Amateur seeks answers to some questions please
Hello,
My name is Robyn and I live in Michigan. I hope you do not mind this post and I hope it is not too off topic or too long. For several years now I have tried to do some flower and vegetable gardening at home here. Increasingly I have become more and more into doing this without using chemicals (man made). So, I have a "problem" with "weeds". I know there are "natural" methods of controlling "weeds". But I have developed an interest in herbal medicine, and I am trying to learn which "weeds" to "fight" and which ones to encourage. I live in an urban area, and there are some legal restrictions as to the type and size of plants I can grow. Over the years I have grown to dislike the word "weed". Some of the "weeds" have a use in herbal medicine; they may have pretty flowers, or if left alone the birds may find them as a food source. I am also becoming reacquainted with the scientific interest I had as a child. I would like to be able to identify the plants that grow "naturally" in the yard. I would also like to just be able to identify plants in general. I have a modern herb book that has loads of pictures, but it does not have every plant I see. It helps to have the common name of the plant in order to use this book. (One problem with common names is that they vary from place to place. I do not always know common names to the plants anyway.) I also have a wonderful book "Plants of Michigan" by Gleason. (Third edition 1939) The main problem with this book is, it has no drawings or photographs. It is mostly plant descriptions in text. Unless you know the name of the plant, it is difficult to use. Then there are cases where two or more plants share the same common name. This book also uses a lot of Latin words. (I could probably learn the meanings to the Latin words easily enough.) (I also have a couple of botany textbooks from the late 1800's.) Finally my questions: Can someone recommend to me a good modern book that could teach me some basic things about botany? I would like to find a book that has good drawings or photos of the parts of plants. I would like to learn what the various words mean and see a good drawing or photograph of an example. (for example, "Evenly pinnate" I would read the definition and then I would see a drawing of "a compound leaf terminating in a pair of leaflets".) I hope I am making sense with my description. I was trying to find a list of "recommended botany books" on the net. I read somewhere that botany teachers do not find botany textbooks to be very accurate. I just want to be able to read the text description in my old book, [or any book] and then be able to find the plant in the woods or in the yard. And then if I see an unusual plant, in the yard, it would be nice to be able to find it in a book, if I do not know the name of it. I am not expecting to be able to identify every plant I run across. (I am not sure if that is available.) Would the Latin plant names in my "Plants of Michigan" from 1939 still be valid? I was also reading on the net an introduction to botanical classification. It indicated that things have changed with the advent of DNA. Any help in this matter will be most appreciated. Thanks. Robyn in Michigan aka LenoraBell |
Amateur seeks answers to some questions please
The only organic method of removing weeds is to physically pull them out by
hand (or with tools). Since the top soil is completely removed during home building and later replaced with sod, it is extremely unlikely that there are any plants that are "naturally" occurring in your yard. What you have are most likely introduced weeds. Do a google search for websites on weeds. There are many. Whether you like the word or not, that is what they are called. Forget the common names. Learn the proper names of the plants and you will be able to find out much more about the plants. Difficult to say if the names are still valid since the 1939 publication. Most names remain the same but some may have been reduced to synonymy under an older name or may have been placed in a different genus since then. It is best to get a more recent flora to identify your plants. DNA has not had that significant effect on naming species. Mostly the changes have been in how the species and genera are related and the organization of the higher ranks that do not affect their names. On the other hand, a number of poorly defined large catch-all genera have been divided up into smaller genera but that has been going on before the use of DNA studies. LenoraBell wrote in message .com... Hello, My name is Robyn and I live in Michigan. I hope you do not mind this post and I hope it is not too off topic or too long. For several years now I have tried to do some flower and vegetable gardening at home here. Increasingly I have become more and more into doing this without using chemicals (man made). So, I have a "problem" with "weeds". I know there are "natural" methods of controlling "weeds". But I have developed an interest in herbal medicine, and I am trying to learn which "weeds" to "fight" and which ones to encourage. I live in an urban area, and there are some legal restrictions as to the type and size of plants I can grow. Over the years I have grown to dislike the word "weed". Some of the "weeds" have a use in herbal medicine; they may have pretty flowers, or if left alone the birds may find them as a food source. I am also becoming reacquainted with the scientific interest I had as a child. I would like to be able to identify the plants that grow "naturally" in the yard. I would also like to just be able to identify plants in general. I have a modern herb book that has loads of pictures, but it does not have every plant I see. It helps to have the common name of the plant in order to use this book. (One problem with common names is that they vary from place to place. I do not always know common names to the plants anyway.) I also have a wonderful book "Plants of Michigan" by Gleason. (Third edition 1939) The main problem with this book is, it has no drawings or photographs. It is mostly plant descriptions in text. Unless you know the name of the plant, it is difficult to use. Then there are cases where two or more plants share the same common name. This book also uses a lot of Latin words. (I could probably learn the meanings to the Latin words easily enough.) (I also have a couple of botany textbooks from the late 1800's.) Finally my questions: Can someone recommend to me a good modern book that could teach me some basic things about botany? I would like to find a book that has good drawings or photos of the parts of plants. I would like to learn what the various words mean and see a good drawing or photograph of an example. (for example, "Evenly pinnate" I would read the definition and then I would see a drawing of "a compound leaf terminating in a pair of leaflets".) I hope I am making sense with my description. I was trying to find a list of "recommended botany books" on the net. I read somewhere that botany teachers do not find botany textbooks to be very accurate. I just want to be able to read the text description in my old book, [or any book] and then be able to find the plant in the woods or in the yard. And then if I see an unusual plant, in the yard, it would be nice to be able to find it in a book, if I do not know the name of it. I am not expecting to be able to identify every plant I run across. (I am not sure if that is available.) Would the Latin plant names in my "Plants of Michigan" from 1939 still be valid? I was also reading on the net an introduction to botanical classification. It indicated that things have changed with the advent of DNA. Any help in this matter will be most appreciated. Thanks. Robyn in Michigan aka LenoraBell |
Amateur seeks answers to some questions please
In article ,
Cereoid+10+ wrote: The only organic method of removing weeds is to physically pull them out by hand (or with tools). There are a lot of methods of killing or preventing the growth of weeds that don't involve use of herbicides. Mulching is not only effective, but improves the soil as the mulch breaks down. If you don't like the stuff growing between paving stones, you can pour boiling water on it. To save energy, use the water you just drained your pasta out of. Some weeds can be controlled by cultivating or mowing at the appropriate time. I got rid of 90% of the goldenrod in a pasture once by mowing it just as it was coming into bloom. Most plants put their remaining resources into regrowth and didn't survive the winter. You can control low growing weeds in a lawn by never mowing close to the ground, allowing the grass to compete by shading them out, etc. If you understand the requirements and life cycle of the weeds, you can usually figure out a way to bias things in favour of your crop and against the weeds without herbicides. Since the top soil is completely removed during home building and later replaced with sod, it is extremely unlikely that there are any plants that are "naturally" occurring in your yard. Depends on how long ago the house was built, what's around it and what has been grown on the lot since. But it's true that apart from goldenrod (Solidago spp) and milkweed (Asclepias), most crop weeds in this part of North America are Eurasian introductions. However, on roadsides and neglected land you may find quite a few of the more assertive native plants. Robyn, since you're interested in useful herbs, you're in luck because most of the information available is about just those Eurasian weeds that are no doubt flourishing in your garden. If you're concerned about bylaws preventing you from growing what you want, you should be aware of a substantial movement for 'naturalizing' suburban lots, by planting them with prairie grasses and forbs in suitable climates. These sites are not mowed, fertilized or watered once established. Bylaws are usually enforced on a complaint-only basis, so if your neighbours understand what you're trying to do, they may become interested and supportive of your project. There are many books and web sites about this sort of thing. Perhaps another poster can suggest some. I recommend you visit a large library and see what's available in the gardening and botany sections, to help you figure out which books are most worth purchasing for your interests. |
Amateur seeks answers to some questions please
LenoraBell wrote:
Finally my questions: Can someone recommend to me a good modern book that could teach me some basic things about botany? Books are OK, but the best way to learn is to work with the plants. Start by collecting, drying and preparing vouchers for the plants around you, in your yard, your neighborhood (with permission) and your county, and work out your own descriptions of the characters. Then compare to your books. Collect the same plant many times from different locations and mount them side by side, so you can begin to see the natural variation within a species. You'll find out how even "evenly pinnate" really is. Also volunteer at your local university herbarium to mount their backlog, file, etc. Over time, you'll find that working with the plants is much more effective than reading about them. See: http://www.mobot.org/MOBOT/molib/fie.../welcome.shtml -- -- Tom Schweich http://www.schweich.com Day: 415-545-3644 |
Amateur seeks answers to some questions please
I am afraid I disagree here. Dried plants look different from live ones.
There appears to be no shortage of characters that are easily visible on live plants but are hard to make out on dried plants. Also a great deal of the fun goes out of it if only dried plants are handled. What helps is getting down next to the plant with a good flora and puzzling out the distinguishing characters (it may help to do this together with somebody else). Have a hand lens handy. Alternatively a good picture book is very helpful for a first approximation. Browsing through a well-printed full color guide is a much happier passtime than making a stack of dried plants. PvR PS for those not interested: technically it is so that once a botanical name has become valid it will remain so forever. The word is "correct" (= current) LenoraBell wrote: Finally my questions: Can someone recommend to me a good modern book that could teach me some basic things about botany? Tom Schweich schreef Books are OK, but the best way to learn is to work with the plants. Start by collecting, drying and preparing vouchers for the plants around you, in your yard, your neighborhood (with permission) and your county, and work out your own descriptions of the characters. Then compare to your books. Collect the same plant many times from different locations and mount them side by side, so you can begin to see the natural variation within a species. You'll find out how even "evenly pinnate" really is. Also volunteer at your local university herbarium to mount their backlog, file, etc. Over time, you'll find that working with the plants is much more effective than reading about them. See: http://www.mobot.org/MOBOT/molib/fie.../welcome.shtml -- -- Tom Schweich http://www.schweich.com Day: 415-545-3644 |
Amateur seeks answers to some questions please
In article ,
"P van Rijckevorsel" wrote: I am afraid I disagree here. Dried plants look different from live ones. This reminds me of the problem one sometimes has in getting a taxonomic expert to identify a plant. As a minimum prerequisite you need to let the sample dry out; but you may have to go further and flatten it adequately before getting a confident determination. :-) There appears to be no shortage of characters that are easily visible on live plants but are hard to make out on dried plants. Also a great deal of the fun goes out of it if only dried plants are handled. What helps is getting down next to the plant with a good flora and puzzling out the distinguishing characters (it may help to do this together with somebody else). Have a hand lens handy. Alternatively a good picture book is very helpful for a first approximation. Browsing through a well-printed full color guide is a much happier passtime than making a stack of dried plants. PvR PS for those not interested: technically it is so that once a botanical name has become valid it will remain so forever. The word is "correct" (= current) LenoraBell wrote: Finally my questions: Can someone recommend to me a good modern book that could teach me some basic things about botany? Tom Schweich schreef Books are OK, but the best way to learn is to work with the plants. Start by collecting, drying and preparing vouchers for the plants around you, in your yard, your neighborhood (with permission) and your county, and work out your own descriptions of the characters. Then compare to your books. Collect the same plant many times from different locations and mount them side by side, so you can begin to see the natural variation within a species. You'll find out how even "evenly pinnate" really is. Also volunteer at your local university herbarium to mount their backlog, file, etc. Over time, you'll find that working with the plants is much more effective than reading about them. See: http://www.mobot.org/MOBOT/molib/fie.../welcome.shtml -- -- Tom Schweich http://www.schweich.com Day: 415-545-3644 Cheers, Phred. -- LID |
Amateur seeks answers to some questions please
P van Rijckevorsel wrote:
I am afraid I disagree here. Dried plants look different from live ones. There appears to be no shortage of characters that are easily visible on live plants but are hard to make out on dried plants. Also a great deal of the fun goes out of it if only dried plants are handled. You're right that dried plants look different than live ones. Just speaking for myself, I feel that I have learned more by going through the process of examining in the field, photographing, collecting, drawing, drying, describing, and vouchering, than if I just sat in the meadow with a flora and examined plants through a hand lens. Also I think remembering how a plant looked when collected, and how it looks dried and mounted on a voucher, helps me visualize what a old, vouchered plant may have looked like when collected. This has particularly helpful in one of my current projects wherein I am reviewing a collection of plants made in 1940 in one canyon of an area now in Mojave National Preserve. -- Tom Schweich http://www.schweich.com Day: 415-545-3644 |
Amateur seeks answers to some questions please
P van Rijckevorsel wrote:
I am afraid I disagree here. Dried plants look different from live ones. There appears to be no shortage of characters that are easily visible on live plants but are hard to make out on dried plants. Also a great deal of the fun goes out of it if only dried plants are handled. Tom Schweich schreef You're right that dried plants look different than live ones. Just speaking for myself, I feel that I have learned more by going through the process of examining in the field, photographing, collecting, drawing, drying, describing, and vouchering, than if I just sat in the meadow with a flora and examined plants through a hand lens. Also I think remembering how a plant looked when collected, and how it looks dried and mounted on a voucher, helps me visualize what a old, vouchered plant may have looked like when collected. This has particularly helpful in one of my current projects wherein I am reviewing a collection of plants made in 1940 in one canyon of an area now in Mojave National Preserve. -- Tom Schweich http://www.schweich.com Day: 415-545-3644 + + + There is not much disagreement here. For serious monographic work dried plants are essential. Obviously the process of familiarizing oneself with plants is helped by any directed activity involving these plants. But the focus should be on looking at (smelling, etc) the plants themselves, preferably through the seasons and at as many forms as possible. Starting a herbarium is only one way to do this, and certainly not the one I recommend for the 'beginner'. Actually something similar goes for photography. Photography can be an invaluable tool, but it requires a certain mindset and training. A photoalbum full of home-made pictures of plants from the 'wrong perspective' is a sad thing. A nice full color picture book is a very happy way to start, although there are vast differences in quality when it comes to books. PvR |
Amateur seeks answers to some questions please
In article , P van
Rijckevorsel writes Actually something similar goes for photography. Photography can be an invaluable tool, but it requires a certain mindset and training. A photoalbum full of home-made pictures of plants from the 'wrong perspective' is a sad thing. As a person with a web site (and hard disc) full of photographs I would be interested in your views as to what is the right perspective. -- Stewart Robert Hinsley |
Amateur seeks answers to some questions please
P van Rijckevorsel writes
Actually something similar goes for photography. Photography can be an invaluable tool, but it requires a certain mindset and training. A photoalbum full of home-made pictures of plants from the 'wrong perspective' is a sad thing. Stewart Robert Hinsley schreef As a person with a web site (and hard disc) full of photographs I would be interested in your views as to what is the right perspective. -- Stewart Robert Hinsley + + + I am not sure anybody would find my views on photography very interesting. There should be any number of people on the list with more practical experience in the subject. I would say that a picture taken from the 'right perspective' is a picture doing full justice to what you want to feature. To get a picture of a plant from 'your right perspective' I assume someone has to be there at the right time (plant in right state, right time of day with proper lighting) with the right film in a camera that one can work with. Taking a brief browse through your website it is noticeable that the quality varies of the pictures you link to. This would seem to be a picture that is well above average: http://www.biologie.uni-ulm.de/systa.../Hohesexfw.htm in both sharpness of focus and features captured PvR PS - you need to recheck your links on the Hoheria page - Technically there is no such thing as an invalid name (re Plagianthus linariifolia). All botanical names are valid, since if they are not validly published they are not botanical names. |
Amateur seeks answers to some questions please
Depending on how "into" this you are a way of naturally controling
weeds without chemicals is by learning about the Ecology and Biology of the plant. some examples. - when the weeds are comming into maturity and beginning to flower and set said, remove the heads. This will prevent more seeds being added to the seed bank. - If you can understand the life cycle of the specific weeds then you can find out when its at ints weakest. This may be when new shoots are sprouting. A bit of heat onto the leaves can often wilt the sappling and they probably wont recover. - Remove small patchs at a time so not to make to much room for other weeds to invade as they may be harder to control and also try to keep soil disturbance to a minimum. If you do use tools in a weed filled section, a rquick rince may help to prevent the transfer of seeds from the soil bank to your new and improving garden :) Tim Uni Student http://www.angelfire.com/dc/stormeagle/index.html |
Amateur seeks answers to some questions please
Stewart Robert Hinsley schreef
As a person with a web site (and hard disc) full of photographs I would be interested in your views as to what is the right perspective. -- Stewart Robert Hinsley + + + There are also some pretty good pictures in the new: Tropical plants of the world Jens G. Rohwer ISBN 0-8069-8387-6 (Obviously, I would like to have them bigger) PvR |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:23 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter