寻找玛土撒拉:一个古老故事的新光

IF 1.1 4区 农林科学 Q3 FORESTRY
Daniel W. Pritchett
{"title":"寻找玛土撒拉:一个古老故事的新光","authors":"Daniel W. Pritchett","doi":"10.3959/TRR2019-10b","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Edmund Schulman is rightly honored for quantifying the age of bristlecone pines and discovering individuals significantly older than giant sequoias (Sequoiadendron gigantea), previously thought to be the oldest living things. However, George Engelmann inferred the potential for great age in his description of bristlecone pine (Pinus aristata) almost a century before, in 1863. Staff from Inyo National Forest re-made Engelmann's inference, and publically asserted that White Mountain bristlecones might outlive giant sequoias before Schulman had published any results of his bristlecone research. Schulman sampled White Mountains pines after seeing a photograph and caption associated with an article by founders of the University of California White Mountain Research Station. Although Schulman's correspondence and publications make this clear, incorrect theories regarding his decision to come to the White Mountains have been published and are promulgated at the Schulman Grove Visitor Center in the White Mountains. This paper places Schulman's work in its historic context by recovering forgotten information about attempts by Inyo National Forest staff and White Mountain Research Station to call attention to the trees. It also recovers details of Schulman's and C. Wesley Ferguson's activities in the White Mountains range as documented in field notes and Thomas Harlan's Bristlecone Pine Project database.","PeriodicalId":54416,"journal":{"name":"Tree-Ring Research","volume":"77 1","pages":"20 - 31"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Finding Methuselah: New Light on an Old Story\",\"authors\":\"Daniel W. Pritchett\",\"doi\":\"10.3959/TRR2019-10b\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Edmund Schulman is rightly honored for quantifying the age of bristlecone pines and discovering individuals significantly older than giant sequoias (Sequoiadendron gigantea), previously thought to be the oldest living things. However, George Engelmann inferred the potential for great age in his description of bristlecone pine (Pinus aristata) almost a century before, in 1863. Staff from Inyo National Forest re-made Engelmann's inference, and publically asserted that White Mountain bristlecones might outlive giant sequoias before Schulman had published any results of his bristlecone research. Schulman sampled White Mountains pines after seeing a photograph and caption associated with an article by founders of the University of California White Mountain Research Station. Although Schulman's correspondence and publications make this clear, incorrect theories regarding his decision to come to the White Mountains have been published and are promulgated at the Schulman Grove Visitor Center in the White Mountains. This paper places Schulman's work in its historic context by recovering forgotten information about attempts by Inyo National Forest staff and White Mountain Research Station to call attention to the trees. It also recovers details of Schulman's and C. Wesley Ferguson's activities in the White Mountains range as documented in field notes and Thomas Harlan's Bristlecone Pine Project database.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54416,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tree-Ring Research\",\"volume\":\"77 1\",\"pages\":\"20 - 31\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tree-Ring Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3959/TRR2019-10b\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"FORESTRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tree-Ring Research","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3959/TRR2019-10b","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"FORESTRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

埃德蒙·舒尔曼(Edmund Schulman)因量化狐尾松的年龄并发现比巨红杉(Sequoiadendron gigantea)更古老的个体而获得荣誉,而巨红杉此前被认为是最古老的生物。然而,乔治·恩格尔曼(George Engelmann)在大约一个世纪前的1863年,在他对狐尾松(Pinus aristata)的描述中,推断出了狐尾松的潜在年龄。英约国家森林的工作人员重新提出了恩格尔曼的推论,并在舒尔曼发表狐尾树的任何研究结果之前,公开断言白山狐尾树可能比巨红杉活得更久。舒尔曼在看到加州大学白山研究站创始人的一篇文章的照片和标题后,对白山松树进行了取样。虽然舒尔曼的信件和出版物清楚地说明了这一点,但关于他决定来怀特山脉的错误理论已经在怀特山脉的舒尔曼格罗夫游客中心出版和传播。这篇论文通过恢复被遗忘的信息,将舒尔曼的工作置于其历史背景中,这些信息是关于因约国家森林工作人员和白山研究站试图唤起人们对树木的关注。它还恢复了Schulman和C. Wesley Ferguson在怀特山脉活动的细节,这些细节记录在野外笔记和Thomas Harlan的狐尾松项目数据库中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Finding Methuselah: New Light on an Old Story
ABSTRACT Edmund Schulman is rightly honored for quantifying the age of bristlecone pines and discovering individuals significantly older than giant sequoias (Sequoiadendron gigantea), previously thought to be the oldest living things. However, George Engelmann inferred the potential for great age in his description of bristlecone pine (Pinus aristata) almost a century before, in 1863. Staff from Inyo National Forest re-made Engelmann's inference, and publically asserted that White Mountain bristlecones might outlive giant sequoias before Schulman had published any results of his bristlecone research. Schulman sampled White Mountains pines after seeing a photograph and caption associated with an article by founders of the University of California White Mountain Research Station. Although Schulman's correspondence and publications make this clear, incorrect theories regarding his decision to come to the White Mountains have been published and are promulgated at the Schulman Grove Visitor Center in the White Mountains. This paper places Schulman's work in its historic context by recovering forgotten information about attempts by Inyo National Forest staff and White Mountain Research Station to call attention to the trees. It also recovers details of Schulman's and C. Wesley Ferguson's activities in the White Mountains range as documented in field notes and Thomas Harlan's Bristlecone Pine Project database.
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
Tree-Ring Research
Tree-Ring Research 农林科学-林学
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
15
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: Tree-Ring Research (TRR) is devoted to papers dealing with the growth rings of trees and the applications of tree-ring research in a wide variety of fields, including but not limited to archaeology, geology, ecology, hydrology, climatology, forestry, and botany. Papers involving research results, new techniques of data acquisition or analysis, and regional or subject-oriented reviews or syntheses are considered for publication. Scientific papers usually fall into two main categories. Articles should not exceed 5000 words, or approximately 20 double-spaced typewritten pages, including tables, references, and an abstract of 200 words or fewer. All manuscripts submitted as Articles are reviewed by at least two referees. Research Reports, which are usually reviewed by at least one outside referee, should not exceed 1500 words or include more than two figures. Research Reports address technical developments, describe well-documented but preliminary research results, or present findings for which the Article format is not appropriate. Book or monograph Reviews of 500 words or less are also considered. Other categories of papers are occasionally published. All papers are published only in English. Abstracts of the Articles or Reports may be printed in other languages if supplied by the author(s) with English translations.
×
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