Ah!! Alexandra, that’s just what I wondered about The Martian! 

This is such an interesting discussion, because how people describe what they 
do is so informative (if you’re brave enough to pick and poke). Because there’s 
a reason for it, right?

 I do wonder… have we lost anything by overshadowing “botany?”  And how does 
this change how scientists explain their work, and how important are titles and 
labels?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sue Nichols
Assistant Director/Strategic communications
Center for Systems Integration and Sustainability           
Michigan State University
(517) 432-0206
 
CSIS homepage
CSIS on Facebook
@suegnic



On Nov 18, 2015, at 7:30 PM, Alexandra Thorn <[email protected]> wrote:

> It's an interesting question.
> 
> I think of "botany" as being specifically about phylogeny and
> characterizing how different plant species are different from one
> another and why.  Other plant sciences have other domains in my mind,
> e.g. "plant physiology" is about the functional attributes of plants
> that might translate among species (just as in animal physiology humans
> and mice have basically the same organs), and "plant ecology" is about
> the relationships among plant species and between plant species and
> other organisms.
> 
> My biology doctorate drew heavily on plant physiology and I feel fine
> saying that my degree was in plant biology, plant ecology, or plant
> physiology, but if somebody calls me a botanist I tend to think they're
> attributing credentials to me that I really don't have.
> 
> Alexandra
> 
> P.S. I am bothered by how the term "botany" is used in the novel "The
> Martian."  I'm pretty sure that "horticulture" would be a better job
> description, but I haven't looked up whether words are just used
> differently by NASA and friends...
> 
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 16:26:04 -0500
> Thomas Wentworth <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Chris,
>> 
>> Our Department at NC State University changed its name from Botany to 
>> Plant Biology (not Plant Science) a number of years ago. We did so 
>> primarily because of a perception that the public sees "botany" as an 
>> antiquated term, not inclusive of the vibrant programs in our 
>> department, which cover the plant realm from molecules to ecosystems.
>> We also believed that prospective student searching for "botany"
>> programs were more likely to use keywords like "plant" and "biology."
>> We avoided "Plant Science" because we thought that too inclusive of
>> ALL plant studies, given that at NC State (a Land Grant university)
>> we still have departments of Crop Science, Horticulture, Plant
>> Pathology, Forestry, etc.
>> 
>> Tom Wentworth
>> 
>> On 11/18/2015 1:00 PM, Christopher Graham wrote:
>>> Hi Malcolm,
>>> 
>>> Interesting question. I studied in the plant biology department at
>>> the University of Georgia, which until recently had been the botany
>>> department. My understanding (and I think this was corroborated by
>>> certain faculty members) was that the change reflected the gradual
>>> shift from "traditional" botanists, who studied plants at a
>>> macroscopic or organismal level and thus were facile with (at least
>>> some members of) the regional flora; to academics who focused at
>>> the cellular or molecular level to such a degree that many of them
>>> do not particularly know or care about the real, wild plants
>>> growing around them. I don't doubt that these plant scientists do
>>> important things, but it's a shame to me that the former type, the
>>> traditional botanist, has been largely displaced by them.
>>> 
>>> chris
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Malcolm McCallum" <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 12:52:32 PM
>>> Subject: plant science vs. botany
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Over the past several years I have noticed a trend that
>>> plant-focused vacancies will refer to the vacancy as plant science
>>> and less frequently what used to be typically referred to as
>>> zoology will be instead referred to as animal science. When I was
>>> an undergraduate, agronomy, pomology, forestry, and course related
>>> to agriculture were designated plant science. Agricutlure courses
>>> like dairy science, feedlot management, swine management, animal
>>> nutrition and the like were designated animal science.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The current widespread lack of distinction between zoology vs.
>>> animal science, and botany vs. plant science creates a lot of
>>> confusion, and doesn't really make any sense to me.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Is there a reason that people have stopped using the term
>>> zoology/botany and in its stead began using animal science/plant
>>> science? It seems like an inappropriate muddying of the academic
>>> waters to me.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> A Plant Scientist and a Botanist are not the same thing, nor is an
>>> animal scientist and a zoologist the same thing. Although some
>>> people might cross these fields (a ruminant ecologist might cross
>>> these areas for example).
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I know most people probably couldn't care less about this, but I
>>> feel it is a pretty important issue. If we are not consistent with
>>> terminology, why should we expect students and others to take it
>>> seriously?
>>> 
>>> Please feel free to contact me off list because some members of the
>>> ECOLOG discussion list get annoyed when it actually involves
>>> discussion, so be it.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 


Reply via email to