Plant Taxonomy and Modern Systematics

Bcing based upan organic evolution and the synthesis of a11 facets of plant hiology, systematics should function as a unifier of botanical science. After a decade and a half oi teaching, I have wondered what we should try to teach in systematics. WhaL problems ~hould he emphasized? Our fie\d has been chang. ing very rapidl}'. Thc points of cm-phasis of the 1950's are now being rc· placed by olhers. Cherished dogmas are hcing challenged, and wholly new eoo-cepts and sources of data are bcing introduced. No longer is it possible to teach modern systematics to students who lack a grounding in general sciences and the variOliS disciplincs of botany. This is perhaps unfortunate, because a knowl-edge of plants, which forms the nuc1eus of thc subjcet matter. makcs an cxccllent framework for the analytical studies of cytology, physiology, etc. This is the problem of presenling biology as a wholc: Do we go from thc organism to its parts, or from the parts to the organism? The problem has not yet been resolved and perhaps never will be. The pendulum swings back and forth. Currendy the custom in collcges and universities is to start out with molecular biology, genetics, physiology,;md other analytical or reductionist ~ub jects. When this curricular sequence is adopted, systcmatic botany bccomes The nuthol ' i8 Director oI the Botanicol Gardens and Professor of Botany at the University o