Palmetto
Botanist Gil Nelson pens new book on native plants
using invasive species in their gardens. It also highlights several specialty and wildlife gardens that can be incorporated into the home landscape.
Best Native Plants for Southern Gardens highlights and illustrates several hundred readily available and easy-to-grow native species for gardeners and landscapers living in Florida and seven other southeastern states.
Featured plants include shrubs, small and large trees, and perennials that can be readily found in most plant nurseries. All of the plant species featured in the book are extremely successful when grown in the home landscape, making them suitable for the average gardener.
The book describes and recommends high-performing native plants, and advises readers on how to avoid
Native species featured in the book have been selected based on the authority of plant enthusiasts and professionals, personal knowledge and experience, and field visits to nurseries, gardens, and arboreta throughout the southeast.
Best Native Plants for Southern Gardens contains chapters on theme gardening, invasive species, hollies, native azaleas, magnolias, blueberries, native roses, vines, groundcovers, and spring ephemerals. The book contains more than 600 photos and is divided into three main sections, making it easy to use.
Gil Nelson is a writer, naturalist, and field botanist specializing in the southeastern United States. He is the author of a dozen gardening and botanical field guides, including Florida’s Best Native Landscape Plants
The purpose of the Florida Native Plant Society is to preserve, conserve, and restore the native plants and native plant communities of Florida.
Official definition of native plant: For most purposes, the phrase Florida native plant refers to those species occurring within the state boundaries prior to European contact, according to the best available scientific and historical documentation. More specifically, it includes those species understood as indigenous, occurring in natural associations in habitats that existed prior to significant human impacts and alterations of the landscape. Organization: Members are organized into regional chapters throughout Florida. Each chapter elects a Chapter Representative who serves as a voting member of the Board of Directors and is responsible for advocating the chapter’s needs and objectives. See www.fnps.org
Board of Directors
Committee
Directors-at-Large, 2008–2010
Vacant
Directors-at-Large, 2009–2011 Terry
Please contact Steve Woodmansee, Vice President for Finance
786-488-3101
stevewoodmansee@bellsouth.net
8025 SW 102 Avenue, Miami, FL 33173-3937
Webmaster ......................................Paul Rebmann
Contract Services
Executive Director ................................Karina Veaudry Accounting Services ............................ Joslin
Palmetto
Features
4 Ants, Anthill, & Biodiversity with E.O. Wilson
Renowned scientist and naturalist E.O. Wilson returns to Florida to lecture on biodiversity, ants, and his new books, The Creation and Anthill.
8 Natives in Action
Peg Urban lets her love of the natural world shine in her photographs of native plants and the animals that utilize them.
10 Native or Not: Studies of Problematic Species No. 5
The convoluted history of naming Duranta erecta, and its status as a native or non-native plant are investigated by Dr. Dan Ward in his 5th article in a series about problematic species.
14 Book Review
Fourteen years in the making, Wildflowers of Tennessee, the Ohio Valley, and the Southern Appalachians is an exceptional field guide to the southeast. Review by Paul Rebmann.
15 Ghosts of the Hammocks – Voyria parasitica
Jim Drake’s affinity for Gentianaceae leads him to southern Florida in search of the elusive parasitic ghost plant.
Palmetto seeks articles on native plant species and related conservation topics, as well as high-quality botanical illustrations and photographs. Contact the editor for guidelines, deadlines and other information at pucpuggy@bellsouth.net, or visit www.fnps.org and follow the links to Publications/Palmetto.
ON THE COVER: Sparkleberry (Vaccinium arboreum) and Southern Hairstreak. Photo by
Make a difference with FNPS
Your membership supports the preservation and restoration of wildlife habitats and biological diversity through the conservation of native plants. It also funds awards for leaders in native plant education, preservation and research.
● Individual $35
● Family or household $50
● Contributing $75 (with $25 going to the Endowment)
● Not-for-profit organization $50
● Business or corporate $125
● Supporting $100
● Donor $250
● Lifetime $1,000
● Full time student $15
Please consider upgrading your membership level when you renew.
The Palmetto (ISSN 0276-4164) Copyright 2010, Florida Native Plant Society, all rights reserved. No part of the contents of this magazine may be reproduced by any means without written consent of the editor. The Palmetto is published four times a year by the Florida Native Plant Society (FNPS) as a benefit to members. The observations and opinions expressed in attributed columns and articles are those of the respective authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official views of the Florida Native Plant Society or the editor, except where otherwise stated.
Editorial Content: We have a continuing interest in articles on specific native plant species and related conservation topics, as well as high-quality botanical illustrations and photographs. Contact the editor for submittal guidelines, deadlines and other information. Editor: Marjorie Shropshire, Visual Key Creative, Inc. ● pucpuggy@bellsouth.net ● (772) 232-1384 ● 855 N.E. Stokes Terrace, Jensen Beach FL 34957
Peg Urban
Top right: Dr. E.O. Wilson talks with (from left) Kate Matthews, Crossley Simmons and Courtney Jenista after an informal Q&A dialogue session with students at Stetson University’s DeLand campus.(Stetson University Photo)
Lower right: Dr. E.O. Wilson
Photo by Marjorie Shropshire
Above: Jacket of Dr. Wilson’s new novel, Anthill
Far right: Dr. Wilson’s ant drawing in the author’s field book
Ants, Anthill, and Biodiversity with E.O. Wilson
E.O. Wilson enters the quiet wood paneled room and greets each of us individually, and when I introduce myself as a representative of the Florida Native Plant Society, he smiles warmly and comments “you all have your work cut out for you.”
Wilson is no stranger to Florida. As a youngster, he lived in Central Florida and the Panhandle – and he describes the state as a “wonderland for a child.” He has returned repeatedly over the years as a visitor, lecturer, scientist, and lately, as a preacher for his most heartfelt interest – the preservation of biodiversity.
An interview with E.O. Wilson by Marjorie
Shropshire
species within them is affected by their physical size and fragmentation.
When asked about the condition of Florida’s environment, Wilson replies, “Magnificent, still, with open spaces – especially in my favorite place, the Panhandle – but under siege and in peril by a mostly uncaring population.”
In the 1960’s, his experimental focus was on biogeography, the geographic distribution of plants and animals. Wilson and his associate Dr. Robert MacArthur sought to understand how speciation occurs. Islands presented unique laboratories that could be used to study population biology. In his book Naturalist Wilson writes “islands are the key to rapid progress in biogeography.” He began by looking at historical records of how species had reestablished themselves on Krakatau, an Indonesian island decimated by a volcanic explosion in 1883. Further investigation examined the balance of species in other isolated habitats, and the research became the basis for the groundbreaking book, The Theory of Island Biogeography
Although first published in 1967, the book’s concepts still are relevant today. One may consider Florida’s natural preserves – scattered widely around the state, separated by development, and isolated from one another – as islands. The number, population, and distribution of
Wilson scoured the state, searching for sites that could be used to collect data for further experiments. He realized that the tiny mangrove islands of the Florida Keys could serve as miniature Krakataus – on them, he could study insect and arthropod re population. He admits that his choice of location was partly aesthetic. “Sometimes I found myself beneath the massed nests of clamoring herons, egrets, and white-crowned pigeons. I drifted along from landfall to landfall, collecting specimens, studying charts, filling my notebook with impressions. Mine was anything but a world-class voyage, but I was as content as Darwin on the voyage of H.M.S. Beagle.”
Wilson explored the Keys, Ten Thousand Islands, Everglades National Park, and the Dry Tortugas, ultimately securing permission from the National Park Service to use a number of small mangrove islands in Florida Bay as sites for his “defaunation” experiments.
The experimental methodology was unique and difficult. Islands were first monitored to survey what species were found there, no easy task due to the variety and number of small creatures hiding among the mangroves. Larger creatures, including snails, were captured and moved to adjacent islands. Next, tent fumigation was used to “defaunate” the islands, exterminating any insect or arthropod life that was present. The process had to be carefully monitored to prevent damage to plants.
Wilson and his associates Daniel Simberloff and Robert Silberglied closely documented the progress of re population. The first arrivals were flying insects, followed by ants and spiders, who ballooned in from nearby islands.
“The loss of biodiversity is the folly our descendants are least likely to forgive.”
It didn’t take long for the islands to be completely recolonized by their original inhabitants, and the data collected helped solidify Wilson and MacArthur’s theory.
In 1967, Simberloff and Silberglied visited Lignumvitae Key. They were astounded to discover an old growth West Indian forest little changed from the time when the Arawak inhabited Florida. The Key was rich with giant gumbo limbo, mahogany and lignumvitae trees, but its resident caretakers told the visiting biologists that the island was to be sold for development, and that its owners were simply interested in a making a “financial killing.”
Concerned with what would be lost if the island was developed, the pair contacted Wilson. A visit left Wilson “enchanted” and he invited Cornell chemical ecologist Thomas Eisner to take a look. Together, they wrote an article for Natural History about the island’s uniqueness – and its potential destruction.
Wilson continued to advocate for preservation, thus beginning the process that would ultimately lead to Lignumvitae Key’s becoming a state park – speaking to the Florida Audubon Society and seeking the help of Thomas Richards, president of The Nature Conservancy. Richards willingly committed his organization to the cause. With the help of donors, Florida Audubon, The Nature Conservancy, park administrator Nathaniel Reed, and the State of Florida, funds to save the island were secured, and Lignumvitae Key was protected from becoming the site of vacation homes for the wealthy.
Wilson recently visited the island for the first time in forty years and said it was “wonderful to return.” He notes, “There has been a lot of progress since I did field work in the Florida Keys in the 1960s. Florida has come a long way in awareness, but it has a much longer way to go.”
He points out that his actions defending Lignumvitae Key were the only time in the past he was politically active and recalls the existence of “primitive struggles between developers and environmentalists over preservation lands,” preferring instead the study of biodiversity. However, it is this campaign to preserve biodiversity that has again led him to activism and a place in the public eye.
One of the challenges of preserving biodiversity is global warming. When asked about his thoughts on the topic, Wilson says, “Within the scientific community there is virtually no disagreement as to the existence of climate change. Big changes in precipitation are already taking place in Australia, sub-Saharan Africa, and the American Southwest. Some Arctic species will be doomed. Boreal and cold adapted species will not survive.” His disgust at those who deny climate change is palpable.
Many of Florida’s fragile ecosystems will be adversely affected by rising sea levels that result from a warming earth, and discussions have already begun about what action to take. I asked Dr. Wilson about approaches to dealing with possible extinctions due to the inability of plants and animals to adapt quickly enough to a changing environment; “Should we move species to preserve them?” He answered, “Yes, but, we can’t move ecosystems. One square mile of natural Florida forest has tens of thousands of species. There is no way to move an ecosystem. The best way to preserve species is to save them on site, and connect the preserves with corridors to allow for natural migration.” He goes on to say, “Major projects are being formulated to meet the impact of climate change on biodiversity. New concepts are being created, like the Spine of the Continent Project, a corridor of natural reserves reaching from Alaska to the Mexican Cordillera – a north-south corridor for migration northward of warm adapted species.” Plans also exist for an eastern wildway linking the Everglades with the Arctic via the Appalachian Mountains.
Today’s economic climate creates many hardships for conservationists – although land values have declined markedly, making them more affordable, budgetary cutbacks have limited funds allocated to purchase conservation lands. When asked to define his level of optimism about the success of environmental causes today, Wilson replied, “There is a period of drought in terms of new money coming in, but that is mixed with a rising green tide that has Americans more open to thinking about their natural heritage.” He describes himself as a “cautious optimist,” and when asked “How do you remain productive – what’s the secret?” he replies without hesitation “Love of natural history, love of being out in it.”
Wilson’s education in natural history began early in his childhood, and he credits his first training to his membership in the Boy Scouts, where he achieved the rank of Eagle Scout. He writes in Naturalist that “the Boy Scouts of America seemed invented just for me” and chronicles his delight at the portion of the 1940 Handbook for Boys and its entry under the heading “Insect Life” – “To obtain this Merit Badge, a Scout must: 1. Go into the country with the Examiner and show to him the natural surroundings in which certain specified insects live, and find and demonstrate living specimens of the insects, telling of their habits or of the nature of their fitness for life in their particular surroundings.”
The Boy Scouts gave Wilson the foundation and work ethic that would serve him well throughout his career, and he says that by the time he enrolled at the University of Alabama to study biology, he had learned so much in the field from direct
observation that he “knew a lot already.” He smiles and says “I had a lopsided education.”
Wilson’s childhood experiences in the Boy Scouts resonated so strongly that he used them as a basis for developing his protagonist’s character in his first novel, provisionally named Anthill, whose early sections are semiautobiographical. At the time of this interview, the book was yet unpublished, but Wilson could not resist talking about it – and rhapsodizing about the longleaf upland savanna. Both longleaf pine and ant societies play important roles in Anthill – in fact, they are as much characters as the humans who ramble through its pages.
In a recent radio discussion about his foray into fiction, Wilson describes Anthill as a novel about the current crisis that faces the American south – vanishing wildlands and the reckless misuse of natural resources. It explores how the environment and the struggles of people affected by these changes intersect, using ant societies as a metaphor for human society. In fact, it is the central section of the book, the Anthill Chronicles, which is garnering the most praise.
When asked why he chose to write a novel, Wilson says “One rule I’ve learned, people respect nonfiction, but they read novels. People are basically storytellers. One of the main motivations was to create a channel to talk about the issues that concern me.” Anthill mixes the scientific study of ants with a story of defending a place you love, and saving biodiversity.
Later that day, in Stetson’s Elizabeth Hall, seated in front of the chapel’s towering pipe organ, Wilson is asked “What do you do about the ants?” He answers in all sincerity, “Be careful of little lives,” and in a lighter vein, “they like little bits of peanut butter and tuna. Watch them and you will understand what social life might be like on another planet.”
Toward the end of the interview, a reporter asked Wilson to talk about the alliance between science and religion. His book The Creation had recently been published, and his evening lecture was titled “Can Nature be Saved? E.O. Wilson on Science, Religion and Our Future.” He says that he calls himself a “secular preacher of the environmental movement,” describes hellfire as the dire condition of the earth’s environment, redemption as what we can do to save ourselves, and sums up by stating “The big question is... do we want to save the creation as a moral mandate? Or do we want to see it disappear quickly?”
In his evening lecture, attended by nearly two thousand people, Wilson outlined ideas that could help maintain biodiversity in the face of an ever-expanding human population. Strategies such as preserving biodiverse “hotspots” could
In amnesiac revery it is also easy to overlook the services that ecosystems provide humanity. They enrich the soil and create the very air we breathe. Without these amenities, the remaining tenure of the human race would be nasty and brief.
The life-sustaining matrix is built of green plants with legions of microorganisms and mostly small, obscure animals – in other words, weeds and bugs. Such organisms support the world with efficiency because they are so diverse, allowing them to divide labor and swarm over every square meter of the earth’s surface. They run the world precisely as we would wish it to be run because humanity evolved within living communities and our bodily functions are finely adjusted to the idiosyncratic environment already created.
–
E.O. Wilson, The Diversity of Life
save large numbers of species at a cost considered cheap in global terms.
Wilson believes that by preserving 35 different global hotspots, 40% of all species could be preserved. That figure would increase to 70% if the Amazon, Congo region, and New Guinea were included in the preservation effort. He went on to cite his self-titled Wilson’s Law – “If you save the living environment, the biodiversity that we have left, you will automatically save the physical environment. If you only save the physical environment, you will ultimately lose both”
In closing, he states that preserving biodiversity is largely a matter of will, and quotes John Sawhill – “A society is defined not only by what it creates, but by what it refuses to destroy.”
Bibliography
E.O. Wilson Biodiversity Foundation. Online at www.eowilson.org/
MacArthur, R. H. and Wilson, E.O. 2001. The Theory of Island Biogeography (Princeton Landmarks in Biology edition). Princeton University Press
Wilson, E.O. 1994. Naturalist. Washington D.C. Island Press
Wilson, E.O. 2000. The Diversity of Life. New York. W.W. Norton
Wilson, E.O. 2002. The Future of Life. New York. Alfred A. Knopf
Wilson, E.O. 2007. The Creation – An Appeal to Save Life on Earth. New York. Alfred A. Knopf
Wilson, E.O. 2010. Anthill. New York. W.W. Norton
Wilson, E.O. and Rehm, D. April 22, 2010. Radio interview. The Diane Rehm Show, WAMU, 88.5, Washington D.C. Online at: http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-04-22/eo-wilson-anthill Wildlands Network. Spine of the Continent Project. Online at: www.twp.org/
NativesAction in
Photos, above, left to right: buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) & silver-spotted skipper; pileated woodpecker and chick; softhair coneflower (Rudbeckia mollis) & blue dasher; young raccoon reaching for hackberry berries. Below left: Rusty lyonia (Lyonia ferruginea) & eastern amberwing.
PHOTOGRAPHY by Peg Urban
Peg Urban’s joy in the natural world shines through in her photography, which depicts native plants and the animals that visit them. Her images are rich with life and color. Peg says “I have always loved all aspects of nature, and from a young age have had a passion to capture its beauty in photographs. Only in recent years have I had more time to devote to that pursuit.”
Peg is originally from London, Ontario, Canada, but for the past 9 years has become a Florida resident with her husband, Hal, after being snowbirds for 16 years.
She credits her knowledge of native plants to her involvement with Pear Park, a 314-acre county environmental preserve near the town of Leesburg. Peg joined the Pear Association (PEAR is an acronym for Palatlakaha Environmental and Agricul-
tural Reserve) 9 years ago, and has worked as a volunteer, helping to restore various types of ecosystems. She has worked with scrub, sandhill, riverine woodlands, and wetlands ecosystems, and with the restoration of grasslands for quail, meadowlarks and other birds. Volunteers at Pear have also worked to create native demonstration, bird, and butterfly gardens featuring representative plant species that can be used for educational purposes.
Peg says of Pear Park, “and so we planted… and they came! I was able to observe and appreciate the interaction between native plants and wildlife, and learned to anticipate what animals would be attracted to the various blooming and fruiting plants over the seasons. That helped me capture them in my photo-
graphs. Fellow volunteers became used to me dropping my work and chasing after a special bird or butterfly!”
In addition to volunteering at Pear Park, Peg also created a garden at home so she could enjoy the native plants and their animal visitors in her spare time. Of her photography technique, Peg says “The key for me is to have a dependable, fast shooting camera with quick recovery and a good zoom lens. My current camera is a Canon Powershot that is two years old and already outdated, but it has been quite reliable.”
“Morning and evening light provides the best light for outdoor photography, but of course butterflies don’t know that, and they are more active in the middle of the day. My photographs come with
Golden-dewdrop Duranta erecta (Verbenaceae)
by Daniel B. Ward
The Golden-dewdrop (Duranta erecta L.) is an attractive shrub found in many South Florida ornamental plantings. Since it is so familiar in cultivation, and since most recent books treat it as an exotic, the occasional plants encountered in the wild are assumed to be introductions, not natives of Florida. But this interpretation is of recent standing. For nearly one hundred years, from the time of its first reporting to past the middle of the 20th century, influential writers thought it to be native. It is worth review of the history of this plant, to see which interpretation is most likely correct. And, incidentally, to determine its correct scientific name.
First, the name. The earliest Florida report, by A.W. Chapman (1860), cited “Duranta Plumieri Jacq.” from “South Florida.” That name, widely used in the early literature, was the work of the Austrian botanist, Baron Nikolaus Joseph von Jacquin, in 1760. By the first years of the 20th century, however, it was widely recognized that Jacquin’s name was a synonym of an earlier name, published by Carl Linnaeus in 1753. But which name? Linnaeus had published two names – Duranta repens and Duranta erecta – on the same page and on the same date, apparently of the same plant.
Priority of publication, of course, is a basic principle of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, the law book that governs how our plants are named. If all else is equal, the earliest published name is the legitimate name.
But how do you deal with two names published simultaneously? Do you select the first name listed? What if both are on the same page? (Linnaeus in 1753, toward the top of page 637, recorded Duranta repens, then immediately below it he listed Duranta erecta.) Do you pick the more appropriate epithet? (Duranta erecta is the only one that fits the upright shrubby Golden-dewdrop.) Do you choose the one with the most accurate description? (Duranta repens was described as “spinosa,” while Duranta erecta was said to be “inermis.” The Golden-dewdrop usually has spurs that can be thought
of as spines.) Do you abandon both names as “irredeemably ambiguous,” and seek immortality by making up a new name, with yourself as author?
The Code gives us the answer. Buried in its dense thicket of technical prose is Article 11.5, that “when, for any taxon of the rank of family or below, a choice is possible between legitimate names of equal priority in the corresponding rank…the first such choice to be effectively published… establishes the priority of the chosen name…over the other competing name….” More simply put, the first author to choose between the two names must be followed.
But, as they saw, the devil is in the details. This rule dates only from the mid-20th century, and any number of earlier authors may have used one of the two names and treated the other as a synonym. And of course there is no index to every use of these names throughout the world’s literature. Thus one early choice may be assumed the earliest, and is followed by reputable botanists. Then an even older publication may be found that makes the same choice, but the other way around. Proper botanists are then obligated to reverse their usage, to the confoundment (and annoyance!) of good folks who just want to know what to call the plant.
The situation wasn’t helped by Linnaeus himself. Ten years later, in 1763 he used Jacquin’s name, Duranta Plumieri, and cited his own two names a synonyms. Why he did so we now can’t say. But priority of publication hadn’t yet become thought of as important, and Linnaeus may have believed that Jacquin had better information than his own. In any event, the prestige of Linnaeus led to Jacquin’s name being used by nearly all early botanists.
However, as the importance of fixed rules of nomenclature gained popularity in the late 19th century, with priority a fundamental principal, authors dug back into the earliest publications and resurrected many long-forgotten names. They came upon an 1891 paper by Carl Ernst Otto Kuntze, a German botanist and gadabout described by the staid
authors of Taxonomic Literature (1979) as a “polemic nomenclatural reformer,” who used Duranta repens, with D. erecta as a synonym. R.W. Sanders (1984), then at Fairchild Tropical Botanic Garden, in his careful synopsis of the species and hybrids of Duranta, accepted this basis for D. repens. Under the assumption that the problem had been resolved, nearly all botanists then dropped D. Plumieri and took up Duranta repens. That is the name you will find in most 20th century floras and horticultural guides, the name we have all used for so long.
Then Gail Bromley (1984), a nomenclaturalist at Kew, England, published a brief note, turning these names upside down. It appears there was an earlier writer who in 1877 combined the two names for a single species – a littleremembered English botanist, William Hiern, and it wasn’t surprising his action had been overlooked, for he buried it in a treatment of Brazilian plants published in an obscure Copenhagen journal. But, unequivocally, he had used Duranta erecta, and had listed D. repens as a synonym.
It has taken, now, nearly two decades for Bromley’s report to percolate its way into American botany. Only within recent years have a few floristic writers (cf. Wunderlin, 1998) switched to Duranta erecta. What we must now fervently hope is that no eager researcher discovers a still earlier publication favoring D. repens!
With an understanding now in hand as to why we use Duranta erecta as the scientific name of the Golden-dewdrop, it is time to turn to determination of its status as either native or introduced into Florida. As noted, A.W. Chapman (1860) reported the plant from “South Florida.” By that reference he almost surely meant Key West, the home of John Blodgett, a physician who sent plants to Chapman in Apalachicola and to Dr. John Torrey in New York. [Torrey’s collections formed the nucleus for what is now the magnificent herbarium of the New York Botanical Garden.] Chapman visited Blodgett once, in the 1840s, but obviously remained in close correspondence with him until Blodgett’s death in 1853. [For an excellent, comprehensive account of these early Florida botanists, see Wunderlin & Hansen, 2000.]
Chapman, by and large, had no interest in cultivated plants. His publications addressed only species he found in the wild, though sometimes he noted them to be only in the vicinity of habitations. The words “native,” “introduced,” “exotic,” “escaped”, etc., were unfamiliar to him. Thus one must read between the lines to interpret his phrase “South Florida.” Surely, in the absence of any qualifying comment, he thought the plant to grow without cultivation, either from his own observation in the 1840s or that of Dr. Blodgett.
Chapman’s report – with the same interpretation as given here – and Blodgett’s few specimens sent to John Torrey (now in New York) may be been all that was available to other floristic writers. J.K. Small’s voluminous but hurriedly written Flora of the Southeastern United States (1903) relied almost exclusively on Chapman’s books and on the then-sparse collections of the New York Botanical Garden – this was before the days of Small’s extensive personal botanical ventures in Florida –and he accepted the plant as native. In Small’s better-known (and better written!) later flora (1933), he unequivocally reported Duranta repens from “hammocks, Everglade Keys, Fla. And Florida Keys.”
Harold N. Moldenke, who devoted many years to an exhaustive study of the Verbenaceae, and who as a young man often visited South Florida, in 1944 reported Goldendewdrop (as D. repens) only “in cultivation” in Miami.
Then came a book, now remembered by its old friends, Erdman West and Lillian Arnold’s The Native Trees of Florida (1946). This book, the first popular guide to Florida’s trees, was reprinted many times (through 1956) and was influential as an independent (and illustrated!) documentation by
Duranta erecta – photo by Marjorie Shropshire
Florida-based botanists. And West & Arnold, not only by the title of their publication (“Native…”), but by their text (“native only in the Everglade Keys and the Florida Keys”), effectively established the plant as a Florida native.
The inimitable George Avery, long resident and keen observer of the South Florida flora, frequently encountered Golden-dewdrop on his rambles. His observations are recorded in a series of meticulous notebooks, zealously guarded at Fairchild (with a copy given to D.B.W.). By his notations it is clear he considered the plant to be part of our flora. He found it in dooryards and plantings, on Key West, Summerland, and Sugarloaf. And in a hammock at Redlands, south Dade, on 1 June 1967, he encountered what he called “native plants.”
Avery’s use of “native” should not be interpreted as reflecting to him what we think of by that term. We must keep in mind that the significance of “native” is of recent origin; Avery surely no more thought of the Redlands plants as of pre-Columbian origin that he did of the “conchs” on Key West. We would now likely call the Redlands plants “escaped” or “naturalized,” and as such he is correct, of course, in treating them as part of our flora.
And some years ago the present writer contentedly accepted Duranta repens as a member of the state’s native tree flora (Ward, 1991).
But then, slowly, individuals with personal knowledge of South Florida botany began to raise the question of Golden-dewdrop’s nativity. E. L. Little, taxonomist for the United States Forest Service, in his first checklist (1953), had accepted Duranta repens as native. Probably following West & Arnold, Little correctly noted it to be “usually seen only as a shrub,” and included it as a small-type addendum. Then in his revised checklist (1979) he qualified his statement even further by suggesting it to be “perhaps introduced.”
Barry Tomlinson (1980), then based at Fairchild Tropical Botanic Garden, addressing the biology of native trees, mentioned the species – apparently indicating his acceptance of it as a tree – but said it “occasionally volunteers” and omitted it from his list of native species.
Other observers of the South Florida flora supported the belief that Golden-dewdrop is only introduced. Daniel F. Austin and Roy Woodbury (pers. comm., Nov. 1993) agreed that it never occurs in undisturbed locations. And in preparation of the present text, rather extensive questioning of other knowledgeable South Florida botanists turned up nobody who could cite where the plant was to be found in an undisturbed place.
And that observation – that there is no undisturbed habitat in Florida where Golden-dewdrop may be expected to occur – is the definitive datum excluding the plant from the native flora. A plant species – if it is truly native – must have a niche where it is at home, where one can expect to find it, where it is a stable part of the indigenous flora. A plant that is sometimes present, sometimes not, whose numbers either increase rapidly or soon disappear, and whose value as an ornamental can explain the waifs that are found outside of cultivation, is almost surely not native.
I wish to thank Daniel F. Austin and the late Roy Woodbury for their personal observations of our South Florida flora.
References Cited
Bromley, G.L.R. 1984. Duranta repens versus D. erecta (Verbenaceae). Kew Bull. 39:803-804.
Chapman, A.W. 1860. Flora of the Southeastern United States. New York. 621 pp.
Jacquin, N.J. 1760. Enumeratio Systemica Plantarum. Leiden. Linnaeus, C. 1753. Species Plantarum. Stockholm. 1200 pp.
Linnaeus, C. 1763. Species Plantarum, ed. 2. Stockholm. 1684 pp.
Little, E.L. 1953. Checklist of Native and Naturalized Trees of the United States. Agric. Handbook no. 41. 472 pp.
Little, E.L. 1979. Checklist of United States Trees. U.S. Dept. Agric. handb. 541. 375 pp.
Moldenke, H.N. 1944. A contribution to our knowledge of the wild and cultivated flora of Florida - 1. Amer. Midl. Nat. 32:529-590.
Sanders, R.W. 1984. Provisional synopsis of the species and natural hybrids in Duranta (Verbenaceae). Sida 10:308-318
Small, J.K. 1903. Flora of the Southeastern United States. New York. 1370 pp.
Small, J.K. 1933. Manual of the Southeastern Flora. Published by the author, New York. 1554 pp.
Stafleu, F.A. & R.S. Cowan. 1979. Taxonomic Literature, vol. II. Utrecht.
Tomlinson, P.B. 1980. The Biology of Trees Native to Tropical Florida. Harvard University, Petersham, Mass. 480 pp.
Ward, D.B. 1991. Checklist of the trees native to Florida. Palmetto 10:8-12.
Ward, D.B. 2003. Native or Not: Studies of problematic species. No. 1: Introduction. Palmetto 22(2): 7-9.
West, E. & L. E. Arnold. 1946. The Native Trees of Florida. Univ. of Florida Press, Gainesville, 218 pp.
Wunderlin, R.P. 1998. Guide to the vascular plants of Florida. Univ. Presses of Florida, Gainesville. 806 pp.
Wunderlin, R. P & B.F. Hansen. 2000. Flora of Florida. Vol. 1, Pteridophytes and Gymnosperms. Univ. Press of Florida, Gainesville. 365 pp.
About the Author
Dr. Dan Ward is Professor Emeritus at the University of Florida.
NativesAction in
a price – sweating in the hot sun and discomfort from the awkward positions I get into while stalking butterflies, but its well worth it.”
Peg closes by saying, “its been a blessing to me to be a part of establishing natural areas for wildlife to thrive, and to be able to capture the results to share with others. I hope that people enjoy seeing the photographs, and learn from them as well.”
Volunteers work in cooperation with Lake County Parks and Trails and receive financial support from Pear Association dues. Donations and grants from Lake County Water Authority, Florida Native Plant Society, National Tree Trust, Florida Wildflower Foundation, and
The United States Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission also support the park. Additional support was received from the Central Florida Woman’s Club, various local garden clubs, and scout troops. The local chapter of the Florida Native Plant Society (Lake Beautyberry) provided knowledge, support, and plant donations.
About the Artist
Peg Urban is a member of The Florida Native Plant Society, National Audubon Society, and in 2002 took a Florida Master Naturalist course through The University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS)
For information on Pear Park, visit www.pearassoc.org.
Photos, clockwise from top:
Pinewoods milkweed (Asclepias humistrata) and queen butterfly; luna moth on sweetgum; rough green snake in plum; monarch pupa on coontie.
Wildflowers of Tennessee, the Ohio Valley, and the Southern Appalachians
Review by Paul Rebmann
A fourteen-year project of the Tennessee Native Plant Society culminated in 2005 with the publication of Wildflowers of Tennessee, the Ohio Valley, and the Southern Appalachians. This is an exceptional wildflower field guide for the region covered. Even though Florida is not included, the book does feature some of our natives, and many panhandle species. FNPS members traveling to Tennessee and other southeastern states will find this guide very useful in wildflower identification. The 5-1/2 by 8-1/2 inch size and plasticized paperback cover make this nearly 500 page book both handy and fairly durable for use in the field.
Near the front of the book is a 15 page color key of small wildflower photos. These thumbnails are captioned with the common name and page number to lead the reader to the full species description. The main body includes descriptions of 1,250 species and varieties, grouped by family. These include all of the Asclepias and Trillium species that occur in Tennessee, most of the orchids, and many rare wildflowers endemic to particular habitats, such as the cedar glades of the central basin. There is not an overall dichotomous key, but keys are included for 12 of the more complex families: Apiaceae, Asteraceae, Brassicaceae, Ericaceae, Fabaceae, Lamiaceae, Liliaceae, Orchidaceae, Ranunculaceae, Rosaceae, Saxifragaceae and Scrophulariaceae. These keys include line drawings to aid in identification. There is a single
comprehensive index of common and scientific names.
Wildflowers of Tennessee, the Ohio Valley, and the Southern Appalachians by Dennis Horn, Tavia Cathcart, Thomas E. Hemmerly and David Duhl
Lone Pine Publishing, Auburn, Washington
ISBN: 1-55105-428-0$22.95
The strength of any guidebook is in the species descriptions and this one is an Olympic contender. Most pages have two entries, each of these includes the common and scientific names of the wildflower, synonyms if appropriate, and a photograph. The text begins with general information about the type of plant, overall height and other important features. This is followed by descriptions of the leaves, flowers and fruit. Significant identifying features of the plant or its various parts are in bold text to assist in quickly finding these key traits. The flowering times listed are not just for Tennessee, but for the entire range. ‘Where found’ is next, describing the overall range of the species. If it is not native to Tennessee the origin will be given and the scientific name in the header will be followed by an asterisk. Frequency of occurrence is based on in how many counties in Tennessee the species is found. Similar species are then briefly described, with significant differences in bold text. The description ends with various notes about the plant or its family, the habitat, other common names, origin of name, historic uses or any other interesting relevant fact. In the glossary section there are a series of line drawings down the sides of the pages. Some are those often found in wildflower guides: flower parts, inflorescence types, leaf shapes, types and margins. Also included are others less frequently found: leaf apices, bases, and attachments, surface features, corolla
shapes, ovary position, and fruit types.
A section of this book provides information about Tennessee, Native Americans that lived in the state, ethnobotany, field botanizing – both historic and current – the Tennessee Native Plant Society, the project that created this field guide, and plant conservation. The three grand divisions of Tennessee are described, followed by the physiographic provinces and sub-provinces that make up the state’s geography and habitats. This excellent field guide was created by volunteers – many from the Tennessee Native Plant Society – with the help of donations from various organizations and individuals. This book was part of the Flora 2001 Project to commemorate the 100th anniversary of Dr. Augustin Gattinger’s Flora of Tennessee and Philosophy of Botany, published in 1901. A Fifth Checklist of Tennessee Vascular Plants was published last summer with the financial assistance of TNPS, and proceeds from the sale of Wildflowers of Tennessee, the Ohio Valley, and the Southern Appalachians. will go towards a project to publish a manual of Tennessee flora.
About the Author
A Tennessee native, Paul Rebmann has been a long-time resident of Florida and FNPS member, now serving as FNPS Webmaster. Paul is a parttime nature photographer, a full-time network administrator and is currently enrolled in the Florida Master Naturalist Program.
Ghosts of the Hammocks
Voyria parasitica
by Jim Drake
The sky was gray with clouds threatening to produce an extended downpour at any moment on that mid-November day as I drove my rental car from Miami International Airport toward that Miami-Dade County Park. My mission was to see and hopefully photograph rare ghosts. The overcast sky would provide less than ideal conditions for photography, but no matter, the ghosts would be hiding deep in the darkened hammocks, anyway. Fortunately, park botanist, Cristina Rodriguez, had already scouted out some locations, knew just where to find them, had agreed to meet at the park and lead me to a site. Rain or shine, I was not about to miss this opportunity to capture (digitally) some of these state-listed apparitions.
My affinity for Gentianaceae had begun months earlier in the mountains of north Georgia during an encounter with rare fringed gentians (Gentianopsis crinita). Following this epiphany, my goal became compiling a folio encompassing that entire family of the Eastern U.S. The ensuing months were filled with road and air trips to various sites in search of far flung members of this family, and I was now closing in on one of the rarer and more highly unusual members.
Parasitic ghost plant [Voyria parasitica (Schltdl. & Cham.) Ruyters & Maas], a tropical species, occurs within the States in a few sites only in the two Florida counties of Miami-Dade and in the keys of Monroe. Superficially, ghost plant may not appear to be related to such cousins as blue bottle gentians, but experts in plant systematics say it’s so.
On arrival at the park, the rain was still holding off and the sky seemed to lighten a bit. After we entered the suspect hammock, a few plants became visible –then more until a respectable number stood posing for photographs. Many of the diminutive, 4-6 inch tall, creamcolored, non-chlorophyll bearing stems terminated in cymes of tiny whitish blooms. Seemingly misunderstood, this frail plant lives off the nutrients of decomposing leaf litter in a saprophytic, not parasitic relationship.
A bevy of shutter clicks resulting in numerous plant images ended with a fond farewell to one of Florida’s most interesting natural parks. This successful adventure made the return flight to Atlanta much more pleasurable.
Acknowledgements and special appreciation
Without the insight of the legendary botanist, naturalist, author and photographer Roger Hammer and the excellent assistance of Miami-Dade County Park and Recreation Department’s Christine Sexton, Pam Rose, Jennifer Possley and Cristina Rodriguez, botanist superb, I would not have had the pleasure of seeing first hand and photographing the unique ghost plant.
Bibliography
Coile, N.C., and M.A. Garland. 2003. Notes on Florida’s endangered and threatened plants (29 January 2005). Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry, Florida. Accessed online 1 January 2010: http://www.doacs.state.fl.us/pi/enpp/botany/images/Notes2003.pdf
Hammer, Roger L. 2004. Florida Keys Wildflowers. A Field Guide to Wildflowers, Trees, Shrubs, and Woody Vines of the Florida Keys. Guilford, CT, Helena MT. A Falcon Guide. The Globe Pequot Press.
Struwe, Lena, and Victor A. Albert (eds.). 2002. Gentianaceae. Systematics and Natural History. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
USDA, NRCS. 2010. The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov, 1 January 2010). National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA. Accessed online 1 January 2010: http://plants.usda.gov/java/profile?symbol=VOPA
Voyria parasitica – photo by Jim Drake
The Florida Native Plant Society PO Box 278 Melbourne FL 32902-0278
FNPS Chapters and Representatives
For chapter contact information, visit www.fnps.org. Go to Join FNPS and click on the Find a Chapter link.
1. Citrus .............................Jim Bierly ........................................jbierly@tampabay.rr.com
2. Coccoloba ......................Dick Workman .................................wworkmandick@aol.com
3. Cocoplum .......................Anne Cox.........................................anne.cox@bellsouth.net
4. Conradina .......................Vince Lamb .....................................vince@advanta-tech.com
5. Coontie ...........................Kirk Scott .......................................kirkel1@yahoo.com
6. Dade ..............................Lynka Woodbury ..............................lwoodbury@fairchildgarden.org
7. Eugenia ..........................Sue Thompson ................................susandjesse@bellsouth.net
8. Heartland .......................Amee Bailey ....................................ameebailey@polk-county.net
9. Hernando .......................Jim Clayton .....................................geoska10@hotmail.com
10. Ixia .................................Jake Ingram ....................................jakeingramla@comcast.net
11. Lake Beautyberry ...........Peg Lindsay.....................................pegcondor@embarqmail.com
12. Lakelas Mint ...................Ann Marie Loveridge .......................loveridges@comcast.net
13. Longleaf Pine .................Amy Hines .......................................amy@sidestreamsports.com Cheryl Jones ...................................wjonesmd@yahoo.com
14. Lyonia .............................David Schroeder ..............................evolvinglandscapes@yahoo.com
15. Magnolia ........................Ann Redmond .................................aredmond@mindspring.com
16. Mangrove .......................Al Squires .......................................ahsquires@embarqmail.com
17. Marion ............................Robin Caple ....................................robincaple@comcast.net
18. Naples ............................Ron Echols ......................................preservecaptains@aol.com
19. Nature Coast ..................Susan Vaughn .................................vaughn_s@firn.edu
20. Palm Beach ....................Lynn Sweetay ..................................lynnsweetay@hotmail.com
21. Pawpaw .........................Elizabeth Flynn ................................eliflynn@cfl.rr.com
22. Paynes Prairie ................Heather Blake .................................butterflygirlh@yahoo.com
23. Pine Lily .........................Christina Uranowski ........................curanowski@aol.com
24. Pinellas ..........................Debbie Chayet .................................dchayet@verizon.net
25. Sarracenia ......................Lee Norris .......................................lnorris@ectinc.com
26. Sea Oats .........................Jill Ziebell ........................................jziebell@bellsouth.net
27. Sea Rocket ....................Paul Schmalzer ...............................paul.a.schmalzer@nasa.gov
28. Seminole ........................Deborah Green ................................watermediaservices@mac.com
29. Serenoa ..........................Dave Feagles...................................feaglesd@msn.com
30. South Ridge .................... Volunteer Needed ............................executivedirector@fnps.org
31. Sumter ...........................Carol Jean Miller .............................caroljean_miller@comcast.net
32. Suncoast .......................Troy Springer ...................................president@suncoastNPS.org
33. Sweet Bay .....................Ina Crawford ...................................ina.crawford@tyndall.af.mil
34. Tarflower ........................Jackie Rolly .....................................j.y.rolly@att.net
Volunteer opportunity: volunteer needed for Okaloosa/Walton County area.