Herbarium Recuration Interim Report - Research

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3. Materials and Methods Genus and species folders were re-curated by updating names on folder covers in pencil; genera were placed into separate genus covers, species were placed into separate species covers. Determinations on all specimens were checked against species names and specimens cited in Balick et al. (2000) as a primary source and against specimen information from TROPICOS (Tropicos.org, 01 Sep 2010) as a secondary source. As a result some of the determinations were updated by inserting a standardised citation slip (Figure 1) designed for this purpose. Taxonomic judgements were generally not made except where the authors had full confidence; however synonymy was updated to the latest accepted name, following Balick et al. (2000) or other literature where appropriate (for example Pennington, 1997). If there was doubt over whether a species name should be accepted or not, the name was kept (it was assigned a species folder, not sunk into another species). Specimens re-curated at BRH were all logged in the project’s plant specimen database. Specimens encoutered that were duplicates of botanical records already present in the database, only the creation of the duplicate record at BRH with a filing name was needed. Partial data capture was performed for specimens not previously in the database; collector name, collection number, filing name and gazetteer location was recorded. Full data capture was performed for novel specimens only if the specimen was a type. 4. Results Approximately 4670 specimens were re-curated in approximately 45 days of recuration. This equated to the recuration of seven full-size cabinet of specimens. 112 families from Acanthaceae to Melastomataceae in addition to Polygalaceae were fully re-curated, and the 24 other families were partially re-curated as their specimens were encountered within the cabinets (Table 1). In addition 1200 recently mounted specimens were also recurated and incorporated into the cabinets. A total of 720 citation and 405 determination slips were used (Table 2). The seven cabinets were expanded to fill 13 cabinets plus 3 shelves. A total of 5294 herbarium specimens have been recorded in the project database from the BRH herbarium during the recuration to date, some herbarium specimens are represented at BRH by more than one duplicate (herbarium sheet) so a larger number of total duplicates (5877) were recorded from BRH. Of these herbarium specimens 2266 specimens (42.8%) were new specimens to the database. 6 Figure 1 Specimen (above) with determination updated using a standardised citation slip (below).
To cover the shortage of specimen folders in the herbarium the project funded the purchase of 1,900 archive quality inner specimen folders (species covers); 400 in September 2010 and 1,500 in March 2011. Table 1. Families re-curated during project year 2 and numbers of duplicates processed per family (A-Z by family). Count Family Count Family 132 Acanthaceae 93 Chrysobalanaceae 3 Achariaceae 7 Cleomaceae 9 Actinidiaceae 11 Clethraceae 1 Agavaceae 77 Clusiaceae 14 Aizoaceae 8 Cochlospermaceae 6 Alismataceae 123 Combretaceae 2 Altingiaceae 40 Commelinaceae 40 Amaranthaceae 15 Connaraceae 14 Amaryllidaceae 103 Convolvulaceae 73 Anacardiaceae 25 Costaceae 97 Annonaceae 7 Crassulaceae 11 Apiaceae 28 Cucurbitaceae 205 Apocynaceae 1 Cupressaceae 24 Aquifoliaceae 6 Cyatheaceae 98 Araceae 2 Cyclanthaceae 36 Araliaceae 7 Cymodoceaceae 1 Araucariaceae 234 Cyperaceae 193 Arecaceae 12 Cyrillaceae 21 Aristolochiaceae 10 Dennstaedtiaceae 12 Asparagaceae 12 Dichapetalaceae 5 Asphodelaceae 48 Dilleniaceae 11 Aspleniaceae 19 Dioscoreaceae 467 Asteraceae 5 Droseraceae 2 Balanophoraceae 11 Dryopteridaceae 2 Balsaminaceae 7 Ebenaceae 1 Basellaceae 13 Elaeocarpaceae 12 Bataceae 8 Ericaceae 15 Begoniaceae 8 Eriocaulaceae 124 Bignoniaceae 26 Erythroxylaceae 14 Bixaceae 269 Euphorbiaceae 6 Blechnaceae 5 Fabaceae 132 Boraginaceae 203 Fabaceae - Caesalpinioideae 4 Brassicaceae 414 Fabaceae - Faboideae 73 Bromeliaceae 226 Fabaceae - Mimosoideae 6 Burmanniaceae 34 Fagaceae 65 Burseraceae 33 Gentianaceae 2 Buxaceae 12 Gesneriaceae 13 Cactaceae 5 Gleicheniaceae 9 Campanulaceae 7 Haemodoraceae 6 Cannaceae 1 Haloragidaceae 15 Capparaceae 37 Heliconiaceae 22 Caricaceae 7 Hydroleaceae 9 Casuarinaceae 15 Hymenophyllaceae 52 Celastraceae 16 Hypericaceae 2 Chloranthaceae 2 Hypoxidaceae 7
Page 1 and 2: Darwin Initiative Project 17-022 Co
Page 3 and 4: 1. Introduction 1.1. Background The
Page 5: ecommendations as to how further re
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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?