A MUST FOR NORTH AMERICAN BIOGEOGRAPHERS

Kartesz, J.T. & MeachamC.A. (1999) Synthesis of the North American Flora, Version 1.0. North Carolina Botanical Garden, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA. CD-ROM interactive software.Price $495.00ISBN 1 889 06505 6 One CD instead of a library? Not yet. Keys, descriptions, and illustrations of individual taxa are not here, but, on the other hand, there is an incredible amount of information on this CD-ROM that is not available immediately in any library: distribution maps for each of the 293 families, 3303 genera, 22 006 species, 2735 subspecies, 5512 varieties, and 993 hybrids based on their presence/absence in 70 areas of North America and nearby islands (U.S. states including DC and Hawaii, Canadian provinces, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, Greenland, and the French islands St Pierre and Miquelon) can be stored and printed. Source information for individual taxon-area records is provided instantly using ‘mouse-over’ technique (e.g. reference to authoritative publication, unpublished sources, or personal communications; information about voucher specimens is often also included). The valid Latin name of each taxon is accompanied by a common name and list of relevant synonyms with authors. Synonyms can be displayed either hierarchically, within the accepted taxonomy (checklist format), or alphabetically (thesaurus format) for easier access. All information which was in Kartesz (1994; now out of print) is here and updated. For each of the 70 areas, information on total numbers of all taxa is provided. Using 135 ‘biological attributes’, this can be decomposed into more specific information on numbers of native and exotic genera or species, species or genera in particular families, extinct taxa, etc. Information on individual areas and taxon attributes can be combined in many meaningful ways (Table 1). Lists of taxa produced by these operations (e.g. exotic wetland plants of Kansas, toxic plants of Gulf coast states, or Cactaceae species in the Arctic) can be stored and printed. Relative concentration of selected sets of taxa can be depicted graphically via maps with proportional shading. Information about actual numbers of taxa in individual areas is provided instantly by clicking on a desired area (e.g. 60 out of 970 native monocot species present in California should be also in Greenland). This project was not an easy task. Considering that the most recent floras or checklists for some areas are quite old (e.g. Alabama: 1901, Idaho: 1952, Mississippi: 1921, Saskatchewan: 1944), their updating was an enormous challenge. It is impossible to tell how many sources, published and unpublished, were used for creation of this system. I spent a substantial amount of time trying to find some publications that were missed. However, I gave up when I realized that not only did this monumental synthesis contain information on spontaneous regeneration of Laurus nobilis in San Francisco from Thomas’Flora of the Santa Cruz Mountains, but also information from the new Steyermark’s Flora of Missouri (Vol. 1, 1999) and articles from the Bishop Museum Occasional Papers (1998). Well, there are two after all: (1) Wunderlin’s (1998)Guide to the Vascular Plants of Florida. Here we have an interesting discrepancy: Wunderlin’s total number of species for Florida is 3834 while Synthesis’ total is 4139; moreover, this discrepancy is not due to exotic species because Wunderlin’s number is higher: 1180 vs. 1035; (2) Vascular Flora of Rhode Island (Gould et al., 1998). A similar discrepancy is here as well: Synthesis’ total number of species is 1941, while in the Flora the total number is 1618; in this case, numbers of both native and exotic species are substantially higher in the Synthesis. As reported numbers for British Columbia (Table 1) are also much higher than numbers in recent checklists for the province (Douglas et al., 1994; Qian & Klinka, 1998), my impression is that Synthesis’ lists are highly inclusive. Considering that this is version 1.0, there are only very few problems I can report: (1) ‘Exotic’ taxa include only established non-native taxa that are native outside of the all the 70 areas covered by the Synthesis. State- or province-level nativity is not considered in this version; (2) ‘Weeds’ are defined in the Synthesis as plants that generally grow in disturbed areas or in areas where they are unwanted and unappreciated. Two overlapping but nonidentical categories (colonizers and weeds) are mixed here. Betula nana is classified as a ‘weed’ but B. pendula is not. I would expect that the opposite should be the case. For exotic species, weeds, and related concepts, more careful terminology and categorization should be used (see Richardson et al. 2000); (3) Striga asiatica has been contained but not eradicated in Carolinas (Kaiser, 1999); probably all that is referred to as Rubus discolor Weihe & Nees (Himalayan blackberry) is R. armeniacus Focke (Weber, 1995); Conyza sumatrensis (Retz.) E. Walker is probably the valid name for the species listed as C. floribunda Kunth (Stace, 1997) or, at least, it should be listed as a synonym; Prunella vulgaris ssp. vulgaris is not native; Anona cherimola is misspelled. I hope that following versions will include among ‘biological attributes’ also chromosome numbers and ploidy status, modes of fruit/seed dispersal, and descriptions of total distribution (beyond the 70 areas covered) of all species and subspecific taxa. British Ecological Flora Database (Fitter & Ford, 1993) can serve as a source of inspiration for which other biological attributes could be considered. Also, I hope that one day more natural boundaries than state and province borders will be used for delimitation of physiographic regions (e.g. Rockies or Great Basin). Finally, some indices of floristic similarity (e.g. Jaccard and Preston’s z) could be incorporated into the program. Extremely positive reviews of the Synthesis are appearing in professional periodicals (e.g. A. Ceska: Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America81/2, 124–125; R. Cranfill: Taxon49, 142–145; H.D. Wilson: Systematic Botony25, 150–152). Instead of recycling the many superlatives already used, I will try to show how information in the Synthesis can be used for one practical task, which may be interesting for all readers of this journal. How much is North American flora homogenized due to naturalized species? Table 2 illustrates what we can derive from the Synthesis. Neighbouring areas are, due to exotic species, consistently somewhat more dissimilar and remote areas are more similar. Obviously, the answer to our question is scale-dependent. Without the Synthesis, it would be not conceivable to get a complete understanding of what is going on. This is one of the most user-friendly computer packages I have ever encountered. Minimum system requirements are Pentium 90 MHz-class processor, 32 MB RAM, 25 MB free hard drive space, and SVGA display (800 by 600 pixel resolution) with 16 colours. The program is designed for IBM-compatible computers running Windows 3.1, 95, 98, NT, or 2000. It also runs extremely fast on Power Macintosh computers with PC compatibility cards. Taxonomic, nomenclatural, phytogeographic, and other updates are on http://www.bonap.org. The Synthesis can be ordered from the North Carolina Botanical Garden, Campus Box 3375, Totten Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599–3375. Credit card orders may also be placed at Tel. +1 919 962 0578. The Synthesis of the North American Flora is a milestone nomenclatural reference, floristic atlas, and, above all, a remarkable analytical tool. All North American plant taxonomists, phytogeographers, and plant macroecologists should have this program on their computers. It is worthy of the price (but it could be cheaper!).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.