Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
|
See also:BOTANY (from Gr. l3or6v17, plant; ,66vicety, to graze) , the See also:science which includes everything See also:relating to the See also:vegetable See also:kingdom, whether in a living or in a fossil See also:state . It embraces a See also:consideration of the See also:external forms of See also:plants—of their anatomical structure, however See also:minute—of the functions which they perform —of their arrangement and See also:classification--of their See also:distribution over the globe at the See also:present and at former epochs—and of the uses to which they are subservient . It examines the plant in its earliest state of development, and follows it through all its stages of progress until it attains maturity . It takes a comprehensive view of all the plants which See also:cover the See also:earth, from the minutest organism, only visible by the aid of the See also:microscope, to the most gigantic productions of the tropics . It marks the relations which subsist between all members of the plant See also:world, including those between existing See also:groups and those which are known only from their fossilized remains preserved in the rocks . We See also:deal here with the See also:history and See also:evolution of the science . The plants which adorn the globe more or less in all countries must necessarily have attracted the See also:attention of mankind from the earliest times . The science that treats of them See also:dates back to the days of See also:Solomon, who " spake of trees, from the See also:cedar of See also:Lebanon to the See also:hyssop on the See also:wall." The Chaldaeans, Egyptians and Greeks were the See also:early cultivators of science, and See also:botany was not neglected, although the study of it was mixed up with crude speculations as to vegetable See also:life, and as to the See also:change of plants into animals . About 300 years before See also:Christ See also:Theophrastus wrote a History of Plants, and described about 500 See also:species used for the treatment of diseases . Dioscorides, a See also:Greek writer, who appears to have flourished about the See also:time of See also:Nero, issued a See also:work on Materia Medica . The See also:elder See also:Pliny described about a thousand plants, many of them famous for their medicinal virtues . See also:Asiatic and Arabian writers also took up this subject .
Little, however, was done in the science of botany, properly so called, until the 16th See also:century of the See also:Christian era, when the revival of learning dispelled the darkness which had See also:long hung over See also:Europe
.
See also:Otto Brunfels, a physician of See also:Bern, has been looked upon as the restorer of the science in Europe
.
In his See also:Herbarium, printed at See also:Strassburg (1530-1536), he gave descriptions of a large number of plants, chiefly those of central Europe, illustrated by beautiful woodcuts
.
He was followed by other writers,—Leonhard See also:Fuchs, whose Historia Stirpium (See also:Basel, 1542) is worthy of See also:special See also:note for its excellent woodcuts; Hieronymus Bock, whose Kreutter See also:Buch appeared in 1539; and See also:
About the See also:year 167o Dr See also:Robert See also:Morison (162o-1683), the first See also:professor of botany at See also:Oxford, published a systematic arrangement of plants, largely on the lines previously suggested by Caesalpinus
.
He divided them into eighteen classes, distinguishing plants according as they were woody or herbaceous, and taking into See also:account the nature of the See also:flowers and fruit
.
In 1690 Rivinus 2 promulgated a classification founded chiefly on the forms of the flowers
.
J
.
P. de Tournefort3 (1656–1708), who about the same time took up the subject of vegetable taxonomy, was long at the See also:head of the See also:French school of botany, and published a systematic arrangement in 1694-1700
.
He described about 8000 species of plants, and distributed them into twenty-two classes, chiefly according to the See also:form of the corolla, distinguishing herbs and under-shrubs on the one See also:hand from trees and shrubs on the other
.
The system of See also:Tournefort was for a long time adopted on the See also:continent, but was ultimately displaced by that of Carl von Linne, or Linnaeus (q.v.; 1707-1778)
.
The system of Linnaeus was founded on characters derived from the stamens and pistils, the so-called sexual See also:organs of the See also:flower, and hence it is often called the sexual system
.
It is an artificial method, because it takes into account only a few marked characters in plants, and does not propose to unite them by natural affinities
.
It is an See also:index to a See also:department of the See also:book of nature, and as such is useful to the student
.
It does not aspire to any higher See also:character, and although it cannot be looked upon as a scientific and natural arrangement, still it has a certain facility of application which at once commended it
.
It does not of itself give the student a view of the true relations of plants, and by leading to the See also:discovery of the name of a plant, it is only a stepping-See also:
Linnaeus himself claimed nothing higher for it
.
He says—" Methodi Naturalis fragmenta studiose inquirenda sunt
.
Primum et ultimum hoc in botanicis desideratum est
.
Natura non facit saltus
.
Plantae omnes utrinque affinitatem monstrant, uti territorium in mappa geographica." Accordingly, besides his artificial index, he also promulgated fragments of a natural method of arrangement
.
The Linnean system was strongly supported by See also:Sir See also: Gardens also early existed at Florence and See also:Bologna . The See also:Montpellier garden was founded in 1592, that of See also:Giessen in 1605, of Strassburg in 1620, of See also:Altdorf in 1625, and of See also:Jena in 1629 . The Jardin See also:des Plantes at See also:Paris was, established in 1626, and the See also:Upsala garden in 1627 . The botanic garden at Oxford was founded in 1632 . The garden at See also:Edinburgh was founded by Sir See also:Andrew See also:Balfour and Sir Robert See also:Sibbald in 167o, and, under the name of the Physic Garden, was placed under the superintendence of James See also:Sutherland, afterwards professor of botany in the university . The garden at See also:Kew dates from about 1730, when See also:Frederick, See also:prince of See also:Wales, obtained a long See also:lease of Kew See also:House and its gardens from the See also:Capel See also:family . After his See also:death in 1751 his widow, Princess See also:Augusta of See also:Saxe-See also:Gotha, showed See also:great See also:interest in their scientific development, and in 1759 engaged William See also:Aiton to establish a Physic Garden . The garden of the Royal See also:Dublin Society at Glasnevin was opened about 1796; that of Trinity See also:College, Dublin, in 1807; and that of See also:Glasgow 1 Morison, Praeludia Botanica (1672); Plantarum Historia Universalis (168o) . Rivinus (See also:Augustus See also:Quirinus) See also:paterno nomine Bachmann, Introductio generolis in Rem Herbariam (Lipsiae, 1690) . 3 Tournefort, Elemens de botanique (1694); Institutiones Rei Herbariae (1700).in 1818 . The See also:Madrid garden dates from 1763, and that of See also:Coimbra from 1773 . See also:Jean See also:Gesner (1709–1790), a Swiss physician and botanist, states that at the end of the 18th century there were 1600 botanic gardens in Europe .
A new era dawned on botanical classification with the work of See also:Antoine See also:Laurent de See also:Jussieu (1748–1836)
.
His See also:uncle, See also:Bernard de Jussieu, had adopted the principles of Linnaeus's Fragmenta in his arrangement of the plants in the royal garden at the Trianon
.
At an early See also:age Antoine became botanical demonstrator in the Jardin des Plantes, and was thus led to devote his time to the science of botany
.
Being called upon to arrange the plants in the garden, he necessarily had to consider the best method of doing so, and, following the lines already suggested by his uncle, adopted a system founded in a certain degree on that of Ray, in which he embraced all the discoveries in organography, adopted the simplicity of the Linnean See also:definitions, and displayed the natural affinities of plants
.
His Genera Plantarum, begun in 1978, and finally published in 1789, was an important advance, and formed the basis of all natural classifications
.
One of the early supporters of this natural method was Augustin Pyramus de See also:Candolle (1778–1841), who in 1813 published his Theorie elementaire de la botanique, in which he showed that the affinities of plants are to be sought by the See also:comparative study of the form and development of organs (See also:morphology), not of their functions (See also:physiology)
.
His Prodromus Systematis Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis was intended to embrace an arrangement and description of all known plants
.
The work was continued after his death, by his son See also:Alphonse de Candolle, with the aid of other eminent botanists, and embraces descriptions of the genera and species of the orders of Dicotyledonous plants
.
The system followed by de Candolle is a modification of that of Jussieu
.
In arranging plants according to a natural method, we require to have a thorough knowledge of structural and morphological botany, and hence we find that the advances made in these departments have materially aided the efforts of systematic botanists
.
Robert See also:
In 1827 Brown announced his important discovery of the distinction between See also:Angiosperms and See also:Gymnosperms, and the philosophical character of his work led A. von See also:Humboldt to refer to him as " Botanicorum facile princeps." In 183o John See also:Lindley published the first edition of his Introduction to the Natural System, em-bodying a slight modification of de Candolle's system
.
From the year 1832 up to 1859 great advances were made in systematic botany, both in Britain and on the continent of Europe
.
The Enchiridion and Genera Plantarum of S
.
L
.
Endlicher (1804-1849), the Prodromus of de Candolle, and the Vegetable Kingdom (1846) of J
.
Lindley became the guides in systematic botany, according to the natural system
.
The least satisfactory part of all these systems was that concerned with the See also:lower plants or Cryptogams as contrasted with the higher or flowering plants (Phanerogams)
.
The development of the See also:compound microscope rendered possible the accurate study of their life-histories; and the publication in 1851 of the results of Wilhelm See also:Hofmeister's researches on the comparative See also:embryology of the higher Cryptogamia See also:shed a See also:flood of See also:light on their relationships to each other and to the higher plants, and supplied the basis for the distinction of the great groups Thallophyta, See also:Bryophyta, See also:Pteridophyta and Phanerogamae, the last named including Gymnospermae and Angiospermae
.
A system of classification for the Phanerogams, or, as they are frequently now called, Spermatophyta (See also:seed-plants), which has been much used in Great Britain and in See also:America, is that of See also:Bentham and See also: Eichler (See also:Berlin, 1883), a modified form of which was elaborated by Dr Adolf Engler of Berlin, the See also:principal editor of See also:Die naturliche Pflanzenfamilien . The study of the See also:anatomy and physiology of plants did not keep See also:pace with the advance in classification . See also:Nehemiah See also:Grew and his contemporary See also:Marcello See also:Malpighi were the earliest discoverers in the department of plant anatomy . Both authors laid an account of the results of their study of plant structure before the Royal Society of See also:London almost at the same time in 1671 . Malpighi's See also:complete work, Anatome Plantarum, appeared in 1675 and Grew's Anatomy of Plants in 1682 . For more than a See also:hundred years the study of See also:internal structure was neglected . In 1802 appeared the Traite d'anatomie et de physiologie vegetale of C.F . B. de Mirbel (1776–1854), which was quickly followed by other publications by Kurt See also:Sprengel, L . C . Treviranus (1779–1864), and others . In 1812 J . J . P . Moldenhawer isolated cells by maceration of tissues in See also:water . The work of F . J . F . Meyen and H. von See also:Mohl in the See also:middle of the 19th century placed the study of plant anatomy on a more scientific basis . Reference must also be made to M . J . See also:Schleiden (1804–1881) and F . Unger (1800–1870), while in K . W. von Nageli's investigations on molecular structure and the growth of the See also:cell membrane we recognize the origin of See also:modern methods of the study of cell-structure included under See also:cytology (q.v.) . The work of Karl Sanio and Th . See also:Hartig advanced knowledge on the structure and development of tissues, while A. de Bary's Comparative Anatomy of the Phanerogams and Ferns (1877) supplied an admirable presentation of the facts so far known . Since then the work has been carried on by Ph. See also:van Tieghem and his pupils, and others, who have sought to correlate the large See also:mass of facts and to find some See also:general underlying principles (see PLANTS: Anatomy of ) . The subject of fertilization was one which early excited attention . The idea of the existence of See also:separate sexes in plants was entertained in early times, long before separate male and See also:female organs had been demonstrated . The See also:production of dates in See also:Egypt, by bringing two kinds of flowers into contact, proves that in very remote periods some notions were entertained on the subject . Female date-palms only were cultivated, and See also:wild ones were brought from the See also:desert in See also:order to fertilize them . See also:Herodotus informs us that the Babylonians knew of old that there were male and female date-trees, and that the female required the concurrence of the male to become fertile . This fact was also known to the Egyptians, the Phoenicians and other nations of See also:Asia and See also:Africa . The Babylonians suspended male clusters from wild dates over the See also:females; but they seem to have supposed that the fertility thus produced depended on the presence of small flies among the wild flowers, which, by entering the female flowers, caused them to set and ripen . The See also:process was called palmification . Theophrastus, who succeeded See also:Aristotle in his school in the 114th See also:Olympiad, frequently mentions the sexes of plants, but he does not appear to have determined the organs of See also:reproduction . Pliny, who flourished under See also:Vespasian, speaks particularly of a male and female See also:palm, but his statements were not founded on any real knowledge of the organs .
From Theophrastus down to Caesalpinus, who died at See also:Rome in 1603, there does not appear to have been any attention paid to the reproductive organs of plants
.
Caesalpinus had his attention directed to the subject, and he speaks of a halitus or See also:emanation from the male plants causing fertility in the female
.
Nehemiah Grew seems to have been the first to describe, in a See also:paper on the Anatomy of Plants, read before the Royal Society in See also:November 1676, the functions of the stamens and pistils
.
Up to this See also:period all was vague conjecture
.
Grew speaks of the attire, or the stamens, as being the male parts, and refers to conversations with Sir See also:
In 1711 E
.
F
.
See also:Geoffroy, in a memoir presented to the Royal See also:Academy at Paris, supported the views of Grew and others as to the sexes of plants
.
He states that the germ is never to be seen in the seed till the apices (anthers) shed their dust; and that if the stamina be cut out before the apices open, the seed will either not ripen, or be barren if it ripens
.
He mentions two experiments made by him to prove this—one by cutting off the staminal flowers in See also:Maize, and the other by rearing the female plant of Mercurialis apart from the male
.
In these instances most of the flowers were abortive, but a few were fertile, which he attributes to the dust of the apices having been wafted by the See also:wind from other plants
.
Linnaeus took up the subject in the inauguration of his sexual system
.
He first published his views in 1736, and he thus writes—" Antheras et stigmata constituere sexum plantarum, a palmicolis, Millingtono, Grewio, Rayo, Camerario, Godofredo, Morlando, Vaillantio, Blairio, Jussievio, Bradleyo, Royeno, Logano, &c., detectum, descriptum, et See also:pro infallibili assumptum; nec ullum, apertis oculis considerantem cujuscunque plantae See also:flores, latere potest." He divided plants into sexual and asexual, the former being Phanerogamous or flowering, and the latter Cryptogamous or flowerless
.
In the latter See also:division of plants he could not detect stamens and pistils, and he did not investigate the mode in which their germs were produced
.
He was no physiologist, and did not promulgate any views as to the embryogenic process
.
His followers were chiefly engaged in the arrangement and classification of plants, and while descriptive botany made great advances the physiological department of the science was neglected
.
His views were not, however, adopted at once by all, for we find See also:
Alston's observations were founded on what occurred in certain unisexual plants, such as Mercurialis, See also:Spinach, See also:Hemp, See also:Hop and Bryony
.
The conclusion at which he arrives is that the pollen is not in all flowering plants necessary for impregnation, for fertile seeds can be produced without its See also:influence
.
He supports parthenogenesis in some plants
.
Soon after the promulgation of Linnaeus's method of classification, the attention of botanists was directed to the study of Cryptogamic plants, and the valuable work of Johann Hedwig (1730–1799) on the reproductive organs of mosses made its appearance in 1782
.
He was one of the first to point out the existence of certain cellular bodies in these plants which appeared to perform the functions of reproductive organs, and to them the names of antheridia and pistillidia were given
.
This opened up a new See also:
Treviranus, professor of botany in See also:Bonn, roused the attention of botanists to the development of the embryo, but although he made valuable researches, he did not add much in the way of new See also:information
.
In 1823 G
.
B
.
See also:Amici discovered the
existence of pollen tubes, and he was followed by A
.
T
.
See also:Brongniart and R
.
Brown
.
The latter traced the tubes as far as the See also:nucleus of the ovule
.
These important discoveries See also:mark a new See also:epoch in embryology, and may be said to be the foundation of the views now entertained, which were materially aided by the subsequent elucidation of the process of cytogenesis, or cell-development, by Schleiden, See also:Schwann, Mohl and others
.
The whole subject of fertilization and development of the embryo has been more recently investigated with great assiduity and zeal, as regards both cryptogamous and phanerogamous plants, and details must be sought in the various special articles
.
The observations of See also:Darwin as to the fertilization of See also:orchids, Primula, Linum and Lythrum, and other plants, and the part which See also:insects take in this See also:function, gave an explanation of the observations of Christian Konrad Sprengel, made at the See also:close of the 18th century, and opened up a new phase in the study of botany, which has been followed by See also:Hermann See also: In his Statical Essays (1727) he gave an account of numerous experiments and observations which he had made on the See also:nutrition of plants and the See also:movement of See also:sap in them . He showed that the gaseous constituents of the See also:air contribute largely to the nourishment of plants, and that the leaves are the organs which elaborate the See also:food; the importance of leaves in nutrition had been previously pointed out by Malpighi in a See also:short account of nutrition which forms an appendix to his anatomical work . The See also:birth of modern See also:chemistry in the work of J . See also:Priestley and S |