25 internautes sur 26 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
Ronald M. Lanner
- Publié sur Amazon.com
This book has a lot going for it. The author has been most recently head of the herbarium at the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew, and has had a front-row seat as a conifer taxonomist during the development of three key disciplines of the last few decades: molecular genetics, cladistic analysis, and earth history. Unlike many taxonomists he glories in making extensive field trips throughout the conifer world, for business and pleasure. His writing style is generally clear and engaging, and occasionally hits some very high notes. And he is a good photographer and a talented botanical artist. Thus he has created a modern treatment of the conifers that would have been impossible just a few years ago, and he has imbued it with deep concern for the biodiversity of the order Coniferales and the preservation of rare and endangered species. He interprets "natural history" broadly and is free to inquire into any aspect of conifer lore, from evolution to forest products. Surely this book will accomplish the author's goal of bringing more respect to these tribes of trees that are major parts of the silva in both hemispheres.
There is a wealth of fascinating information here, and the author is an affable guide taking us along on numerous exciting quests. The stories of discovery of new-to-science conifers like Wollemia and Xanthocyparis add spice to the overall conifer story, as do travels to New Caledonia and other venues of remarkable trees. But not everything is equally well done. Some chapters are densely academic, heavy going for amateurs lacking technical credentials. A preoccupation with numerical measures of diversity, and an emphasis on extinct groups may not appeal to many.
Mistakes or faux pas are fairly common, and range from the trivial to the profound. A few examples: use of the term "appendices" where American English would use "appendages" (with neither term in the too-skimpy glossary)adds puzzlement to an already dense anatomical discussion of cone structure; reference to a 3600+ year-old Utah juniper known since 1956 to be less than half that age; numerous fine botanical drawings whose plant parts are unlabeled and lack scales (i.e. "X 2"); a dismissal of the possible evolutionary importance of hybridization in conifers despite its commonness in pines and firs; an equally abrupt dismissal of the idea of reticulate evolution, an area of active research; a weak treatment of mycorrhizae which does not mention the profoundly different types found in Pinaceae vs. Cupressaceae -- surprising for a taxonomist; a description of the mutualism of nutcrackers and white pines with several material factual errors; a statement that bark beetles invade the cambium, while they actually invade the phloem; omitting windborne soil particles from the ingredients of "canopy soil", which accumulates in branch crotches and sustains epiphytes; attributing clones of Pinus pumila to shoots sprouting from the roots whereas it is due to rooting of branches in contact with the ground. The author is often on shaky ground writing about wood. For example, he errs in stating that Great Basin bristlecone pine "has some of the densest and hardest of all woods", or that sugar pine and western white pines are "nonresinous", or that wood of Cupressaceae is "more fibrous" than that of Pinaceae (he must mean finer-grained), or that hollow trees grow new wood on the inside as well as the outside of the trunk. The fleshy fruits of Torreya are labeled as "seeds" in a photograph. Though geography seems one of his strong suits, the author writes incorrectly that Port-Orford-Cedar "is restricted to mountains on the border between California and Oregon". He states twice that California's only Taxaceae species is Torreya californica, overlooking Taxus brevifolia. In cataloging that state's biodiversity he claims 22 pines. In my book Conifers of CaliforniaConifers of California, I list 18 pines (including P. washoensis, around which there is some controversy)plus one pinyon pine hybrid. I cannot quite see where 4 more species have immigrated to this state.
The book's index is not as lengthy and inclusive as a book of this scope deserves. You will not find cambium, seeds, rust diseases, roots, or many other terms to take you to useful information.
Even more grievous, however, is the very skimpy bibliography. The purpose of this book is to make available much of what has been learned about conifers in recent decades, and a reader should be able to follow up some of the many leads provided here.Yet the bibliography lists a mere 52 items. Ten of these are the author's own previous works and 16 are on paleobotanical topics. Nine are general biological works or are about other plants than conifers. Why does this matter?
Well, take for example the author's statement that drooping pine needles may be an adaptation to protect them from dwarfmistletoe infection. He gives no indication whether this is his idea, or the result of someone's research. If you want more on this, you cannot get help from the literature list. This is true of many speculations, possible matters-of-fact, and arguments made throughout the text. The feeble bibliography not only leaves much of the text unsupported, but impedes readers from further pursuit. Besides, it would have been a simple matter to list the most useful 100 conifer books as a special feature, tying this new volume to the historical development of conifer science.
17 internautes sur 17 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
- Publié sur Amazon.com
This book fills a gap in the popular literature on conifers: there's really a strong need for a comprehensive review of the natural history of conifers. But if that's what you are looking for, you will be disappointed here. Still, this volume has some strengths.
Some of the high points of this text: (1) There a many photos of species where it is difficult to find good photographs; most notably of the Southern hemisphere species. It is almost worth keeping the book on my shelves just for the "tree porn". (2) Again, it is really the Southern species where this book really provides new details. If you are looking for a work that discusses the new finds in Indo-China or New Caledonia this is a book not to be missed.
Where I was disappointed: (1) Most notably, this book is in dire need of editorial coherence. It reads mostly like a collection of magazine articles that have been very lightly reshaped into a thematic structure. This book really would have benefited from a more disciplined analytic structure. (2) I really wanted to see more sustained discussion of the evolutionary linkages of the conifers--especially in reference to Northern hemisphere species. There's bits and pieces here (even chapters with titles that look like they will provide the sustained analysis that I'm looking for) but the discussions are just so scattered as to be frustrating.
In short, this is the type of book that you can open up at almost any point and start reading--and that's not necessarily a good thing. Again, I really wanted to like this book more than I did.
11 internautes sur 12 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
- Publié sur Amazon.com
I'm not sure how to review this book without resorting to tired clichés like "a masterpiece" or "the bible of conifer natural histories." This book just happens to be the prefect example of everything popular science writing should be.
Farjon doesn't dumb down the science and doesn't apologize for it (excepting a brief mea culpa in the preface, which also includes Farjon's philosophy on the craft of writing popular science, so don't skip the preface!) Any botanist will enjoy this book just as much as an amateur ecologist, weekend hiker, or little old lady in suburbia with pine trees in her yard. The scientists will find many morsels to whet the appetite for further study while the amateur will walk through a door to the wonders of conifer natural history, perhaps referring back to the book after every new hike through the woods.
There are 34 chapters - some of them as short as just a couple pages. This brevity makes the text an easy, casual read. Each chapter is headed with an anecdote from the author's life or human history. The first 20 or so chapters deal with the typical science common to any natural history - evolution, physiology, systematic, ecology. There follows a section on geography (often lacking in popular works), then several chapters about human interaction with conifers which segues nicely into the final section about conservation. A glossary and a reference section close the book. As I desperately try to find something negative to say here, I guess I wished only that the references would have been more numerous, but that is truly a nit-picky complaint.
Timber Press did their usual bang-up job of production with gr eat binding and paper, beautiful jacket, and stunning photos. The two-page spreads introducing the main sections are the stuff of a coffee table book. The rest of the book is not cluttered, yet hardly a page goes by without a color photo or some sort of eye candy. It really does seem like a coffee table book, but with meat instead of the usual fluff in the text.
Enough gushing! Buy the book and see for yourself!
1 internautes sur 1 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
- Publié sur Amazon.com
I bought this book through my interest in paleobotany.I have read Beck's classic on gymnosperm evolution so this did not add much from this point of view nor fossil wise.But I was fascinated by the use of pylogeny and morphology as against pure genetic studies which rule the day elsewhere.In conifers they just have not worked as yet!And perhaps this is a good thing.More and more botanists are criticising the laborotory pundits who don't even know what the plant they are studying the genes of looks like!Field work like that of the author is very impressive and was in days gone by ,de riguer!So much can be gleaned from the simple contact with the plants.Touch and observation are far from obsolete.
I would like to have known a bit more about araucariaceae in the nothern hemisphere continent of Laurasia.We are not told that it was a species close to Araucaria heterophylla that occured in this area.Any others?Wollemia,Agathis?
But otherwise an excellent book written with and from great passion!
A few spelling mistakes though which is most unlike this publisher.
2 internautes sur 3 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
P. van Rijckevorsel
- Publié sur Amazon.com
As we have become accustomed to from Timber Press, this is a very well-printed book, on glossy paper, with an immaculate layout. Illustrations are excellent and are of three kinds: mainly 1) color photographs and 2) line-drawings but with the occasional 3) SEM B&W photograph. Most of the illustrations were made by the author, but some have been contributed by other experts (for instance, some of the line-drawings have been borrowed from van Pelt's book).
Obviously, the author is THE acknowledged expert on conifers and the text well reflects that, taking the grand view.
Two points that bothered me are the writing style, which, although accessible enough, strikes me as peculiar (at least in some spots); also the chapter on wood is clearly written by the conifer expert making notes, without a real understanding of this rather different topic or a feel for it.
Nevertheless, this is book is great value for money.