Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:
Perhaps PvR can comment as to whether Judd et al would be an acceptable
substitute (I haven't seen Cronquist myself), tho' Judd et al tends to
miss out minor families.

Although I am not PvR, I can comment. Judd et al. not only
misses many families (including many not so small), but it
spends more time on the mechanics of systematics, hence less
on the synthesis (overall classification) and even less on
the family descriptions.

I like Judd et al. very much, but I would not use it as a
substitute for Cronquist. Cronquist still has its uses,
despite the rather obsolete classification.

Una Smith

Los Alamos National Laboratory, MS K-710, Los Alamos, NM 87545
--
Una Smith

Los Alamos National Laboratory, MS K-710, Los Alamos, NM 87545