Others: Very comprehensive http://www.herbarium.unc.edu/flora.htm
More localized, but wonderful new releases http://uncpress.unc.edu/browse/book_detail?title_id=1895 http://www.amazon.com/Wildflowers-Communities-Southern-Appalachian-Mountains/dp/0807871729 On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Olyssa Starry <[email protected]> wrote: > Here's one underway, please consider supporting it: > http://www.floraofvirginia.org/index.shtml > I may be biased, but I am especially a fan of the drawings and agree with > the comment above that drawings are just as useful as photos. > Olyssa Starry > > On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Tom Mosca <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I use "Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas" by Radford et al. > > (Univ. of North Carolina Press). It is a comprehesive technical manal > with > > keys, distribution maps, descriptions, and line drawings. It covers the > > southeast from Virginia to Georgia, but lacks the sub-tropical flora of > > Florida. > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [ > > [email protected]] on behalf of Wayne Tyson [[email protected]] > > Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2011 12:23 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Wildflower Guides to Southeastern U.S. > > > > Ecolog: > > > > "Wildflower" guides are usually oriented to casual users, and that's > fine. > > What I would like to see are small, generalized distribution maps that > > extend beyond the geographic boundaries of the guide with reasonable > > accuracy (not just colored-in states from whence they have been reported, > > but real locations, however simplified) plus a world map indicating their > > original place(s) of origin and post-contact locations (dots/stipples > would > > be ok, to keep the map small) followed by a few words or symbols > indicating > > habitat type. Emphasis should be placed on reliably diagnostic features, > > preferably visible with the naked eye or low-powered magnifier. > References > > could be made to keys and references for those wanting more detail, in > > PLAIN > > LANGUAGE, with technical terms used only when simpler terms would > actually > > cause confusion. A brief introductory essay that explains all necessary > > limitations can warn users in advance without weighting them down either > > intellectually or physically. > > > > Actually, I would rather see a series of guidebooks oriented to > bioregions, > > not political boundaries, and/or a "master" volume that could be as > simple > > as an index. This complex of guides could be expanded into ecological > > realms > > beyond habitat categories (desert, riparian, forest), discussing > > interesting > > stuff like disjunct distributions, sky islands, and convergent evolution, > > with further guides leading to further guides ("It's turtles all the way > > down," right?), branching off into the kinds of animals, fungi, etc. with > > which they are associated. > > > > All of this should be freely available on-line; the publisher's copyright > > should be limited to the physical books and CD/DVD's in which they have > > incurred actual costs. I think having such information freely available > > on-line would INCREASE, not decrease, book sales. Corporate bean-counters > > are missing the point and are stuck in the last century and beyond. If > they > > don't get ahead of us (yes, paying us to create), we'll get ahead of > them, > > and leave them in the dust. Don't forget that the information they use > was > > originally done by people who didn't get a cent from the publishers. Just > > because the botanists, entomologists, etc. didn't copyright their work > > doesn't mean that it's right to assemble the information and sell it back > > to > > them, threatening to sue them for using information they didn't produce. > > > > WT > > > > PS: Taxonomists should be on the team, but probably shouldn't write such > > guides. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jason Hernandez" <[email protected]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2011 10:07 AM > > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Wildflower Guides to Southeastern U.S. > > > > > > I was asked by at least two people to summarize the replies to my query > > about Southeastern wildflower guides. Here is what I got, followed by > some > > more of my own comments: > > > > Three respondants recommended Newcomb's Wildflower Guide for the > mountains > > and piedmont. The problem there is, Newcomb's area map is nearly > identical > > to that in Peterson's Northeastern/North-Central guide, so unless > Newcomb's > > is more comprehensive than Peterson, which I already own, it is not > > worthwhile for me to purchase Newcomb's. > > > > I also received recommendations for Wofford's Key to the Blue Ridge > > Mountains; for the Lower Coastal Plain, Clewell's Guide to the Vascular > > Plants of the Florida Panhandle; Duncan and Duncan for the entire Eastern > > region (presumably both North and South -- the preview on Amazon did not > > let > > me see an area map, if any); Clair Brown's guide for Louisiana and > adjacent > > states; and the Audubon Society's guide to the Eastern region. Also, > > Sorrie's about-to-be-released guide for the Carolina Sandhills (June 1). > > One > > respondant said that since there is no good guide to the entire region, > he > > cobbles together a collection of guidebooks, scientific articles, and > > technical keys. > > > > Here are my thoughts: it is too bad that Peterson-style line drawings > seem > > to be out of vogue. They can clarify what photographs obscure. For > example: > > say we are at a site where a roadside abuts a riparian zone, in South > > Carolina. There are numerous yellow Senecio blooming. Is it the ruderal > > Senecio smalii, or the riparian Senecio glabella? Look at a guide with > two > > separate photos, and it may be difficult to tell -- especially if the > guide > > in question is arranged by habitat, with ruderals in a separate section > > from > > riparian species. But if there was a Peterson-style guide, arranged > > visually > > and with line drawings, we could simply turn to the page of clustered > > yellow > > rayed composites. All Senecio species of that type would be lined up > there > > as line drawings, with handy diagnostic arrows pointing to the key > > details -- in this case, the width and lobing of the leaves -- to > > distinguish S. smallii from S. glabella; there would then be a note on > > habitat at the end of each description, to add a further important > detail. > > Peterson's system, in my opinion, has never been improved upon. > > > > One responadant noted that "being a guide," the recommended volume did > not > > have the best species coverage. Well, it is true that no guidebook has > the > > coverage of the technical floras; but Peterson's come close, given his > > admittedly arbitrary definition of a "wildflower": herbaceous > angiosperms, > > excluding Poaceae, Cyperaceae, and Juncaceae. To take the example I know > > best: before coming to the Southeast, I lived for over twelve years in > the > > Pacific Northwest. The Peterson wildflower guide to that region is > Niehaus > > and Ripper, "Pacific States Wildflowers." In twelve years, 98% of the > > wildflowers (by Peterson's definition) I encountered were in Niehaus and > > Ripper; only rarely did I need to consult the flora by Hitchcock and > > Cronquist. Any guidebook less comprehensive than that is, in my opinion, > > substandard. > > > > Given that Peterson's wildflower guides cover every part of the > contiguous > > 48 states except the Southeast, I wonder if it is worthwhile contacting > the > > folks at Houghton-Mifflin about this? > > > > Jason Hernandez > > > > > > ----- > > No virus found in this message. > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3620 - Release Date: 05/06/11 > > >
