Armen Leonovich Takhtajan or Takhtajian (Russian: Армен Леонович Тахтаджян; surname also transliterated Takhtadjan or Takhtadzhian) (June 10, 1910 - November 13, 2009), was a Soviet-Armenian botanist, one of the most important figures in 20th century plant evolution and systematics and biogeography. His other interests included morphology of flowering plants, paleobotany, and the flora of the Caucasus. (Wikipedia entry)I had the privilege of meeting Professor Takhtajan once. He was kind, generous, and extraordinarily knowledgeable. His phylogenetic system has been largely superseded by work of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group, but his influence will never be forgotten. He died on 13 November, and he will be buried in the Armenian part of the Smolensk cemetery in St. Petersburg tomorrow after a civil funeral at the Komarov Botanical Institute.
Recently in Botany Category
If you're like me, you have a well-worn copy of Sibley's Guide to Birds sitting on a windowshelf next to a pair of binoculars. I also have copies of both the smaller eastern and western versions that I often take with me when I'm travelling.
Yesterday I learned1 that Sibley has now produced a guide to trees. I haven't had much of a chance to look at it yet, but my first impression matches what Ed Wilson has to say about it in a cover blurb: "A beautiful, masterful, and much-needed work that will henceforth be our guide to the North American trees."
As you would expect from Sibley, the illustrations are wonderful, and like his bird guide, the illustrations include examples of how individuals belonging to the same species may differ from one another. I don't like to admit it, since I'm president of the Botanical Society of America, but I'm lousy at telling trees apart.2 With Sibley at my side, maybe I'll finally learn how to tell more of them apart.
Here's a link to Sibley describing the book.2
Yesterday I learned1 that Sibley has now produced a guide to trees. I haven't had much of a chance to look at it yet, but my first impression matches what Ed Wilson has to say about it in a cover blurb: "A beautiful, masterful, and much-needed work that will henceforth be our guide to the North American trees."
As you would expect from Sibley, the illustrations are wonderful, and like his bird guide, the illustrations include examples of how individuals belonging to the same species may differ from one another. I don't like to admit it, since I'm president of the Botanical Society of America, but I'm lousy at telling trees apart.2 With Sibley at my side, maybe I'll finally learn how to tell more of them apart.
Here's a link to Sibley describing the book.2
Continue reading A guide to trees.
My copy of Randy Olson's new book, Don't be Such a Scientist, arrived earlier this week. I'll be posting more comments about it later. For now, I want to use the photograph to the left -- of a jack-in-the-pulpit urinal by Clark Sorenson, available for a mere $7900 -- to mention one lesson I've learned so far.
In chapter 1, Randy advises us,1 "Don't be so cerebral." In chapter 2, he advises us, "Don't be so literal minded." Chapter 1 introduces his "Four organs theory" of connecting with a mass audience, and chapter 2 admonishes us to "arouse your audience and fulfill their expectations." You'll have to buy (or borrow) the book if you want to know more,2 but when I saw this sculpture, I realized that it unifies these two chapters (or at least chapter 1 and the "arouse their interest" part of chapter 2).
Whether or not Sorenson consciously thought about it, his sculpture is obviously talking to our gut (or maybe our sex organs), not to our heart. That's almost guaranteed to get Sorenson a larger audience than if he were talking to our head (Marcel Duchamp notwithstanding). He's used an appeal to the gut (or somewhere lower in our anatomy) to capture our attention, and once he's got it, you start wondering about the structure he illustrates. In this case and in the other sculptures displayed on his urinal page, Sorenson does a pretty good job of making accurate 3-dimensional models various flowers and snail shells. Most guys will probably go no further than to snicker at the flower while they're using it, but no one who uses it is likely to forget it, and that alone makes botany seem a little more interesting than it would have otherwise.
In chapter 1, Randy advises us,1 "Don't be so cerebral." In chapter 2, he advises us, "Don't be so literal minded." Chapter 1 introduces his "Four organs theory" of connecting with a mass audience, and chapter 2 admonishes us to "arouse your audience and fulfill their expectations." You'll have to buy (or borrow) the book if you want to know more,2 but when I saw this sculpture, I realized that it unifies these two chapters (or at least chapter 1 and the "arouse their interest" part of chapter 2).
Whether or not Sorenson consciously thought about it, his sculpture is obviously talking to our gut (or maybe our sex organs), not to our heart. That's almost guaranteed to get Sorenson a larger audience than if he were talking to our head (Marcel Duchamp notwithstanding). He's used an appeal to the gut (or somewhere lower in our anatomy) to capture our attention, and once he's got it, you start wondering about the structure he illustrates. In this case and in the other sculptures displayed on his urinal page, Sorenson does a pretty good job of making accurate 3-dimensional models various flowers and snail shells. Most guys will probably go no further than to snicker at the flower while they're using it, but no one who uses it is likely to forget it, and that alone makes botany seem a little more interesting than it would have otherwise.
Continue reading And now for something completely different.
From Sunday's New York Times:
Norman E. Borlaug, the plant scientist who did more than anyone else in the 20th century to teach the world to feed itself and whose work was credited with saving hundreds of millions of lives, died Saturday night. He was 95 and lived in Dallas.Tom Philpott (at Grist) has a different view.
...
Dr. Borlaug's advances in plant breeding led to spectacular success in increasing food production in Latin America and Asia and brought him international acclaim. In 1970, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
Rather than focusing on the social relations around agriculture, Borlaug honed in on one thing: increasing yield. For him, the complexities of poverty and hunger could be reduced to a single problem: not enough food. From there, the answer was simple: grow as much as possible, using whatever technology available.
...
But it may be that Borlaug's blindness to politics--his refusal to consider the power relations at work in the countries whose hungry he set out to save--undermined his legacy. His tireless effort to boost grain yields, while no doubt resulting in a flood of cheap grain, created all manner of problems that won't be easily solved.
...
The award for buying into the "Green Revolution package" was a bumper crop. The problem was that when everyone did the same thing and yields spiked, the price farmers received for their crops plunged.
The result is a kind of vicious cycle: farmers scramble to produce more to offset losses, leading to yet more downward pressure on prices. Of course, there's the temptation to boost yields with yet more inputs like fertilizer--meaning that farmers' costs could continue creeping up even as the prices they received in the marketplace fell steadily. The result is a kind of structural economic crisis in farming.
The winners in the game are not farmers, but rather the buyers of the cheap commodities (mainly transnational grain processors like Archer Daniels Midland and Cargill) as well as input suppliers (like Monsanto, Dupont, and, again, Cargill) that sell the needed seeds and agrichemicals.
From a recent e-mail:
The Chicago Botanic Garden and Botanic Gardens Conservation International's U.S. office are working with several partners, including the Botanical Society of America, to assess strengths and areas for improvement in plant science education, research and habitat management in the United States. We need your help. Please take a few minutes to complete our survey (links below), which includes questions about your academic background, management specialization, research interests, career goals, access to resources, and your opinion on several conservation issues. The survey is anonymous, and results will only be reported as a group or group subset.
We are asking individuals involved in plant science research, education and/or natural resource management in the United States to take this survey. The objective of this grant-funded project is to assess the collective ability of U.S. institutions and individuals to advance plant science research and application, while identifying gaps in capacity and highlighting opportunities to fill these gaps in the future. A summary report will be released in mid-2010 and freely available from www.bgci.org/usa/bcapinfo.
Thank you in advance for completing this survey. Your contribution is crucial to the study's success and is greatly appreciated. Please note that all surveys will close on Friday, September 19, 2009.
To TAKE THE SURVEY - please go to http://www.bgci.org/usa/bcap/
Please feel free to forward this message on to colleagues or students, and don't hesitate to contact us directly with any questions or concerns.
http://www.bgci.org/usa/BCAPInfo/
Sincerely,
Andrea T. Kramer, Ph.D.
Executive Director, U.S. Office
Botanic Gardens Conservation International
at Chicago Botanic Garden
1000 Lake Cook Road
Glencoe, IL 60022 USA
Phone: 847-835-6971
atietmey@chicagobotanic.org
Barbara Zorn-Arnold, Ph.D.
Research Associate
Chicago Botanic Garden
1000 Lake Cook Road
Glencoe, IL 60022 USA
Phone: 847-835-6858
bzornarnold@chicagobotanic.org
