FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1975436828> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1975436828 endingPage "577" @default.
• W1975436828 startingPage "575" @default.
• W1975436828 abstract "Botanic gardens have great and longstanding strengths in the exploration and documentation of plant diversity – including systematics, horticultural science, and most recently molecular phylogenetics. However, in terms of mainstream plant science today, with its dominantly reductionist focus, research in botanic gardens is often neglected. Using the conventional criteria few botanic garden plant scientists rank as leaders in the plant science community and the work undertaken in botanical gardens is often viewed as peripheral to current societal problems and “cutting-edge” research. Yet as this issue demonstrates, at no other point in history has research in botanic gardens and arboreta, been more important. Accelerating global change has reached the point where key leaders, such as the UK economist Lord Stern, have concluded that business as usual is not an option. The sound stewardship and management of plant communities and plant diversity is now an international imperative. Destruction and burning of wild plant life accounts for a fifth of ongoing carbon emissions, more than that due to the world's transport systems (www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/stern_review_report.htm). At the same time, plant-based solutions offer vital ways towards more sustainable ways of living, repairing and restoring depleted biodiversity and carbon sinks, and improving human welfare at a time of unprecedented global change (www.aspb.org/PressReleases/GPC.cfm). Plant-based solutions to current pressing problems offer hope in an increasingly gloomy world of dire prediction and seeming helplessness. Furthermore, the principle of intergenerational equity demands that we address the current erosion of biodiversity at all scales, and develop new cadres of well-trained specialists in plant diversity to help chart innovative ways through the challenges that we face. Solutions will need to be both innovative and inspirational. They will also need to be place-based and varied, depending on the local context and the needs of local people. The world is too complex to expect that a one-size-fits-all simple technological fix will see us through to a more sustainable future (see Kramer & Havens, this issue).In this rapidly changing context, and notwithstanding their relation to some aspects of modern plant science, it is heartening that botanic gardens and arboreta continue to flourish. There is new interest in biodiversity collections and how they can be studied, celebrated and used for human benefit. More than half the world's 2500 major botanic gardens have been created since 1950. Innovation and strong cultural relevance go hand in hand with this continuing international passion for the creation of new botanic gardens. The scale and imagination of new gardens continues to increase, very often with extraordinary public outreach and creative design at their core. The Eden Project in Cornwall (www.edenproject.com/), the Australian Garden of the Royal Botanic Gardens in Victoria (www.rbg.vic.gov.au/australian_garden), and the soon to be completed Gardens by the Bay in Singapore (www.gardensbythebay.org.sg/index.php) are just three recent examples. The Gardens by the Bay will cost in excess of Singapore $1 billion, almost all from Government funds. This is an almost unimagined level of investment in a world that sometimes seems more inclined to turn its back on the traditional services provided by botanic gardens and arboreta – the ongoing discovery, collection, investigation, celebration, conservation and use of plant diversity.At the same time that the world of botanic gardens is attracting new interest, 2009 is also an auspicious year for some of the most venerable botanic gardens and arboreta. The Royal Botanic Gardens Kew (www.kew.org/) celebrate their 250th anniversary, and the Missouri Botanical Garden (www.mobot.org/) and the Singapore Botanic Gardens (www.sbg.org.sg/) celebrate their 150th anniversary. The extraordinary tenure of these organisations signals abiding community support for what they contribute locally, nationally and internationally. Coincidence with the bicentenary of the birth of Charles Darwin and the tercentenary of publication of his most important book, The Origin of Species… is also significant. Darwin explained how the diversity of life came about. Today, increasingly, the world's botanic gardens are concerned with the future of plant life: the fate of tens of thousands of species that have arisen over hundreds of millions of years.Just as Darwin relied on the wise counsel of Kew's Joseph Hooker for information and expert opinion on scientific matters that really count, so too does the world today continue to rely on the quietly authoritative and collaborative sharing of knowledge and expertise that have become synonymous with the many networks among botanic gardens and arboreta. Few other global networks of science-based organisations could deliver programmes as inclusive, essential or long-lasting as the taxonomic inventory of plant biodiversity continuing over three centuries or more, its modern counterpart in DNA sequencing for molecular phylogenetics and potential barcoding and the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (see Wyse Jackson & Kennedy, this issue). The Millennium Seed Bank Project (see Li & Pritchard, this issue) provides just one example that, in little more than ten years, has already succeeded in safe storage of seeds of 10% of the world's plants, in and from, 54 countries. At a time of accelerating global extinction, such programmes are fundamental to helping chart sustainable ways forward in a rapidly changing world.The papers in this special issue provide some insight as to why plant science research in botanic gardens continues to be relevant and in many places continues to enjoy strong support. While the situation is not rosy everywhere, plant diversity science remains vibrant and innovative in many parts of the sector, as cutting-edge innovation is combined with an ongoing commitment to traditional areas of valuable and long-lasting big science (e.g. taxonomy and collections science). Many contemporary innovations in plant science are coming from relatively young botanic gardens able to forge exciting programmes directly relevant to today's environmental challenges. Imaginative approaches illustrated herein have emerged among scientists at Chicago Botanic Garden (see Kramer & Havens, this issue), Kirstenbosch Botanic Garden in Cape Town (see Donaldson, this issue), Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden in China (see Chen et al., this issue) and Kings Park and Botanic Garden in Perth, Western Australia (see Swarts & Dixon, this issue). Equally, the relatively recent emergence of Botanic Gardens Conservation International has enabled major collaborative science programmes such as a global focus on trees (see Oldfield, this issue), the launching and co-ordination by the New York Botanical Garden of “Tree-BOL,” a ‘Barcode of Life’ (BOL) initiative to sample all the species of trees of the world, and delivery of targeted outputs under the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (see Wyse Jackson & Kennedy, this issue), including red listing threatened taxa (see Schatz, this issue)Innovation is also a hallmark of recent developments aimed at mobilising data held in collections assembled over centuries in the herbaria of botanic gardens and museums. The provision of authoritative names remains challenging; given that there are an estimated 370,000 plant species but ca. 900,000 names presently published (see Paton, this issue), with 2000 more per annum appearing over the past two decades. The integration of data in accessible form through digital media is a major thrust (see Nic Lughadha & Miller, this issue).A shift in policy towards conservation has also been evident in most botanic gardens over recent decades. Yet translating international policy commitments, such as the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation, into significant outputs has been slower than many would hope or that circumstances demand. Putting collections to work for conservation, and understanding global change, are both natural progressions from areas of traditional strength in botanic gardens (see Donaldson, Paton, Nic Lughadha & Miller, this issue). Promising moves towards digital capture of collections information are underway, but the sheer quantity of primary data remains daunting and difficult to resource (see Nic Lughadha & Miller, this issue). A significant number of pilot studies have demonstrated the power and potential of such approaches, leaving a legacy of partially populated databases that somehow will need urgent consolidation if their benefits for conservation and sustainable living are to be realized fully.Expanding the traditional focus of botanic gardens on elucidating patterns of diversity at the species level to also incorporate a more genetic approach that delivers real advances for conservation genetics and restoration ecology is a new frontier (see Kramer & Havens, this issue). Work on adaptive genetic diversity or ecological genomics is needed to complement existing strengths in documenting variation in neutral markers. Populations subject to environmental change may survive through phenotypic plasticity or genetic adaptation, or go extinct. Studies of neutral markers alone will rarely enable relevant insights on such conservation challenges. Botanic gardens need to embrace ecological genomics, and apply their considerable infrastructure to experimentally test hypotheses regarding responses and thresholds of taxa to global change. Kramer and Havens suggest that tomorrow's world will be one where common is the new rare, ecological relationships undergo significant change, and one size does not fit all in understanding responses of plants to such dynamic circumstances.Restoration ecology is a further new frontier for botanic gardens, and several contributors recommend that it should be embraced expeditiously. While the problems shouldn’t be underestimated, Swarts and Dixon's review of orchid conservation in botanic gardens suggest that even the most biologically specialized and vulnerable taxa have some hope for restoration if sufficient resourcing and innovation in plant science is applied. Seed banking is one critical area but it is often overlooked that such facilities also produce fundamental advances in our understanding of seed biology and ecology. The discovery of chemicals in smoke that stimulate germination is one excellent example (see Donaldson, Swarts & Dixon, this issue). In tropical regions where many species have recalcitrant seeds, other biotechnological approaches also will need to be deployed, and there is a special need for tropical botanic gardens to focus on assisting with in situ conservation and restoration programmes (see Chen et al., this issue).Citizen science is a special opportunity for botanic gardens given their high levels of visitation both on site and online (see Donaldson, Swarts & Dixon, this issue). Indeed, there is no room for complacency among botanic garden scientists if they are to capitalise on unique opportunities to communicate with and inspire visitors and decision makers on site, through publications and events, and online.Like all other organisations, botanic gardens cycle through periods of rapid development and retrenchment. In our time, when botanic gardens offer so much in terms of plant-based problem-solving that is increasingly relevant to improving human welfare, there is a special need for strong advocacy and communication with broader society. This needs to go hand in hand with continued support of excellence in plant diversity science, training, conservation and sustainable use. The papers in this special issue give cause for quiet optimism that plant science in botanic gardens will continue to contribute in many different and significant ways.The Guest Editors Botanic gardens have great and longstanding strengths in the exploration and documentation of plant diversity – including systematics, horticultural science, and most recently molecular phylogenetics. However, in terms of mainstream plant science today, with its dominantly reductionist focus, research in botanic gardens is often neglected. Using the conventional criteria few botanic garden plant scientists rank as leaders in the plant science community and the work undertaken in botanical gardens is often viewed as peripheral to current societal problems and “cutting-edge” research. Yet as this issue demonstrates, at no other point in history has research in botanic gardens and arboreta, been more important. Accelerating global change has reached the point where key leaders, such as the UK economist Lord Stern, have concluded that business as usual is not an option. The sound stewardship and management of plant communities and plant diversity is now an international imperative. Destruction and burning of wild plant life accounts for a fifth of ongoing carbon emissions, more than that due to the world's transport systems (www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/stern_review_report.htm). At the same time, plant-based solutions offer vital ways towards more sustainable ways of living, repairing and restoring depleted biodiversity and carbon sinks, and improving human welfare at a time of unprecedented global change (www.aspb.org/PressReleases/GPC.cfm). Plant-based solutions to current pressing problems offer hope in an increasingly gloomy world of dire prediction and seeming helplessness. Furthermore, the principle of intergenerational equity demands that we address the current erosion of biodiversity at all scales, and develop new cadres of well-trained specialists in plant diversity to help chart innovative ways through the challenges that we face. Solutions will need to be both innovative and inspirational. They will also need to be place-based and varied, depending on the local context and the needs of local people. The world is too complex to expect that a one-size-fits-all simple technological fix will see us through to a more sustainable future (see Kramer & Havens, this issue). In this rapidly changing context, and notwithstanding their relation to some aspects of modern plant science, it is heartening that botanic gardens and arboreta continue to flourish. There is new interest in biodiversity collections and how they can be studied, celebrated and used for human benefit. More than half the world's 2500 major botanic gardens have been created since 1950. Innovation and strong cultural relevance go hand in hand with this continuing international passion for the creation of new botanic gardens. The scale and imagination of new gardens continues to increase, very often with extraordinary public outreach and creative design at their core. The Eden Project in Cornwall (www.edenproject.com/), the Australian Garden of the Royal Botanic Gardens in Victoria (www.rbg.vic.gov.au/australian_garden), and the soon to be completed Gardens by the Bay in Singapore (www.gardensbythebay.org.sg/index.php) are just three recent examples. The Gardens by the Bay will cost in excess of Singapore $1 billion, almost all from Government funds. This is an almost unimagined level of investment in a world that sometimes seems more inclined to turn its back on the traditional services provided by botanic gardens and arboreta – the ongoing discovery, collection, investigation, celebration, conservation and use of plant diversity. At the same time that the world of botanic gardens is attracting new interest, 2009 is also an auspicious year for some of the most venerable botanic gardens and arboreta. The Royal Botanic Gardens Kew (www.kew.org/) celebrate their 250th anniversary, and the Missouri Botanical Garden (www.mobot.org/) and the Singapore Botanic Gardens (www.sbg.org.sg/) celebrate their 150th anniversary. The extraordinary tenure of these organisations signals abiding community support for what they contribute locally, nationally and internationally. Coincidence with the bicentenary of the birth of Charles Darwin and the tercentenary of publication of his most important book, The Origin of Species… is also significant. Darwin explained how the diversity of life came about. Today, increasingly, the world's botanic gardens are concerned with the future of plant life: the fate of tens of thousands of species that have arisen over hundreds of millions of years. Just as Darwin relied on the wise counsel of Kew's Joseph Hooker for information and expert opinion on scientific matters that really count, so too does the world today continue to rely on the quietly authoritative and collaborative sharing of knowledge and expertise that have become synonymous with the many networks among botanic gardens and arboreta. Few other global networks of science-based organisations could deliver programmes as inclusive, essential or long-lasting as the taxonomic inventory of plant biodiversity continuing over three centuries or more, its modern counterpart in DNA sequencing for molecular phylogenetics and potential barcoding and the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (see Wyse Jackson & Kennedy, this issue). The Millennium Seed Bank Project (see Li & Pritchard, this issue) provides just one example that, in little more than ten years, has already succeeded in safe storage of seeds of 10% of the world's plants, in and from, 54 countries. At a time of accelerating global extinction, such programmes are fundamental to helping chart sustainable ways forward in a rapidly changing world. The papers in this special issue provide some insight as to why plant science research in botanic gardens continues to be relevant and in many places continues to enjoy strong support. While the situation is not rosy everywhere, plant diversity science remains vibrant and innovative in many parts of the sector, as cutting-edge innovation is combined with an ongoing commitment to traditional areas of valuable and long-lasting big science (e.g. taxonomy and collections science). Many contemporary innovations in plant science are coming from relatively young botanic gardens able to forge exciting programmes directly relevant to today's environmental challenges. Imaginative approaches illustrated herein have emerged among scientists at Chicago Botanic Garden (see Kramer & Havens, this issue), Kirstenbosch Botanic Garden in Cape Town (see Donaldson, this issue), Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden in China (see Chen et al., this issue) and Kings Park and Botanic Garden in Perth, Western Australia (see Swarts & Dixon, this issue). Equally, the relatively recent emergence of Botanic Gardens Conservation International has enabled major collaborative science programmes such as a global focus on trees (see Oldfield, this issue), the launching and co-ordination by the New York Botanical Garden of “Tree-BOL,” a ‘Barcode of Life’ (BOL) initiative to sample all the species of trees of the world, and delivery of targeted outputs under the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (see Wyse Jackson & Kennedy, this issue), including red listing threatened taxa (see Schatz, this issue) Innovation is also a hallmark of recent developments aimed at mobilising data held in collections assembled over centuries in the herbaria of botanic gardens and museums. The provision of authoritative names remains challenging; given that there are an estimated 370,000 plant species but ca. 900,000 names presently published (see Paton, this issue), with 2000 more per annum appearing over the past two decades. The integration of data in accessible form through digital media is a major thrust (see Nic Lughadha & Miller, this issue). A shift in policy towards conservation has also been evident in most botanic gardens over recent decades. Yet translating international policy commitments, such as the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation, into significant outputs has been slower than many would hope or that circumstances demand. Putting collections to work for conservation, and understanding global change, are both natural progressions from areas of traditional strength in botanic gardens (see Donaldson, Paton, Nic Lughadha & Miller, this issue). Promising moves towards digital capture of collections information are underway, but the sheer quantity of primary data remains daunting and difficult to resource (see Nic Lughadha & Miller, this issue). A significant number of pilot studies have demonstrated the power and potential of such approaches, leaving a legacy of partially populated databases that somehow will need urgent consolidation if their benefits for conservation and sustainable living are to be realized fully. Expanding the traditional focus of botanic gardens on elucidating patterns of diversity at the species level to also incorporate a more genetic approach that delivers real advances for conservation genetics and restoration ecology is a new frontier (see Kramer & Havens, this issue). Work on adaptive genetic diversity or ecological genomics is needed to complement existing strengths in documenting variation in neutral markers. Populations subject to environmental change may survive through phenotypic plasticity or genetic adaptation, or go extinct. Studies of neutral markers alone will rarely enable relevant insights on such conservation challenges. Botanic gardens need to embrace ecological genomics, and apply their considerable infrastructure to experimentally test hypotheses regarding responses and thresholds of taxa to global change. Kramer and Havens suggest that tomorrow's world will be one where common is the new rare, ecological relationships undergo significant change, and one size does not fit all in understanding responses of plants to such dynamic circumstances. Restoration ecology is a further new frontier for botanic gardens, and several contributors recommend that it should be embraced expeditiously. While the problems shouldn’t be underestimated, Swarts and Dixon's review of orchid conservation in botanic gardens suggest that even the most biologically specialized and vulnerable taxa have some hope for restoration if sufficient resourcing and innovation in plant science is applied. Seed banking is one critical area but it is often overlooked that such facilities also produce fundamental advances in our understanding of seed biology and ecology. The discovery of chemicals in smoke that stimulate germination is one excellent example (see Donaldson, Swarts & Dixon, this issue). In tropical regions where many species have recalcitrant seeds, other biotechnological approaches also will need to be deployed, and there is a special need for tropical botanic gardens to focus on assisting with in situ conservation and restoration programmes (see Chen et al., this issue). Citizen science is a special opportunity for botanic gardens given their high levels of visitation both on site and online (see Donaldson, Swarts & Dixon, this issue). Indeed, there is no room for complacency among botanic garden scientists if they are to capitalise on unique opportunities to communicate with and inspire visitors and decision makers on site, through publications and events, and online. Like all other organisations, botanic gardens cycle through periods of rapid development and retrenchment. In our time, when botanic gardens offer so much in terms of plant-based problem-solving that is increasingly relevant to improving human welfare, there is a special need for strong advocacy and communication with broader society. This needs to go hand in hand with continued support of excellence in plant diversity science, training, conservation and sustainable use. The papers in this special issue give cause for quiet optimism that plant science in botanic gardens will continue to contribute in many different and significant ways. The Guest Editors" @default.
• W1975436828 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1975436828 creator A5061459891 @default.
• W1975436828 creator A5075532537 @default.
• W1975436828 creator A5078870331 @default.
• W1975436828 creator A5083176729 @default.
• W1975436828 date "2009-11-01" @default.
• W1975436828 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W1975436828 title "Plant science research in botanic gardens" @default.
• W1975436828 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2009.09.007" @default.
• W1975436828 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19800836" @default.
• W1975436828 hasPublicationYear "2009" @default.
• W1975436828 type Work @default.
• W1975436828 sameAs 1975436828 @default.
• W1975436828 citedByCount "52" @default.
• W1975436828 countsByYear W19754368282012 @default.
• W1975436828 countsByYear W19754368282013 @default.
• W1975436828 countsByYear W19754368282014 @default.
• W1975436828 countsByYear W19754368282016 @default.
• W1975436828 countsByYear W19754368282017 @default.
• W1975436828 countsByYear W19754368282018 @default.
• W1975436828 countsByYear W19754368282020 @default.
• W1975436828 countsByYear W19754368282021 @default.
• W1975436828 countsByYear W19754368282023 @default.
• W1975436828 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1975436828 hasAuthorship W1975436828A5061459891 @default.
• W1975436828 hasAuthorship W1975436828A5075532537 @default.
• W1975436828 hasAuthorship W1975436828A5078870331 @default.
• W1975436828 hasAuthorship W1975436828A5083176729 @default.
• W1975436828 hasBestOaLocation W19754368281 @default.
• W1975436828 hasConcept C2992936677 @default.
• W1975436828 hasConcept C2994435560 @default.
• W1975436828 hasConcept C54286561 @default.
• W1975436828 hasConcept C59822182 @default.
• W1975436828 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W1975436828 hasConceptScore W1975436828C2992936677 @default.
• W1975436828 hasConceptScore W1975436828C2994435560 @default.
• W1975436828 hasConceptScore W1975436828C54286561 @default.
• W1975436828 hasConceptScore W1975436828C59822182 @default.
• W1975436828 hasConceptScore W1975436828C86803240 @default.
• W1975436828 hasIssue "11" @default.
• W1975436828 hasLocation W19754368281 @default.
• W1975436828 hasLocation W19754368282 @default.
• W1975436828 hasOpenAccess W1975436828 @default.
• W1975436828 hasPrimaryLocation W19754368281 @default.
• W1975436828 hasRelatedWork W2024827054 @default.
• W1975436828 hasRelatedWork W2027136333 @default.
• W1975436828 hasRelatedWork W2027989916 @default.
• W1975436828 hasRelatedWork W2047134548 @default.
• W1975436828 hasRelatedWork W2119976708 @default.
• W1975436828 hasRelatedWork W2468335957 @default.
• W1975436828 hasRelatedWork W2476588683 @default.
• W1975436828 hasRelatedWork W2981713487 @default.
• W1975436828 hasRelatedWork W3215139134 @default.
• W1975436828 hasRelatedWork W4240757957 @default.
• W1975436828 hasVolume "14" @default.
• W1975436828 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1975436828 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1975436828 magId "1975436828" @default.
• W1975436828 workType "article" @default.