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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

You need a field guide to wild flowers. Go to the library & take out one or two
until you decide which one you want to buy. I prefer Simon & Schuster. I think
you want the Eastern edition, but I suggest you check. For trees you want a
field guide to trees & shrubs.

Botany nowadays, especially taxonomy, is changing almost as rapidly as computer
science. Your old books will not be useful, except as antiques. Go to the
botany library at the University of Michigan and tell the librarian what you
are looking for.

Would the Latin plant names in my "Plants of Michigan" from 1939 still be
valid?

A few might.
You also need to become adept at Web searches.


Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)

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.

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

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