Herbarium Recuration Interim Report - Research

More documents

Recommendations

Info

classification or revision; this appeared to result in families being laid away in multiple locations as explained below. Classification Systems in Herbaria Family delimitation and nomenclature can differ between taxonomic systems accepted by herbaria worldwide. For example North American herbaria have traditionally favoured Englerian system, British collections have favoured Bentham & Hooker, now the LAPG III system (Haston et al., 2009) is increasingly being adopted by herbaria worldwide. Thus specimens of the same species may potentially have different family names depending on the institution from they are repatriated. For example the genus Ternstroemia may be included one of three families; Ternstroemiaceae, Theaceae or Pentaphylacaceae. Thus Ternstroemia specimens received by BRH from different non-Belizean herbaria are potentially being laid away under any of these three different families. As in most herbaria, a two-tiered folder system has been used at BRH, with one to many thin paper folders being contained within a thicker cardboard folder. In many herbaria the inner folders are used to hold specimens of the same species and thus these are often called species folders; the outer folder are used to hold one to many species folders of the same genus and thus are called the genus folder. However, at BRH the inner folders contain specimens of many different species and the outer folders often contain multiple genera. Both covers are usually unlabelled with no family, genus or species name present. In addition, both species and genera are often out of order making the process of laying away or locating specimens very timeconsuming. Generic and specific names appeared not to have been updated to an appropriate revision, and specimens were laid away by label name without checking. Thus the herbarium contained many synonymous and invalid names. In 2008 approximately 3,000 repatriated plant specimens were mounted by University of Belize undergraduate students led by Rolando Caballero (University of Belize) at BRH, following a course in herbarium specimen mounting by Daniel Atha of New York Botanic Garden (NY). These specimens occupied three full size cabinets and had been sorted roughly by family, yet were still to be incorporated into the existing collection. 2.2. Summary of herbarium recuration activities in May 2010 A total of five and half days were spent in the herbarium by Zoë Goodwin and Geman Lopez during the periods May 10-14 and June 2-4. Approximately 800 specimens in two families were re-curated. The small family Polygalaceae (3 genera) and two subfamilies in the Fabaceae, Mimosoideae and Caesalpinoideae, were completely recurated, the recuration of the Fabaceae subfamily Faboideae was started. 2.3. Summary of recommendations after first session of recuration in May 2010 Following the results of recuration work that has been carried out on a single cabinet of 800 specimens by Zoë Goodwin and German Lopez, the project made these 4
ecommendations as to how further recuration work, supported in the first instance by the Darwin Initiative, should proceed: • Families to remain ordered alphabetically, however a specific classification for family and genera needs to be adopted; • APG III is suggested as the system for angiosperms, using Haston et al (2009) and Mabberly (2008) as primary references for family and genera names; • It is suggested that fern families should follow Smith et al. (2006); • Species and infraspecific level specimen determinations and species names should continue to follow Balick et al. (2000) primarily; • The savanna plant database being created as part of this Darwin project can be used to generate a comprehensive index of accepted names and synonyms for all families and genera for use in the herbarium. • The purchase of additional outer and inner specimen covers is urgently recommended for the near future. • It is recommended that the practise of placing a single genus within an individual outer cover and that of placing a single species within each inner cover should continue during further recuration. However this is reliant on the purchase of a sufficient number of further specimen covers. For a full summary of recommendations made see Goodwin et al. (2010). 2.4. Summary of herbarium recuration activities in October – December 2010 A total of thirty eight days or half days were spent in the herbarium by Zoë Goodwin and Geman Lopez during the period October 8 th to December 10 th . Approximately 3,800 specimens in all families (112) from Acanthaceae to Melastomataceae were recurated. This equated to the recuration of six full-size cabinets of specimens. 24 other families were partially re-curated as their specimens were encountered within the cabinets. In addition 1200 recently mounted specimens were also recurated and incorporated into the cabinets. The seven cabinets re-curated (including the cabinet re-curated in FS2) were expanded to fill just over 13 cabinets (Appendix 1 and 2) to reduce over crowding of specimens, to allow the incorporation of the additional mounted specimens and to allow spare room within cabinets for future additions to the collection. 5
Page 1 and 2: Darwin Initiative Project 17-022 Co
Page 3: 1. Introduction 1.1. Background The
Page 7 and 8: To cover the shortage of specimen f
Page 9 and 10: Table 2. Families re-curated at BRH
Page 11 and 12: Hamamelidaceae 0 Heliconiaceae 10 1
Page 13 and 14: Table 4. Type specimen information
Page 15 and 16: Schipp, W.A. 1314 Salicaceae Laetia
Page 17 and 18: e resolved. For example for this sy
Page 19 and 20: Boxes Refrigerator 6 5 4 Empty 3 8
Page 21 and 22: Appendix 2A. Organisation of famili
Page 23 and 24: 11 Solanaceae 4 Sphenocleaceae Stap
Page 25 and 26: 11 12 13 14 15 Fagaceae 2 Lecythida

Herbarium Recuration Interim Report - Research

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?