In article , Tim Tyler writes
I've used the "Taxonomy Browser" - at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/Browser/wwwtax.cgi

IIRC, the Taxonomy Browser only contains those plants for which DNA
sequences are available in GenBank/EMBL/DDBJ/Sanger Institute. Therefore
it is possible that some plants cultivated for food are not listed
therein. (Crop plants will be disproportionately listed, but need not
all be present.)

Also, the Taxonomy Browser isn't completely accurate.

...to prepare a family tree of edible plants:

Is tobacco really edible?

http://sprouting.org/taxonomy/plants/

You've got Apiales and Lamiales in twice. You might like to check the
tree for Asterids - it doesn't look right, but the classification might
have changed again. Also Fagaceae and Betulaceae should be under
Fagales, rather than directly under Eurosids I. I recommend the
Angiosperm Phylogeny Website for the latest word on classification. See
URL:http://www.mobot.org/MOBOT/Research/APweb/.

This is quite a large page - and takes a while to load and display.

My tree contains much the same information as is in the database -
but *only* the major edible plants are listed.

I think you should have kola (Cola acuminata - Malvaceae/Byttneroideae),
and jute (Corchorus olitorius - Malvaceae/Grewioideae). (Jute is a salad
vegetable as well as a fibre crop.)

The zed in Zibethinus shouldn't be capitalised.

There's other malvaceous plants used as food, but perhaps they're not
'major'. (But I would have thought that several were more used than
Malva neglecta.) As far as I know cottonseed oil is only used in animal
feeds. (It's poisonous in sufficient dosage, so people have to worry
about feed formulation.)

I guess that you ought to have the currants under Ribes, as well as
gooseberry. (Ribes nigrum and Ribes rubrum, IIRC.)
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley
http://www.meden.demon.co.uk/Malvaceae/Malvaceae.html