, several) dedicated field botanist/taxonomist serving as curator at some point in the collection's history. The establishment dates for the herbaria ranged from the late 1800s through 1989. Many of the collections were largely created by a single faculty member who was particularly interested in floristic or taxonomic studies; this person may or may not have been the one who began the collection, but the bulk of the collection was dependent on that person's enthusiasm, experience, and hard work.

The organizational system used in the herbaria was split, with 50% using a taxonomic system and 50% arranged alphabetically by family. Those that use a taxonomic organization were mostly based on Cronquist (1968), though a few were based upon the published flora for their region, and one was organized according to the 1908 Gray's Manual of Botany (Robinson and Fernald 1908).

Only five of the 19 colleges included in the study had computerized databases for their herbarium collections, and these were not always complete. Five more described the rudimentary beginnings of a database or partial databasing (e.g., database for only one taxonomic group of interest, or only for one county). One reported a very old database that would be difficult to access today. Only one had a substantial part of the database online and searchable. Several reported having data on 3x5 file cards or on computer punch cards. Eight reported having no database at all.

USE OF THE HERBARIUM

The single most common use of these herbaria is as a resource in teaching undergraduate courses. Most of the faculty interviewed described using specimens from the herbaria in their teaching, and some said that other faculty in their department would occasionally use specimens for teaching as well. A few faculty used the herbarium in their own research, but this was rare due to limited time for research and/or the fact that their research interests didn't involve field collections. Several of the faculty discussed, and some lamented, the trend of college biology towards eliminating taxonomy and/or botany from the curriculum. As mentioned above, one of the schools did not have a botanist on the faculty, and those that do have botanists most commonly have plant ecologists or plant physiologists, not plant taxonomists. Only three of the faculty interviewed are actually plant taxonomists by training and/or research emphasis. All three of these use their herbaria extensively in their research.

Many of the faculty report that students use the herbarium collection to confirm ID of plants; at some institutions this is rare or periodic, while at others it is quite common. At some of the herbaria, students regularly or occasionally contribute to the collection through research projects or collections made for courses. Several of the faculty involve students in their research on floristics or plant ecology and the students learn to use the herbarium in association with this research. One school (New College of Florida) indicated that students with special interest in organic gardening or medicinal plants sometimes use the herbarium as a resource.

Use of the herbaria by off-campus parties is common, though not frequent, and is quite varied. Only 5 of the faculty interviewed indicated that there was no use of the collection by individuals or groups from off-campus. Most report some limited use: visitors from local plant societies, requests for loans or information from other scientists, reference use by farmers/gardeners, visits by faculty from other institutions or scientists from the state Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program, or Natural History Survey, U.S. Forest Service, or local environmental organizations. These uses by outside parties tend to occur once to several times a year at most of these herbaria. Several of the faculty interviewed indicated an interest in increased community outreach.

For the most part, these herbaria do not receive outside funding. Most of them do receive college funds, though these can range from plentiful to almost non-existent. Four of the herbaria have received some outside funding, in the form of small grants or scholarships, or from faculty contracts with the U.S. Forest Service or state Department of Natural Resources. Two of the schools have special herbarium funds or endowments established by alumni or emeritus faculty. Several receive work-study funds for hiring student assistants as part of their institutional funding.

When asked about who maintains the collections, almost all interviewees reported that this work was entirely or in part in their own hands. Nine have students helping out, either as volunteers or as paid work-study positions. Two have a staff member who helps with caring for the collection in addition to many other duties, and four reported having volunteers from off-campus who help in collection maintenance.

GOALS AND WISHES

The two most common goals that the interviewees cited for their collections were maintenance of the collection, and having the collection serve as a repository and record of the local flora. Coming in a close second were updating nomenclature on existing specimens, and creation of a searchable database. Several indicated a desire to train students and get them interested in the science of taxonomy, and several were interested in creating a website for the herbarium. Two interviewees indicated that they had no goals or plans for the herbarium under their care; they seemed to have little interest in the collections and/or thought that they were of marginal value. Some other goals mentioned included training other faculty to use the herbarium, becoming more visible with displays or tours, mounting a backlog of specimens, digitizing label records or creating an image collection, increasing the collection through new specimens, or hosting community events for outreach.

When asked what a “wish list” for their herbarium would contain, i.e., what would make their herbarium more useful, valuable, or accessible, the most common responses involved more time as curator to work on the collection and a complete, searchable database. Some also asked for funding for an assistant (student or staff). A number of respondents listed things that could be done by a faculty member with more time dedicated to the collection, such as updating the nomenclature, creating an image collection, confirming ID by students, and reorganizing the collection. Others named improved facilities, such as a dedicated room, fireproofing, microscopes, and computers.

I asked each interviewee to describe what they thought the mission of a small-college herbarium should be. Universally the respondents indicated education as the first priority, including both education about plants and training of field and curation skills. Beyond this, the most common responses are research and local flora documentation. Several also thought that a small herbarium could and/or should serve as a community resource. Individuals also cited documenting campus arboretum specimens, K-12 education, and raising consciousness in the local community about plant conservation and biodiversity.

Finally, interviewees were asked to describe characteristics of an ideal herbarium for a small liberal arts college. A couple of these interviewees indicated that they didn't think herbaria were very important resources and should not be a high priority for resources or time. However, these were the minority, and most had clear ideas of what these characteristics might be, including resources, accessibility, and/or scope of the collection itself. In terms of scope of the collection, all agreed that the local flora should be the main focus for these small herbaria, with limited specimens of plants from other major biomes for teaching purposes. Other high priorities were computers and staff/student assistance. Regular maintenance and updating of the collection and a searchable database were commonly mentioned, and are tasks that could be accomplished by the staff/student assistance cited above. Faculty release time as well as faculty recognition and summer compensation for work in the herbarium were also a high priority, reflecting the need for more time dedicated to these collections as faculty have busy schedules. Facilities such as cabinets, prep room, and microscopes were also needed.

DISCUSSION

The primary use for herbaria at small liberal arts colleges is, universally, undergraduate education in botany. This matches the primary focus of the institutions where these collections are housed: small, liberal arts colleges are traditionally devoted first and foremost to the mission of educating students, and only secondarily, if at all, to the acquisition of knowledge (Michalak & Friedrich 1981). These colleges also often advocate experiential education, and herbaria can be great tools for providing direct access to and experience of the objects of study. They provide a context for botany students not only to learn about the plants themselves but to acquire skills in field study and curation. We are in a time today in the biological sciences when biodiversity is disappearing while the taxonomic skills necessary to study that biodiversity are also disappearing. Natural history collections such as herbaria may be in danger of disappearing as well at a time when they are most needed to train the field biologists of our future.

Herbaria at small liberal arts colleges are faced with the same trend in the biological sciences that face large institutions: growth in microbiology, molecular biology, and prehealth professions that has led to shrinking funding and support for natural history collections and research. In some ways, this trend has hit smaller collections harder than the larger ones. Plant taxonomy and even botany are more likely to disappear completely from a small, generalized department of biology, leaving herbarium collections in the hands of botanists without herbarium-related training, or even in some cases in the hands of zoologists or microbiologists. Even when the collections have an enthusiastic curator, that curator is likely to be severely limited in time available. Professors at small colleges often teach a heavy course load, leaving little time for any research or other professional activities. When these collections lack a curator with the time for and/or interest in collection development and maintenance, they may easily end up discarded, deposited at larger institutions, or simply neglected, left to the exploits of bugs, humidity, and time.

On the other hand, collections at small collections also may be more likely to “fly under the radar,” taking up little space or resources and therefore not seen as a significant drain on the home institution. Because of this, they may be maintained for many years with little notice, continuing to be used for teaching and occasional research or community inquiry.

The most important resource for these herbaria--the one that has made the difference between minimal, neglected collections and those that are well-developed and well-used--is an engaged faculty curator. The main resource needed to make these collections more valuable and useful, therefore, is faculty time for maintenance, organization, establishment of a searchable database, training of student workers, checking/updating identifications and classifications, and so on.

Small herbarium collections tend to focus strongly on their local flora and may serve as a valuable repository for local floristic data. Searchable databases, especially online, could make the collections more accessible to researchers outside the home institution, thereby increasing their scientific value.

Based on my survey, the picture of an ideal herbarium for a small liberal arts college emerges clearly and is not an outlandish, unachievable goal. The mission of such an herbarium would be focused on undergraduate education, with student research and taxonomic skills training as components. It would have basic equipment and facilities (cabinets, dedicated space, microscopes, computer) to allow maintenance, development, and usability of the collection. It would specialize on the local flora, with some additional taxonomic and ecosystem breadth as a resource for teaching. It would have an up-to-date, searchable computer database, linked to the internet to allow searching from off-site. The collection would be curated by a faculty member trained in herbarium curation skills and with an interest in the collection (though this person need not be a plant taxonomist, necessarily). The curator would have institutional support for time dedicated to the collection, be it release time from teaching, summer support, an extra stipend or other recognition. Lastly, the collection would be accessible to the outer community as a resource for study and research.

How far are existing collections from this vision? It varies widely; some are very close to what I've described, while others lack even the most basic resources. I see three categories of collections that were covered in my study, with different needs:

1) Collections that currently have no faculty member interested in herbarium use or curation. There is probably very little that would make a difference in these collections until and unless a faculty member emerges with an interest in the collection. Without faculty support, there is very little hope that natural history collections of any kind will be maintained at these small colleges.

2) Collections that have been neglected or underdeveloped but have an interested faculty member overseeing them. The most useful resource for these collections would be personnel time, for the faculty curator and/or for student or staff support. Personnel support would allow for repair, updating, organization, new acquisitions, and databasing, all of which would improve the value and usefulness of these collections. Where needed, funding for basic supplies and equipment (from mounting paper to cabinets and microscopes), either from the home institution or from small grants, could also be an excellent investment into the preservation and usefulness of these educational collections.

3) Collections that are well-developed, well-maintained, and have an active curator. The most common criterion missing from these collections is an online, searchable database. Support for databasing these collections and making them accessible via internet would make these collections more useful both to their home institutions and to scientists and other community members outside the home institution.

Small-college herbaria have long been overlooked and undervalued. The results of this study show that there is considerable agreement about what is needed to make these collections more accessible, valuable or useful, and that the goals are, indeed, achievable with a modest amount of support.

Acknowledgments: Many thanks to the participants in the survey that has led to this article. Thanks also to Donna Ford-Werntz at University of West Virginia for her mentoring during my sabbatical research, and to the Appalachian College Association and Warren Wilson College for their financial support of the research.

Literature Cited
Cronquist, A. 1968. The evolution and classification of flowering plants. Houghton Mifflin, Boston.

Dalton, R. 2003. Natural history collections in crisis as funding is slashed. Nature 423: 575.

Ertter, B. 2000. Our undiscovered heritage: past and future prospects for species-level botanical inventory.

Funk, V. 2003. 100 uses for an herbarium (well at least 72). American Society for Plant Taxonomists Newsletter 17: 17-19.

Gotelli, N. J. 2004. A taxonomic wish-list for community ecology. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 359: 585-597.

Gropp, R. E. 2003. Are university natural science collections going extinct? BioScience 53(6):550.

Krishtalka, L. and P. S. Humphrey, 2000. Can natural history museums capture the future? BioScience 50(7): 611-617.

Michalak, S. J., and R. J. Friedrich, 1981. Research productivity and teaching effectiveness at a small liberal arts college. Journal of Higher Education 52(6): 578-597.

O'Connell, A. F. Jr., A. T. Gilbert, and J. S. Hatfield, 2004. Contribution of natural history collection data to biodiversity assessment in national parks. Conservation Biology 18(5): 1254-1261.

Robinson, B.L. and M.L. Fernald, 1908. Gray's new manual of botany, a handbook of the flowering plants and ferns of the central and northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. 7th ed. New York: American Book.

Snow, N. 2005. Successfully curating smaller herbaria and natural history collections in an academic setting. BioScience 55(9): 771-779.

Schatz, G. E. 2002. Taxonomy and herbaria in service of plant conservation: lessons from Madagascar's endemic families. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 89: 145-152.

Suarez, A. V. and N. D. Tsutsui, 2004. The value of museum collections for research and society. BioScience 54(1): 66-74.

BOTANY IN BULGARIA

Anitra Thorhaug, School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University

To many botanists Bulgaria is the least known and least traveled portion of the “new Europe.” The Republic of Bulgaria (110,980 km²) is part of the Balkan chain of mountains. Bulgaria is bounded by Balkan nations of Macedonia and Serbia to the West, Romania along its northern border (the Danube river), the Black Sea on the east coastline, and Turkey and Greece beyond another set of mountains on Bulgaria’s southern border. Thus, it is simultaneously almost a Mediterranean country (only a few hundred miles from the Mediterranean sea, it receives weather patterns from the Mediterranean), a Black Sea nation, and a Danubian nation as well as having extensive Balkan mountains. The southern and western portions are forested (Fig 1 and 2). The average elevation is about 480 m. The Balkan Mountains cross the country from the northwestern corner to the Black Sea and form the watershed between the Danube River and the Aegean Sea. The northern side of the Balkan Mountains slopes gradually to the Danube River to form the northern Danubian Plateau. Transitional plains lie to the south of the mountains and are an important agricultural region. The Rhodope Mountains, which form the boundary with Greece on the south, rise to the country's highest point, Musala Peak, at 2,925 m.

The mountains contain a large number of ecosystems. The Black Sea coastal areas range from marsh lands in the north to wide beaches with a sloping shelf that create a marine benthic habitat. (Note that extensive pollution beyond the control of Bulgaria occurs both in the Black Sea, where it is at the receiving end of circulation from Turkey, Georgia, Russia, Ukraine, and Romania as well as down from the Danube, draining 9 nations into Bulgarian Danubian waters.) The principal river draining Bulgaria is the Danube. Several other rivers, including the Iskur and the Yantra, flow into the Danube. The Maritsa River flows east to Greece and Turkey across the Thracian Plain. Other important rivers are the Kamchiya, which empties into the Black Sea, and the Struma and Mesta, which flow south to the Aegean Sea. Most of Bulgaria has a continental climate, with cold winters and hot summers. The climate in general is more severe than in other European areas of the same latitudes, although a Mediterranean climate, with dry summers and mild, humid winters, prevails in the valley of the southwestern Rhodope Mountains. Climate can be defined as average January temperatures ranging from 2° C near the Black Sea to -17° C in central Bulgaria. July temperatures range from 16° to 27° C. The average rainfall is about 630 mm per year, ranging from a low of about 190 mm in the northeast, to a high of about 1,900 mm in the Rila Mountains. The wettest period is early summer in most of the country and autumn or winter in the southern valleys. Snowfall is generally light except in the mountains.

Protected areas are generally forests or marshes. They include about 10% of the land area in 753 protected reserves. There are 16 biosphere reserves and 5 RAMSAR sites. The known number of higher plants is said to be 3,572 (FAO, 2008). Forests cover 3,625,000 ha of which 267,000 are primary, 2,028,000 ha are modified natural, 992,000 ha are semi-natural and 41,000 are plantations. This is an increase since independence in 1989 (FAO, 2005).

A large and rich region of agricultural productivity lies in the valleys between the mountains and in the delta of the Danube. This area has been in cultivation for at least 9,000 years (Thracian and pre-Thracian cultures). The many nations who have dominated Bulgaria have prized exports from these soils (Greek, Roman, Turkish and USSR). Presently tobacco, fruits and vegetables are chiefly grown. A high value export product is the attar of the Bulgar rose (Rosa damascena and Rosa alba) grown in valleys in central Bulgaria, which is not a native variety, but was imported several centuries ago to service the Western European perfume business. I was fortunate to witness the late May rose production with many miles of central Bulgaria in full bloom. The forest products are largely exported lumber with no value added. This is deeply troubling since the limited forests are protected by various reserves.

The outstanding institution with ongoing botanical research is the Academy of Sciences, Institute of Botany in the capital Sofia. Universities, most notably the Universities of Sofia, of Plovdiv, of Soumen, and of Stara Zagoraalso, do some botanical research beyond their teaching. The Institute of Botany maintains field facilities in the Western Rhodope Mountains, and near Dolni Lozen village. The Institute of Botany does research in the following areas: Flora and florogensis, Phytocoenology and Ecology, and Applied Botany (medicinal plants, regeneration of rare and endangered species, pollution effects on plants). They also have extensive collections of plant fossils, bryological and mycological, and vascular plants. Note that fossil pollen is a paleo-specialty.

There have a series of botanical investigations at the Institute of Botany since its inception in 1947 when it merged with the Royal Institute for Science and Sofia Botanical Gardens. The staff is 100 persons with 47 Ph.D.s. The Institute of Botany has produced “The Flora of the Republic of Bulgaria” in 11 volumes, “The Fungi of Bulgaria” (1991-) in 4 volumes, “Synopsis of Flowering Plants of Bulgaria” (1980) “Guide to Mosses in Bulgaria” (1992), “Synopsis of Plant Communities in Bulgaria” (1995), “Edible and Poisonous Mushrooms in Bulgaria” (1998), “Cenozoic Plants of Bulgaria” (Eocene to Pliocene) (2005), “Atlas of Bulgarian Endemic Plants” (2006) and various proceedings of botanical conferences as well as other publications. The journal Phytologia Balcanica (since 1975) deals with taxonomy and biosystematics, chorology, floristics, evolution, phytocoenology, paleobotany, palynology, plant anatomy, embryology, ecology, and chemistry of medicinal and aromatic plants. The mean number of annual publications is 52.

Obviously since Bulgaria is involved in the botanical research of the European Union and NATO there are cooperative programs with these nations for mapping (as in Natura 2000) and in CORINE, in the UNESCO_MAB programs, the EU Danubian and Balkan Flora programs. Also there are FAO and UNEP cooperative programs ongoing, as well as a Black Sea Association of Institutes. The European Initiative for Euro + Med Plant Base, Periodic Review of Bulgarian Biosphere Reserves, National Grassland Inventory Project, European Native Seed Conservation Network, Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity in Strandzha Mountain (UNESCO_MAB), Transboundary Cooperation Bulgaria-Greece (PHARE), European Pollen Bank, Evolution of Climate in the Neogene (NECLIME), and Mapping of the Flora of Europe (Finland) are international cooperative projects undertaken by the Institute of Botany.

This is one in a series of national botanical profiles conceived by the International Outreach Committee of the Botanical Society of America to educate botanists about international efforts in botany.

The map below shows the ecological zones, as shown on the FAO global map of ecological zones produced as part of the FRA 2000. Please refer to FRA Working Paper 20 for further information on the Global Ecological Zone map.

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

Map source: Global Forest Resources Assessment 2000, base map: ESRI

Forest cover map

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

Map source: Global Forest Resources Assessment 2000, base map: ESRI

The above map is an extract from the Global Forest Cover map produced as part of FRA 2000. Please refer to FRA Working Paper 19 for a background to the production of the map.

News from the Annual Meeting

Botany 2008 Plenary Address Solutions from Nature: How Mushrooms Can Help Save the World

Paul Stamets Founder, “Fungi Perfecti”

“We are an evolutionary success – so far – but if there was a U.N. of living organisms, would humans be voted off the earth?” This question was raised by Stamets at the beginning of his engaging and stunningly illustrated address that opened the scientific meetings in Vancouver. With humans implicated as the instigators of the 6th major extinction event, what can we do? GROW MORE MUSHROOMS!

After a brief review of basic mycology, focusing on the growth and ecology of the mycelium, “the true foundation of the food web,” Stamets launched into a four-part explanation of mycoremediation and ended with medical and edible applications. Fungi were the true colonizers of the land and dominated the landscape when Rhynia was getting its start. Prototaxites, an upright form 30m tall, studded the earth 420 mybp. Fossil remnants may be found in Canada and Saudi Arabia. Stamets likens the mycelium to an internet for nature – internet architecture, with nodal optimization, mimics the interwoven, branching mycelial structure. “As hikers walk across these sensitive filaments, they leave impressions, and mycelia sense and respond to these movements.” And these mycelial mats can be huge – thousands of acres in size.

Fungi play a variety of roles in nature and Stamets suggested that we can take advantage of their digestive powers by enlisting fungi to cooperate with us in “mycorestoration” to clean up some of our mess. He illustrated four specific applications: mycoremediation, mycofiltration, mycopesticides, and mycoforestry. In an experiment with the Washington State DOT, a 10 yd3 mound of dieselcontaminated soil was inoculated with oyster mushroom spawn and compared to two bacterial treatments and a control. Within two months total petroleum hydrocarbons were reduced from 20,000 ppm to less than 200 ppm, the mushrooms had fruited and inaugurated a succession of other mushrooms species and seed plants. There were no visible changes in the control or either bacterial treatment. On his own property, a small waterfront farm on Puget Sound, he created a wood chip bed inoculated with Stropharia rugoso annulata spawn near the top of a ravine that emptied into the bay. This bed filtered runoff from his farm animals and was a back up to his septic system. Within a year there was a hundred-fold drop in coliform bacteria from his property. Trouble with ants or termites? Try a mycopesticide! Since the 1980s and 90s researchers have been working with entomopathogenic molds, such as Metarhizium, whose spores quickly penetrate the exoskeletons of insects and kill them. Unfortunately, spores are quickly removed from colonies by workers who isolate and sacrifice themselves to protect the queen. Like many fungi grown in culture, this fungus produces concentric rings of vegetative, presporulating mycelium and sporulating hyphae. The insect colony will not tolerate spores, but the presporulaitng mycelium is choice food - - and natural bait. Two to three weeks after baiting colonies of Formosan termites, eastern subterranean termites, and fires ants, the colonies were exterminated by the fungus. Mycoforestry includes not just the obvious practice of inoculating the soil with mycorrhizal fungi when replanting, but facilitating decomposition and hastening forest recovery by chipping and/or shading limbs and debris left in the wake of harvesting or thinning the forest.

Edible mushrooms, either store-bought or especially wild collected, are a gastronomic delights and Stamets has built his business, “Fungi Perfecti” (http://www.fungi.com) on producing and selling gourmet and medicinal mushroom growing kits and medicinal mushroom products. He concluded his presentation with examples of the antimicrobial properties of the oyster mushroom, birch polypore, and agarikon against E. coli 0157:H7 and Staphylococcus aureus. Work also is being done on the antiviral properties of various fungi.

Much of Stamets’ presentation is elaborated upon in his recent book, Mycelium Running: How Mushrooms Can Help Save the World. Paul Stamets, 2005, Berlekey, California, Ten Speed Press, from which the above illustration is taken. - Marsh Sundberg

Regional Botany Special Lecture: Science Education for the 21st Century: Using the tools of science to teach science.

Carl Wieman Carl, Wieman Institute for Science Education, University of British Columbia

Why Wieman? Who would be better to speak to a society of professional scientists about the importance of teaching science than the Nobel Prize-winner in Physics who also was the Carnegie Foundation’s U.S. University Professor of the Year and chairs the National Academy of Sciences Board on Science Education?

Why now? Wieman pointed out that while the traditional role of science teaching was to train the next generation of scientists, today the need is to 1), prepare a more scientifically literate populace to make science-WISE decisions, and 2), to prepare a work force for the modern economy. Not only is our target audience a different group of students, but it is a much larger one.

What must we do? Our goal must be to transform how students think so that they can think about science, and use science, like a scientist (but not as a scientist). Furthermore, this goal must be the focus of individual instructors in their courses AND in the curriculum as a whole. To be effective in this endeavor we must: 1) be guided by fundamental research principles; 2) devise practices based on good data and standards of evidence; 3) disseminate the results of our work in a scholarly manner and incorporate what works for others; and 4) fully utilize modern technology.

After this brief introduction, Wieman proceeded with a personal testimony about how he used to teach (and most of us still do) and what happened to cause him to change. This grew from his frustration with graduate students who invariably came to his lab with 17- years of “successful” education behind them and yet were “clueless” about physics! Neverthe- less, 2-4 years later they were “expert” physicists. What was different about the way he taught his undergraduates and the way he taught graduate students? Inquiry and investigation! What he quickly discovered is that during the past two decades there have been major advances in our understanding of effective classroom practice, cognitive psychology, and brain research and that these three areas all are interconnected and paint a consistent picture of how students learn. Studentactive learning in the classroom is shown to be much more effective in information transfer and retention, developing conceptual understanding, and changing naïve beliefs about science. Cognitive psychology says that cognitive load (short term memory) is reached very quickly – we can remember and process only 4-7 items. Furthermore, novice thinkers (our students) process information very differently from expert thinkers (us - - in our discipline). The findings of cognitive psychology reinforce and explain the results from classroom studies. Effective teaching involves facilitating students’ construction of new information based on what they already know. They must do the work, but we must be motivating and engaging and then follow up with monitoring and guiding their thinking. The expert teacher is an expert tutor!

This is the point where technology, if used correctly, can help. Interactive lectures, using “clickers” can keep students engaged as can interactive simulations. But this is not automatic. Used as an attendance and simple testing device they have little benefit and may even be resented. Effective use involves asking challenging, conceptual questions, involving student discussion and responses, and follow-up discussion led by the instructor with minimal but non-zero grade impact. And the perfect classroom is not enough. Develop homework with authentic problems and useful feedback. Brain research says that the brain is just like a muscle – development requires strenuous extended use! See the CWSEI web site (see www.cwsei.ubc.ca) for a variety of tutorials, powerpoint presentations, and other tools to promote more effective student learning. - Marsh Sundberg

President’s Address - Karl Niklas

The bylaws of the Botanical Society of America require that the President–Elect deliver “to the membership assembled at the annual banquet a botanically-oriented address”. Recently, it has become something of a tradition to publish the text of this address in the Plant Science Bulletin. To some degree the publication of my address presents something of a difficulty. The founders of the BSA could not envision the effects of technology on how we lecture to our students or how we speak with our colleagues. Indeed, the 21st century has provided us with a vast range of tools that extend our words and concepts well beyond the lecture podium of the classroom or the banquet hall. Mindful of the stipulation that I present a “botanically-oriented address” but having a deserve to provide something that might be both entertaining as well as informative, I presented a 10 minute film entitled Botany Without Borders that was prepared in collaboration with Christopher Julian (director and narrator), Edward Cobb (photographic research and acquisition), and Doug Fahl (musical score). This film, which can be downloaded free of charge from the BSA website at www.botany.org, strives to attract students to the study of plant life as well as educate the general public about botany, botanists, and the roles played by botanical societies. It is my hope that Botany Without Borders might be useful in the classroom or as a feature added to the websites of colleges, plant biology departments, botanical societies, etc. Because this film is intended to “sell” botany and inform the public about the roles of all botanical societies, my colleagues and I have also prepared a narration-less version so that the text can be translated into any language. For this purpose, the English version of the narration is published here, which also fulfills the stipulation of the BSA bylaws and perpetuates the tradition of publishing the President-Elect’s “address”. The lyrics of the song Photosynthesis (sung by the Hot Toddies) are also provided at the end of the narration. Some may find the words amusing; others may find them informative.

Text of Film:

“Astronomers tell us we are made of stardust because the elements manufactured in the hearts of stars billions of years ago now reside in all life forms. If this is true, then it is also fair to say that we are made of starlight –– because all of Earth’s great ecosystems and their food-webs ultimately rest on the foundation of photosynthesis (the ability of plants to harness the energy of sunlight and convert it into their own living substance). People may call this a blue planet, but it’s really a “green world.”

The greening of our planet started billions of years ago when animal-like and photosynthetic bacteria entered into a symbiotic partnership that in turn gave rise to fungi, animals, and plants. This pivotal biological event changed our planet and the course of evolution in many ways –– not the least of which was to produce our oxygen-rich atmosphere and the formation of the ozone layer. Today, plants continue to make the air breathable, but they also serve us in so many other important ways by providing food, fiber, pharmaceuticals, and timber. They also add beauty to our lives.

In light of their great importance, it is surprising that so many people know so little about plants. Indeed, some people don’t even think of them as being alive. Most plants move so slowly, we don’t even notice their intricate activities with the human eye. That we live in an animal oriented world is not surprising. We are, after all, animals and it is fair to say that our household pets give us far more loving attention that our prized roses or orchids. Plants are rarely cute or cuddly. But it is equally fair to say that without plants, most of the world around us would not exist.

So, what are “plants”? What are these creatures that survive without benefit of blood, brains, or muscles, summon without self-awareness, and feed the world without intention? They are among the oldest organisms that ever existed, some achieving over 5000 years of age. They comprise some of the smallest cells floating in our oceans and some of the largest organisms that ever lived on land or in the sea. Some swim with the aid of flagella; others fly like helicopters or with the aid of parachutes; but most are sedentary. Some are colorless and parasitic. But most are green and photosynthetic. Some live in trees, while others live submerged in deep water. Their diversity in form, size, and lifestyle is truly beyond description. Perhaps this is why plants are often depicted in our popular culture as “strange”, potentially dangerous, if not malignant life-forms, or as comical “creatures” from another planet. Yet, even when depicted in these distorted ways, they remain fascinating organisms that should demand our attention and admiration. Indeed, they have inspired our art as well as our science.

Who studies plants? The study of plant life is as historically ancient as is harvesting and farming. The earliest peoples who incorporated plants as an important component in their diets were botanists in the truest sense of the word. Their survival depended on recognizing and observing plants could be eaten and which were poisonous. The first botanical writings known to us are from Aristotle. Sadly, his botanical works are lost forever. We only know of their existence because they are mentioned by some of his contemporaries, such as his pupil, Theophrastus.

Theophrastus’s interest was in the classification of medicinal plants. In many respects he was one of world’s first great homeopathic physicians. This focus dominated much of botany for many centuries. But it was not until the time of the Swedish professor and physician, Carl Linnaeus, that a formal classification system was invented. It is still used today for naming species of every form of life, including bacteria, fungi, plants, and animals.

The discovery and cataloging of plants might appear to be a dry subject. But the history of plant exploration is rather romantic and, in some cases, full of tales of danger and daring. Many early explorers, like Alexander von Humboldt and J. D. Hooker, traveled the globe collecting plants and secretively making maps for military or commercial purposes. Indeed, the exploits of the great plant collector Ernest Henry Wilson traveling in China and Tibet earned him the nickname “China Wilson” –– which some claim was one of the role models for “Indiana Jones”. Today, many botanists continue in the tradition of these early explorers, collecting plants at their own peril. Others study plants in the peaceful setting of the laboratory or test garden, using chemistry, physics, math, or computers. Indeed, the ways in which plants are studied are almost as diverse as plants are themselves.

Why study plants? Who should care? For botanists, this is an important question. Well over 90% of the living visible world is made up of plant life. We eat them, we use them to build homes, we wear them as textiles, we extract life-saving medicinals, and communicate with the written page composed of plant fibers. What often goes unnoticed is that industry is fueled by plants in the form of their fossil remains –– coal –– the organic remains of ancient plant life. In today’s hectic and complicated world, plants remain as important as ever in the making of bio-fuels, the mitigation of Global Warming by binding carbon in their cell walls, and the production of genetically modified plants to feed the world more efficiently and economically. For those of us who are professional botanists, it’s difficult to answer the question “why study plants?” not because we don’t know the answer, but because we cannot imagine why anyone would not want to!

The study of plant life is a global enterprise involving scientists from every nation. This endeavor occurs in universities, botanical gardens, industrial laboratories, and in natural preserves everywhere. The role of botanical societies around the world is to allow scientists to share their discoveries with colleagues, students, and the general public in the form of conferences, symposia, and publications.

These societies represent communities of botanists –– academics of every age and ethnicity –– that share a passion for the study of plant life.

The mission of these societies has a common theme, articulated in many languages. It is to “promote the study and inquiry into the form, function, development, diversity, reproduction, evolution, and uses of plants and their interactions within the biosphere, and preserve plant life for future generations to enjoy and use wisely.”

Regardless of where you live, joining a botanical society and becoming part of the world-wide community of plant biologists requires little effort. Information about most botanical societies is generally available on the internet. It is also provided in many libraries that subscribe to botanical journals.

Many societies have membership dues at reduced rates for students or non-professional botanists. You do not need to be a “botanist” to join a botanical society. You just need to love plants and to have a desire to learn more about them. Members of these societies include elementary and high school students and teachers, gardeners, and farmers. The field of botany has a rich history, a dynamic present, and a fascinating future. So, come and join us in this great enterprise and learn more about our blue planet and green world.”

Lyrics to “Photosynthesis” from the video.

Come on little plants, we’re groovin’ in the sunlight. Spread your leaves and dance, reach up for the blue sky.
Soak up all the water, I won’t leave your roots dry. Drink it up now, baby, let your cells multiply, multiply, multiply…
Photo, photosynthesis
Photo, photosynthesis
Photo, photosynthesis
Photo, photosynthesis

Photosynthesis is my favorite chemical reaction. When the plants are growing it gives me so much satisfaction.
Chlorophyll’s the green stuff, I just can’t get enough. Building up your cell walls, so you grow up big and tall, big and tall, big and tall…
Photo, photosynthesis
Photo, photosynthesis
Photo, photosynthesis
Photo, photosynthesis

note: the video, shown after the banquet, is available on the BSA web site.

Awards

2008 BSA Merit Award

Dr. Thomas Rost, University of California Davis

Dr. Thomas L. Rost is one of the world’s foremost researchers on root development. His research record spans four decades and includes more than 80 published papers in highly regarded journals and chapters in scholarly books. He has led his students and post-doctoral researchers to a modern and accurate understanding of the development of this model root system. Specifically, he and his colleagues have shown that the architecture of the root apical meristem changes as the meristem ages and that the pattern of root apical meristem ontogeny is associated with periclinal divisions and gives rise to a threedimensional arrangement of periclinal derivatives arranged in a helix. Tom Rost has done more than any other current structural botanist to bring the plant root to our attention as a dynamic developmental entity. However, his research has not been limited to roots. He has authored or co-authored impressive articles regarding seed structure and histochemistry, plant morphogenesis, and agriculture, and especially the recent studies on Pierce’s disease in grapevine. Further, Tom’s contributions to botanical education via his teaching/ mentoring and his writings have been quite well known and recognized. The Botanical Society of America is proud to recognize Dr. Thomas L. Rost with this highest award.

Dr. Warren Wagner, National Museum of Natural History

The botanical community is indebted to Dr. Warren L. Wagner for his major contributions: monography of Oenothera, The Manual of the Flowering Plants of Hawaii, studies on speciation and relationships of Marquesan plants, and service at the National Museum of Natural History (Smithsonian Institution) are among those that will be most rememberedIn 1982, he undertook what was probably one of the most difficult and most needed contribution in floristic botany: a flora of Hawaii. The previous flora (Hillebrand, 1888) was out of date, and subsequent contributions featured varied species concepts and were published in scattered places. The 1990 Manual (rev. 1999) was a major factor in permitting botanists to explore the amazing insular evolutionary phenomena that the Hawaiian flora contains. Wagner’s work on islands continued with the Marquesas, where cladistic studies and contributions using DNA permitted an understanding of the biogeographic nature of the remote and neglected archipelago. Wagner is both imaginative and practical, and has served as Chair of Botany at the Smithsonian, managed funds for IAPT and ASPT, and served in numerous capacities for professional societies. Through his mentorship of younger botanists, his identity in monographic, floristic, and phylogenetic botany has been multiplied significantly.

Charles E. Bessey Teaching Award

Dr. Beverly Brown, Associate Professor of Biology, Nazareth College, Rochester, New York, and Immediate Past Chair of the Teaching Section of the Botanical Society of America.

Dr. Michael Pollan, Knight Professor, University of California--Berkeley and Director of the Knight Program for Science and Environmental Journalism.

Student Travel Awards

Phycological Section Student Travel Award
Kendra Bunner, Illinois State University, Normal, IL - Advisor, Dr. Martha Cook - Botany 2008 presentation: “Description of Zoospore Structure and Development in Entransia fimbriata (Charophyceae).”

Pteridological Section Student Travel Awards
Jay Bolin, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA - Dr. Lytton J. Musselman - Botany 2008 presentation: “Unraveling the reticulate evolutionary history of the Isoetes hyemalis complex.”

Emily Butler, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI - Advisor, Dr. Thomas J. Givnish - Botany 2008 presentation: “In the Light of Evolution: A Proposal to Integrate Phylogeny and Ecophysiology in New World Dryopteris.”

Amber Churchill, Stonehill College, North Easton, MA - Advisor, Dr. J. Edward Watkins - Botany 2008 presentation: “A Site for Sori: Consequences of Fertile/Sterile Leaf Dimorphism in Ferns.”

Michael Sundue, New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY - Advisor, Dr. Robbin Moran - Botany 2008 presentation: “Systematics of grammitid ferns: Lellingeria, Melpomene, and Terpsichore.”

Southeastern Section Student Travel Award
Nicole Hughes, Wake Forest University, Winston- Salem, NC - Advisor, Dr. William K. Smith - Botany 2008 presentation: “Winter color change: The adaptive role of anthocyanin pigments in leaves of broadleaf evergreen species.”

Phytochemical Section Student Travel Award
Cary Pirone, Florida International University, FL - Advisor, Dr. David Lee - Botany 2008 presentation: “A Mammalian Pigment in the Plant Kingdom.”

Genetics Section Graduate Student Research Awards
The 2008 recipients of the Genetics Section Graduate Student Research Awards, each of which provides $500 for research funds and an additional $500 for attendance at a future BSA meeting, are:
Renate Wuersig, Purdue University (PhD student) and
Sunni J. Taylor, Texas State University (MS Student)

News from the Society

And The Survey Says: Taking the Pulse of BSA Members

In July 2008, following on the heels of a productive meeting of BSA’s Strategic Planning Committee, the Botanical Society of America released a comprehensive survey of its membership. Since a survey of the entire membership had not been conducted in at least the past five years, the Strategic Planning Committee recognized a distinct need to gather as much feedback as possible from members in order to better inform the decisions of the Council and the Executive Committee as new societal goals are set. Utilizing the web-based SurveyMonkey tool, BSA staff crafted the questionnaire with input from the American Society of Association Executives (a national resource for non-profits like ours), President Pam Soltis, as well as the Strategic Planning Committee. Two thousand seven hundred sixteen members received the survey via an email link (undeliverable emails have been excluded from this total). In addition, paper surveys were mailed to 140 members. This is the first in a series of surveys that are being analyzed by staff and society leadership in an effort to provide insights into new areas for growth, membership engagement, and impact on the society’s mission. In essence, this data gathering exercise is and will become a continual part of the fabric of the BSA as we strive to deliver the best value and opportunities to our members. The results are highlighted below, and they provide some fascinating insights into this community of scholars, scientists, and educators that will help shape the future of the Botanical Society of America.

The respondents
Compared to other surveys of this type, where a 5 or 10% response rate is considered favorable, the BSA membership survey received a resounding 20% response rate. The diversity of responses also matches up with the current distribution among membership categories. Professionals were wellrepresented at 70%, Students at 16%, Emeritus response at 9%, K-14 Educators at 2%, and Retired members at 2%; Amateurs, Affiliates, and Associates made up the remainder of the respondents.

Overall highlights
The exciting news from the survey is that BSA members rate their society experience and satisfaction very positively. Of those who responded, 62% state that they are “highly satisfied” with their BSA membership. Together with the 28% that ranked their experience as “somewhat satisfied,” this places 90% of respondents in the satisfied category. Only 1.5% of respondents expressed dissatisfaction with their BSA membership. Recent research by the American Society of Association Executives has shown that academics and members of scientific societies are among the strongest society supporters and also strong promoters of their professional affiliations (Dalton & Dignam, 2007). This finding seems to have been replicated here with the BSA members. In fact, 97% of respondents would recommend BSA membership to a colleague or student. This is a key finding, as one of the best ways to grow a society such as ours is through word-of-mouth and member-to-non-member campaigns.

Overall, the survey results reaffirm the direction of the society that has been laid out in the draft strategic plan crafted earlier this year (to view the Strategic Plan, visit the following web link: (www.botany.org/ governance/papers/Strategic_Plan_DRAFT- 033008.pdf ). Members also spoke highly and rated favorably the areas where the society has traditionally excelled. For example, the annual scientific conference and BSA publications like the American Journal of Botany and Plant Science Bulletin score very highly throughout the survey. These membership benefits are not only long-time staples, but according to members, they are the building blocks to which new and exciting ideas and strategies can and should be added.

Member Benefits – Publications
As previously mentioned, the publications of the society are highly valued. The American Journal of Botany (AJB) is the number one reason why potential members choose to affiliate with the society. The overwhelming majority of respondents read the journal monthly, and almost 50% read AJB solely online while 20% read only the print version. The remainder of respondents said that they rely on a combination of both formats. The journal’s Table of Contents (TOC) is prime real estate space as most readers use the TOC to find articles in their main areas of specialty or other articles that perk their interest. Only 16% of respondents say that they read the entire issue. When selecting where to submit an article for publication, BSA members rate the quality and reputation of the journal as the leading factor in their decision-making, followed by speed of publication and ease of submission/peer-review, which ranked head-to-head as the second most important factors. The journal is another area for future growth as it can raise the profile of the society internationally and reach a diverse base of plant scientists. Respondents expressed deep passion for the journal and topics they wish to see covered. Open-ended feedback converged around the inclusion of high impact review articles, article summaries in the journal’s front matter, and maintaining the diversity of the journal’s coverage. Much discussion also revolved around publishing articles on educational topics in botany, which are highly desired by many members, but do not necessarily find a proper home in the American Journal of Botany.

As for this publication, the Plant Science Bulletin (PSB), 50% of respondents read all or more than half of each issue. The PSB is currently placing articles for the next issue online before publication in print format. However, the membership expressed deep misgivings regarding abandoning the print newsletter, as 34% stated that they would read the PSB less often if it were only available online. This feeling permeated all categories of membership, including students, who are recognized as the leaders in researching and utilizing online content.

Member Benefits- Career, Community and Collaboration
Another overriding result of the survey, which was fairly expected, is that there is a strong need to view the needs of BSA’s membership through the lens of career development. Students, Professionals, Emeritus, K-14 Educators, and Amateurs all place differing values on BSA offerings and benefits. Key areas for growing the society appear to focus on the creation of community as well as opportunities for peer contact and networking. The concept of “fostering community” includes reaching out as a leader and catalyst to bring differing plant societies together in collaborative efforts (96% state this is important), as well as bridging the “America” gap to resolve disconnects between domestic and international members (as evidenced in many openended responses). Indeed, it was a top priority for many members to make the society more user- and benefit-friendly to our international members so that the BSA becomes truly THE home for ALL plant scientists and enthusiasts around the world.

Member Benefits-Personal and Professional Development
Only one third of our respondents expressed that that they are involved in some way with BSA inner workings. Overall, the key ways that our membership volunteers for the society is through submission or editing of articles in the American Journal of Botany or Plant Science Bulletin, serving on BSA committees, and mentoring in the PlantingScience educational outreach program. Given the current high level of regard and satisfaction with the society, it is somewhat surprising how little the membership gets involved in volunteering or contributing to the BSA. Since it has been demonstrated that members who are involved in a society are more likely to stay loyal to and promote the organization (Dalton & Dignam, 2007), membership involvement and volunteer opportunities will be a key to membership retention and satisfaction in the future.

It is important to note that while BSA members cite networking and peer contact as a high motivator to the join the society, it appears that BSA members are overwhelmingly not aware of current offerings that foster community and the creation of networks (PlantingScience/educational outreach, committee service, career/job board, volunteer opportunities, Student’s Corner). Creating more opportunities for the development of social and professional networking will be a main target area for growth as the society evolves. In open-ended questions, members suggested ideas such as regional/ smaller specialized meetings, blogs, listservs, and collaboration with other societies as future possibilities that might meet their needs for interaction.

Next Steps
This membership survey is just the beginning. It provides the keys that let all of us know how BSA members determine value. It also gives intriguing insights into new strategies and exciting ideas for bettering the society’s offerings and attracting more colleagues and students to this botanical home. In the future, you will see the society continue to gather data, test these survey results further, and tease out new information. As new ideas and strategies evolve, they will be shared with you. As a result of this survey, the Plant Science Bulletin will begin to feature short articles on different benefits and BSA offerings.

Please feel free to contact President Karl Niklas kjn2@cornell.edu, Executive Director Bill Dahl wdahl@botany.org, or Membership & Subscriptions Director Heather Cacanindin hcacanindin@botany.org, with your feedback and ideas for the future of the BSA.

For those that thrive on data, here are some of the highlights from the survey results. You can also visit the following web site to view more detailed aggregated data: www.surveymonkey.com/sr.aspx?sm=Hrtxj_2biVh3DMpETMSQ6C_2blG3uzJ4EpwHd5qggEjuvao_3d

Membership Most BSA members belong to many scientific societies. The largest crossover occurs with the following groups:
American Society of Plant Taxonomists (42%)
Society for the Study of Evolution (22%)
Ecological Society of America (26%)
American Society of Plant Biologists (14%)
Other highly mentioned societies that were not included in the selection options are: International Association of Plant Taxonomists, International Organization of Paleobotany, Linnean Society of London, Geological Society of America, and the American Society of Naturalists.

Top four reasons members originally joined the BSA:
Receive access/subscription to the American Journal of Botany (61%)
Peers/Community/Networking aspects (48%)
Publish in the American Journal of Botany (35%)
Attend the Annual Scientific Meeting (30%)
It should be noted that student members, as might be expected, place a much higher value on social aspects of membership, such as networking and the annual meeting, than other membership categories. In fact, for students, one of the main drivers for joining BSA was a recommendation to join from another student or professor.

BSA Members Express High Awareness for the Following BSA Benefits:
Top notch, peer-reviewed journal
Annual scientific meeting
Encouragement for lifelong development
Place to publish primary research

BSA Offerings with Low Awareness:
Associate and Gift Memberships
Student’s Corner
PlantingScience
Program Job/Career Board

BSA Members Do Not Perceive They Are Receiving:
Personal Development/Volunteer Opportunities
A Voice in Public/Government Policy
Educational Outreach Opportunities

BSA Publications

Of top importance to Authors’ Decision-Making Process on Where to Publish:
Quality and reputation of the journal (92%)
Speed of publication (51%)
Ease of manuscript submission and peer review (50%)
Page charge and/or color figure policy (29%)
Online accessibility of articles (26%)
Ability to publish ahead of print (3.5%)

Methods Members Support to Fund the Journal (in addition to paid subscriptions)
Capital campaign to increase endowment support (68%)
Increased paid advertisements (67%)
Increased price for subscriptions (30%)
Author pays model (19%)

References
Dalton, James and Monica Dignam.2007. The Decision To Join: How Individuals Determine Value and Why They Choose To Belong. ASAE and the Center for Association Leadership, Washington, D.C.

Respectfully submitted by Heather Cacanindin, Director of Membership and Subscriptions, hcacanindin@botany.org.

BSA Science Education News and Notes

BSA Science Education News and Notes is a quarterly update about the BSA’s education efforts and the broader education scene. We invite you to submit news items or ideas for future features. Contact: Claire Hemingway, BSA Education Director, at chemingway@botany.orgor Marshall Sundberg, PSB Editor, at psb@botany.org.

A Bonanza of Summer Botany for Secondary School Teachers This summer the BSA held its first professional development sessions for secondary school teachers in conjunction with Co-PI Carol Stuessy in the College of Education at Texas A&M University. These complementary programs bring plant biology into secondary classrooms across the nation, while supporting innovative approaches of investigative casebased teaching and open-ended inquiry learning.

myPlant IT Summer Institute for Teachers, July 7-18, 2008

The Plant IT Careers, Cases and Collaorations summer program allows secondary teachers and students to explore plant-related biology problems and career connections. Co-PI Ethel Stanley and Margaret Waterman introduced teachers to investigative cases focusing on pollen forensics and remote sensing. In the second week, teachers tried out the cases they had adopted/adapted with students attending the partner summer career camp. Students also visited laboratories and learned about podcasting with “Dr. Biology” Charles Kazilek. Read more: http://tlac.tamu.edu/articles/plant_science_camp_teaches_students__teachers and www.myPlantIT.org.

PlantingScience Summer Institute for Teachers, August 4-13, 2008

The PlantingScience program has connected scientists as online mentors to 2,500 students since 2005. NSF funds now provide the opportunity to prepare teachers for the mentored open-ended plant inquiry experience during summer institutes. Kicking off the first professional development session was a team of scientists (Beverly Brown and Marshall Sundberg) who authored the plant inquiries and teacher leaders (Toni Lafferty of CH Yoe High School and Allison Landry of the Louisiana School of Math, Science and the Arts) who have implemented the plant inquiries in their classrooms.

BSA Contact Information
All inquiries for the BSA Business Office should be
directed to:
Executive Director: William Dahl and / or
Administrative Coordinator: Wanda Lovan
BSA Business Office
Botanical Society of America, Inc.
4475 Castleman Avenue
P.O. Box 299
St. Louis, MO 63166-0299
Voice: 314-577-9566
FAX: 314-577-9515
E-mail: bsa-manager@botany.org

Office hours are 7:30 am to 4:30 pm Central Time
www.botany.org

President: Karl Niklas niklas@cornell.edu

All inquiries about the Botany 2009 meeting (and any other future meeting) should be directed to:
Mrs. Johanne Stogran, Meetings Manager.
Email: johanne@botany.org or meetings@botany.org
Voice: 614-292-3519 Fax: 614-247-6444
www.botanyconference.org

Editor’s Choice: Gynoecium Structure Tutorial Web

Previously I had noted that my botany and plant identification students could not confidently determine if leaves were alternate/opposite/whorled or if leaves were compound what level of division they displayed (e.g. trifoliolate/pinnate/palmate/etc). I devised a tutorial (www.csu.edu.au/ herbarium/HRT202/intro/intro.htm) based on numerous scans of living material for each feature, complimented with an interactive ToolBook-based test. This web site has been well received by a wide range of students and evaluations have shown it is particularly useful for distance education students and as a pre- and post-practical exercise for fulltime students.

Possibly from a student’s perspective the most problematic part of floral structure (and thus keying plants out) is the gynoecium. Determining whether the ovary is superior/inferior or whether the carpels are free/fused or assessing the number of carpels can cause considerable confusion. Part of the problem, for both students and teachers, is that the floral parts are often very small and for many months of the year the number of samples available to show the diversity of structure is limited. With the help of Kylie Kent (web page design) and Scott Black (ToolBook based tests) I have developed another tutorial and test, this time on gynoecium structure.

See: www.csu.edu.au/herbarium/HRT202/Gynoecium/intro.htm

Obtaining images for the leaf morphology tutorial was relatively simple as shoots and leaves could be quickly collected and scanned. The gynoecium tutorial required transverse and longitudinal sections of flowers to be prepared and then photographed using a dissecting microscope. Approximately 50 species were used in constructing the tutorial and another 12 species were used in the test. The species are a mix of Australian natives and crop, weed and garden species that have been introduced into Australia. I haven’t seen anything of direct equivalence on the www but wouldn’t be surprised if there is. If this is the case hopefully the additional examples will be useful. We would welcome feedback on the tutorial and tests – from factual faults, layout improvements, the inability to run some or all of the tutorial or tests on some computers, etc. Geoff Burrows, Charles Sturt University, gburrows@csu.edu.au.

Announcements

In Memoriam

Arthur Galston, Ph.D. (1920-2008)

Arthur Galston passed away the second week of June 2008 after a short illness serving as Professor Emeritus from the Yale University Department of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology in his retirement. He served as President of the Botanical Society of America (1968) wherein he and Graeme Berlyn resurrected the Physiological Section (from the large number of members who had switched to the American Society of Plant Physiologists from the BSA). Galston also served as President of the ASPP. He was awarded a series of academic honors, including Guggenheim, Fulbright and Senior National Science Foundation Fellowships, both Phi Beta Kappa and Sigma Xi visiting lectureships, and two honorary degrees. His research concerned plant photobiology, hormones, protoplasts and polyamines. The research contribution for which he is most noted is his suggestion and first evidence of the role of riboflavin (not carotene) as the photoreceptor for phototropism first published in 1949 in the American Journal of Botany 36: 773-780. 1949 (also PNAS 35: 10-17, 1949; Science 111: 619-624, l950). He published more than 320 papers in refereed journals, as well as more than 50 articles on public affairs, several successful textbooks of plant physiology and two edited anthologies of papers in bioethics. (This suggestion has recently been proven by others, notably the laboratories of Winslow Briggs.)

He was a leading plant physiologist in the 1940s to 1970s in the Botanical Society of America and American Society of Plant Physiologists, both of which he belonged to throughout his life and continued to contribute. In his lifetime he contributed not only to Botany, but to International Relations, especially in the Far East and to the field of Bioethics. He was born in Brooklyn, NY in 1920. Galston received his undergraduate degree from Cornell, and Ph.D. in Botany from the University of Illinois in 1943, then spent a year at Yale and then became an assistant then associate professor at the California Institute of Technology. He returned to Yale in 1955 as an Associate Professor of Plant Physiology in the former Department of Botany. He retired in 1990, at the (then mandatory) retirement age of 70 and subsequently began teaching and doing research in Bioethics. His unhappiness with the government use of Agent Orange as a bio-weapon in Vietnam caused him great personal distress so that he instituted at the BSA Business Meeting in 1967 a coalition of botanists and eventually other scientists who finally testified before the US Congress and were important in ceasing the use of Agent Orange on the battlefield. He made contact with the Chinese during his travels to Vietnam and lived in China, becoming friends with Chou En-Lai. This helped pave the way for the BSA exchange delegation to China in 1978 wherein we were asked frequently about Professor Galston.

In his own words: “In 1936, at the age of sixteen, I found myself enrolling as a freshman in the College of Agriculture at Cornell University, where, importantly, tuition was free for residents of New York state. I came not to study botany, but to spend one year of study required as a prelude to entry into the College of Veterinary Medicine at the same institution, where tuition was also free. Veterinary medicine was also not my burning passion: Inspired by Paul de Kruif's "Microbe Hunters" and similar books, my true aspiration had always been to become an M.D. But the year was 1936, The Great Depression was on the land, my father had been out of work for several years, and there seemed not the slightest possibility of my being able to enter the long and expensive study required to become a physician. A friend happened to tell me about the Agriculture and Veterinary Schools at Cornell, where "the price was right". Since I was confident that I could use my saxophone-playing skills to earn my living expenses, after an arduous freshman year and a successful application for admission to the Veterinary School, I declined the offer of entry by then Dean William A. Hagan, and remained in the College of Agriculture to major in Botany.

“The reason for this unanticipated change in direction was, simply, infatuation with Professor Loren C. Petry, who taught the yearlong course in Elementary Botany. Not only his remarkably skillful lectures, but also his entire persona attracted me. I so admired him that I wanted nothing more than to imitate his life style, impractical though that might have been. The attractiveness of the academic career, with its opportunities in teaching and research, seemed to me an ideal worth pursuing. So I stayed on in Botany, but deviated from Petry in choosing to concentrate on plant physiology rather than on his specialty of paleobotany.

“Cornell was then a center of excellence in the plant sciences. I took advantage of this excellence by enrolling in every possible botany course, then bootlegged as many College of Liberal Arts and Sciences courses in chemistry, physics, mathematics, and geology as were permitted to students in the Agriculture school. I emerged with a BS in Botany in 1940. In the depression year of 1940 I received only one offer of a Teaching Assistantship to support my graduate study, which I gratefully accepted. In the fall of 1940, I ventured into the terra incognita of the American Midwest, to begin my graduate study in the Department of Botany at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana. After a year of looking around, I chose to work with Harry Fuller, a plant physiologist who was a brilliant lecturer and coauthor, with another young faculty member, Oswald Tippo, of an outstanding textbook in Botany. Fuller introduced me to the world of plant hormones and photoperiodism that were the subject of my 1943 PhD dissertation. Unfortunately, because World War II had engulfed the United States in December 1941, Fuller was not able to give me much guidance, for when the Japanese conquest of Malaysia made rubber unavailable to the Allies, he was sent on an extended mission to South America to locate remnant stands of Hevea brasiliensis. He remained absent for several years, and I thus muddled through my research pretty much on my own, except for occasional critiques by mail. Under a wartime mandate, I had to finish my graduate work in three years, working full time every summer. I felt short-changed, because of the shortened period of study and also deprivation of my advisor.

“I had expected induction into military service immediately after the receipt of my degree, but again, serendipity intervened to change the course of my life. I had taken several courses in biochemistry, including a lively literature seminar run by a young faculty member, Herbert Carter. While every other student reported on animal and microbial biochemistry, I spoke on such topics as photosynthesis (Ruben, Kamen, and Hassid), auxin (Thiemann, Bonner) and "florigen" (Chailakhian). Carter was delighted with my "atypical" presentations. Convinced that I could be of greater use to the country as a scientist than as a soldier, Carter arranged for me to join Bonner's group at Caltech, working on the Emergency Rubber Project, which sought to convert the Mexican shrub, guayule (Parthenium argentatum Gray), into an important rubber-producing plant. This was an exciting and ultimately successful project, whose potential importance was short-circuited by the simultaneous success of the synthetic rubber program. Finally drafted, I joined the Navy as an enlisted man, and after many vicissitudes, served as Natural Resources officer in Naval Military Government on Okinawa.

“By the time I was slated for discharge in the spring of 1946, my wife and I had become parents, and since all four grandparents lived in New York City, I was urged to find a job in the east, despite an offer of continued employment at Caltech. I spent the academic year of 1946-7 as an Instructor at Yale. I then spent nine happy and productive years in Pasadena, first as Research Fellow, and ultimately as tenured Associate Professor. I flourished in the plant physiology group led by Went and Bonner, with young colleagues like Sam Wildman and George Laties, and frequent contact with outstanding scientists like George Beadle, Linus Pauling, Max Delbruck, and Richard Feynman. Yet early in 1955, mainly for family reasons, I succumbed to an attractive offer from Oswald Tippo, newly appointed Chairman of Botany at Yale, to return to Yale as a full Professor. This was an important fork in the road for me; before the move, I was doing experiments mainly with my own hands, but thereafter I was greatly involved in planning, equipping, and staffing laboratories, teaching courses, and overseeing the research of numerous grad students and postdocs. This was fulfilling work, but very different from Caltech! In 1961, working with Edgar J. Boell, I was instrumental in fusing Botany with Zoology to form the Department of Biology, and planned the first unified Biology course taught by the new Department. In 1966-7, I served as Director of the Division of Biological Sciences and in 1985-8, was Chairman of Biology. I opposed the dismemberment of Biology into MCDB and EEB, but note with pleasure the recent strengthening of organismal biology in EEB.

“Since retirement, I have been associated with the Institution for Social & Policy Studies, and serve on its Executive Committee for the Interdisciplinary Bioethics Project. For 12 years, I taught College Seminars in Bioethics, and for two years, have taught a new introductory bioethics course in Yale College, which in 2003-4, attracted more than 460 students, making it one of the largest courses in Yale College.

“My major research contribution, made at Caltech, was to provide the first evidence for flavin-based photoreception. This heterodox idea, opposed by many pundits who favored carotenoids, including Thiemann, Went, Bünning, Skoog, and Nobelist George Wald, led me into difficulties with granting agencies, and I accordingly shifted my research to other areas. Time has proved this to have been a mistake; one need only note the outstanding recent results in flavin photoreception achieved by Briggs et al. with phototropins and by Cashmore et al. with cryptochromes.

“Two other "decision points" affected my life greatly. From 1956 to 1978, I had been a consultant to DuPont, and at one point was tempted by an opportunity to leave academia for industry. It was mainly my love of teaching and contact with students that deterred me. The second critical decision developed out of our government's use of Agent Orange and other chemicals to defoliate and kill vegetation during the war in Vietnam. This violated my deepest feelings about the constructive role of science, and moved me into active opposition to official U.S. policy. Starting with the business meeting in 1967, and working with like-minded colleagues around the country, I began a time-consuming and distracting campaign against this type of chemical warfare (Galston, 2001). Our small group was eventually successful in helping to change our country's policy, when President Nixon ordered the end of the spraying at the end of 1970, almost five years before the end of the war. Since we now know that Agent Orange contained significant levels of teratogenic dioxins, this was an important accomplishment. It was followed by five visits to Vietnam and six to China, including the honor, with Ethan Signer of MIT, of being the first American scientists invited to visit the People's Republic of China. In 1971, we met Chou En-lai, then Prime Minister, as well as King Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia, who then resided in Shanghai. This pre-Kissinger-Nixon visit to China, as well as my family's subsequent (1972) summer on an agriculture commune (Galston, 1973) was page 1 news in many newspapers, including the New York Times.

“Agent Orange also seems to have turned on other activist genes in my makeup, and since then I have been drawn increasingly by an interest in the social and ethical consequences of scientific research. After my mandatory retirement from Biology in 1990, I helped to organize a Bioethics Project at Yale, and am now an active member of that group, teaching, leading seminars, and helping to plan activities. Life does play funny tricks with our career plans!"

LITERATURE CITED
Briggs WR, Huala E (1999) Blue-light photoreceptors in higher plants. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 15: 33-62
Briggs, WR, Jarillo JA, Wu YJ, Liu D (1999) Cryptochromes: blue light receptors for plants and animals. Science 284: 760-765
Galston AW (1973) Daily Life in People's China. Thomas Y. Crowell, New York
Galston AW (2001) Falling leaves and ethical dilemmas: Agent Orange in Vietnam. In A.W. Galston, E.G. Shurr, eds, New Dimensions in Bioethics. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands

-Anitra Thorhaug and Graeme Berlyn. School of Forestry and Environmental Sciences, Yale University.

R. C. Jackson (1928-2008)

Raymond Carl Jackson, Horn professor emeritus at Texas Tech University, died on April 7, 2008 following a long illness.

Dr. Jackson grew up in rural Indiana and fell in love with nature as a boy. He and his other love from Indiana, June, were married in 1947. After three years of service in the U.S. Army Air Corps-U.S. Air Force, Ray entered Indiana University in 1949 earning a BA in 1952. Upon completing his Master’s degree at Indiana, he moved on to Purdue in 1953 where he earned a Ph.D. in 1955.

Ray's fondness for the Asteraceae began at IU thanks to some persuasion from his mentor and long-time colleague and friend, Charles Heiser. Soon after graduation, he packed up his wife, two-year-old son and newborn daughter, and moved cross-country to Albuquerque (UNM) where he accepted a faculty position that included herbarium curator. Here he continued working on Helianthus and other local composites, most notably, Haplopappus. It was in New Mexico that he encountered the unassuming desert annual Haplopappus gracilis and found it to have n=2 chromosomes, the lowest number ever reported for a plant. Realizing the potential goldmine of this easy to culture, short life-cycled composite as a model for chromosomal, genomic and genetic linkage studies, Ray shifted his focus to cytogenetics – a shift that coincided with a career move to the University of Kansas in 1958. Here he flourished professionally, becoming a leading figure in cytogenetics and plant biosystematics. In 1969 he was appointed Chair of the Botany Department at KU and served in that role until 1971 when he accepted the chairship of the Department of Biological Sciences at Texas Tech University.

In the 1980’s Ray became an authority on chromosome pairing behavior in polyploids, proposing and testing models based on random synapsis and non-random distribution of chiasmata. He modified and applied these models to diploids, triploids, and tetraploids through octoploids. He also proposed similar models for predicting meiotic behavior in translocation heterozygotes.

Ray published eighty-some peer-reviewed articles throughout his prosperous professional career including three in Science. He was a member of several honor societies including Sigma Xi, Phi Sigma, and Delta Phi Alpha (a national German language honor society); and an active member of many professional societies serving in several capacities including editor of the University of Kansas Science Bulletin and of the Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science; associate editor of Evolution; chair and founding member of the Genetics Section of BSA; founding member of the Mid-continent Section of BSA; Chair of the Botanical Section of AAAS-SWARM Div.; and President of AAAS-SWARM Div., to name a few. Throughout his career he was recognized with many honors and awards including the BSA Merit Award, the BSA Centennial Award, the AAAS-SWARM President’s Award, Outstanding Educator of America (1974-75), and an annual award established in his name for outstanding student presentation in the Mid-continent section of the BSA. But perhaps the ultimate honor was in 1996 when he was eponymized with the genus Rayjacksonia in the Asteraceae. The family suggests memorials to the Department of Biological Sciences, Texas Tech University. Type in “biology” in the search window on the On-line Giving page (https://securejava.tosm.ttu.edu/onlineGiving/landing.do) to select an endowed fund.

-Don Hauber, Department of Biological Sciences, Loyola University

Charles Adam Schexnayder (1926-2008)

Charles Adam Schexnayder, professor emeritus of LSU and husband of Claire Brown Schexnayder, passed away at 1 a.m. Wednesday, June 4, 2008, at his home. He was born on April 18, 1926, at Lauderdale Plantation in St. James Parish. He had been ill for almost a year with pulmonary fibrosis. He graduated from White Castle High School in 1943, joined the Naval Aviation Program and studied to be a naval aviator in World War II. Following the cessation of hostilities of the war, he enrolled at LSU, where he obtained a bachelor's degree in vocational agriculture in 1948, a master's degree in botany in 1950 and a Ph.D. in plant pathology in 1953. Upon completion of his degree in plant pathology, he worked for the U.S. Department of Agriculture at the Houma Federal Field Station with a specialty in sugar cane production. In 1958, he was offered a position working with the South Puerto Rico Sugar Corp. in La Romana, Dominican Republic, where he worked as a plant pathologist and plant breeder with sugar cane in the area of agronomy research. After four years, he moved his family back to the United States and joined LSU with the Department of Plant Pathology and Botany. He served on the LSU faculty in 1962 as professor and chairman of botany for 12 years. He was appointed director of International Programs through the LSU Agriculture Center. Dr. Schexnayder accepted a position in Jamaica in 1988, where he worked to build an agriculture college in Port Antonio on the Caribbean. The project was sponsored by LSU and the Department of State for the benefit of Third World countries. Much of his work with international programs was performed in West African countries as chief of party providing educational programs for helping African natives to cultivate crops for their livelihood. He retired as professor emeritus in 1991 due to developing problems with his health.

He is survived by his wife, Claire Brown Schexnayder; daughter, Jacqueline Schexnayder MacMurdo Schneider and husband Brian; son, Dr. Michael Schexnayder and wife Charlene Curole Schexnayder; and five grandchildren, Christopher James MacMurdo, Ross Bailey MacMurdo, Laura Elise Schexnayder, Charles Michael Schexnayder and Matthew Steven Walker. Also survived by his brothers, Jean Manfred Schexnayder and wife Sandra, Harold Joseph Schexnayder and wife Mary Janice, and Lawrence Schexnayder and wife Jill.

-Russell L. Chapman, Ph D., FLS, Executive Director, Center for Marine Biodiversity and Conservation 0202, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA 92093.

Personalia

Dr. Brent Elliott Receives Greensfelder Medal from the Missouri Botanical Garden

The Missouri Botanical Garden has awarded Dr. Brent Elliott, librarian and archivist at the Royal Horticultural Society Lindley Library in London, with the 2008 Greensfelder Medal. Dr. Elliott was honored at the dedication of the Doris Waters Harris Lichtenstein Victorian District at the Garden on June 13.

Dr. Elliott is a renowned authority on Victorian gardens who collaborated on the landscape design and interpretation of the new Victorian District. The unified and enhanced area comprises the historic southeast corner of the Garden and includes the Kresko Family Victorian Garden and Tower Grove House, country home of Garden founder Henry Shaw.

The Albert P. and Blanche Y. Greensfelder Medal was established in 1980.  It honors individuals who have made significant contributions to landscape, garden and park planning, and design for urban improvement.

Dr. Peter H. Raven, Renowned Botanist and E