跨越全球的多样性:十九世纪早期美国植物园的物种选择

IF 0.1 3区 艺术学 0 ARCHITECTURE
R. Loeb, Taylor N. Walborn, Alaina J. Leasure, Joelle D. Manners, Richard P. Massimino, Olivia A. Mcgraw
{"title":"跨越全球的多样性:十九世纪早期美国植物园的物种选择","authors":"R. Loeb, Taylor N. Walborn, Alaina J. Leasure, Joelle D. Manners, Richard P. Massimino, Olivia A. Mcgraw","doi":"10.1080/14601176.2022.2097429","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This research compared early nineteenth-century species lists from the Elgin Botanic Garden, New York; Cambridge Botanic Garden, Massachusetts; Botanick Garden of South-Carolina; Botanical Garden of Transylvania University, Kentucky; and Bartram’s Botanic Garden, Pennsylvania (two lists). Diversity was shown by more species being unique in each botanical garden than species common to the five botanical gardens. Global representation was demonstrated with species from all of the continents (excluding Antarctica) and the Cape of Good Hope region in the botanical gardens except the Botanick Garden of South-Carolina, which did not have Australian species. Only Bartram’s Botanic Garden US market list did not have twice as many species reported to be hardy in the New York City climate than species requiring a greenhouse. There were more herbaceous than woody plants in five of the six lists with the exception again being the Bartram’s Botanic Garden US market list. Among the uses agriculture, arts, diet, and medicine, only medicine comprised more than 25% of the species in the five botanical gardens except the Botanical Garden of Transylvania University. For all six lists, the historical information on hardiness and duration matched modern information for more than 75% of the species; however, native region matches were less than 75% for African species.","PeriodicalId":53992,"journal":{"name":"STUDIES IN THE HISTORY OF GARDENS & DESIGNED LANDSCAPES","volume":"42 1","pages":"67 - 119"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Spanning the globe for diversity: species selection in early nineteenth century United States botanical gardens\",\"authors\":\"R. Loeb, Taylor N. Walborn, Alaina J. Leasure, Joelle D. Manners, Richard P. Massimino, Olivia A. Mcgraw\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14601176.2022.2097429\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This research compared early nineteenth-century species lists from the Elgin Botanic Garden, New York; Cambridge Botanic Garden, Massachusetts; Botanick Garden of South-Carolina; Botanical Garden of Transylvania University, Kentucky; and Bartram’s Botanic Garden, Pennsylvania (two lists). Diversity was shown by more species being unique in each botanical garden than species common to the five botanical gardens. Global representation was demonstrated with species from all of the continents (excluding Antarctica) and the Cape of Good Hope region in the botanical gardens except the Botanick Garden of South-Carolina, which did not have Australian species. Only Bartram’s Botanic Garden US market list did not have twice as many species reported to be hardy in the New York City climate than species requiring a greenhouse. There were more herbaceous than woody plants in five of the six lists with the exception again being the Bartram’s Botanic Garden US market list. Among the uses agriculture, arts, diet, and medicine, only medicine comprised more than 25% of the species in the five botanical gardens except the Botanical Garden of Transylvania University. For all six lists, the historical information on hardiness and duration matched modern information for more than 75% of the species; however, native region matches were less than 75% for African species.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53992,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"STUDIES IN THE HISTORY OF GARDENS & DESIGNED LANDSCAPES\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"67 - 119\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"STUDIES IN THE HISTORY OF GARDENS & DESIGNED LANDSCAPES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2022.2097429\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"艺术学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ARCHITECTURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"STUDIES IN THE HISTORY OF GARDENS & DESIGNED LANDSCAPES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2022.2097429","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:本研究比较了19世纪初纽约埃尔金植物园的物种列表;马萨诸塞州剑桥植物园;南卡罗来纳州植物园;美国肯塔基州特兰西瓦尼亚大学植物园;宾夕法尼亚州的巴特拉姆植物园(Bartram’s Botanic Garden)(两张名单)。多样性表现为各植物园特有的物种多于5个植物园共有的物种。除了南卡罗莱纳植物园(Botanick Garden of south carolina)没有澳大利亚物种外,全球所有大陆(南极洲除外)和好望角地区的植物园都有物种。据报道,只有巴特拉姆植物园的美国市场名单上,在纽约市气候下耐寒的物种数量不是需要温室的物种数量的两倍。六份名单中有五份草本植物比木本植物多,唯一的例外是巴特拉姆植物园美国市场名单。在农业、艺术、饮食和医学的用途中,除了特兰西瓦尼亚大学植物园外,五个植物园中只有医学占了25%以上的物种。在所有六个名单中,75%以上物种的耐寒性和持续时间的历史信息与现代信息相匹配;然而,非洲物种的本地匹配率不到75%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Spanning the globe for diversity: species selection in early nineteenth century United States botanical gardens
Abstract This research compared early nineteenth-century species lists from the Elgin Botanic Garden, New York; Cambridge Botanic Garden, Massachusetts; Botanick Garden of South-Carolina; Botanical Garden of Transylvania University, Kentucky; and Bartram’s Botanic Garden, Pennsylvania (two lists). Diversity was shown by more species being unique in each botanical garden than species common to the five botanical gardens. Global representation was demonstrated with species from all of the continents (excluding Antarctica) and the Cape of Good Hope region in the botanical gardens except the Botanick Garden of South-Carolina, which did not have Australian species. Only Bartram’s Botanic Garden US market list did not have twice as many species reported to be hardy in the New York City climate than species requiring a greenhouse. There were more herbaceous than woody plants in five of the six lists with the exception again being the Bartram’s Botanic Garden US market list. Among the uses agriculture, arts, diet, and medicine, only medicine comprised more than 25% of the species in the five botanical gardens except the Botanical Garden of Transylvania University. For all six lists, the historical information on hardiness and duration matched modern information for more than 75% of the species; however, native region matches were less than 75% for African species.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: Studies in the History of Gardens & Designed Landscapes addresses itself to readers with a serious interest in the subject, and is now established as the main place in which to publish scholarly work on all aspects of garden history. The journal"s main emphasis is on detailed and documentary analysis of specific sites in all parts of the world, with focus on both design and reception. The journal is also specifically interested in garden and landscape history as part of wider contexts such as social and cultural history and geography, aesthetics, technology, (most obviously horticulture), presentation and conservation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信