Evaluating the living wealth of botanic gardens:a necessity for maintaining our own ideals

National Botanic Garden of Belgium (NBGB)

Dave A

plin

, Resp

on

sib

le fo

r Scie

nce a

nd

H

ortic

ultu

re[G

lassh

ou

se C

olle

ctio

ns] d

avid

.aplin

@br.fg

ov.b

e

Ignoring this procedure will weaken of the word ‘Botanic’ in our institutes’ names and reduce our effectiveness.

Evaluating the living wealth of botanic gardens: a necessity for maintaining our own ideals

Introduction Collections at Meise

Evaluation

Case studies Conclusions

Conclusions

Plant collections in botanic gardens are extremely varied.

Decades of plant acquisitions reflect research and personal interests, of which many may be redundant.

Regular, critical evaluation of living collections should be an increasingly important activity, to meet the current demands of our gardens etc.

This is especially true in space-limited areas.

The NBGB is not unlike other gardens of similar age. Areas are reaching capacity while increasing costs impinge on collection management.

Maintaining our own ideals:the art of practising what we preach

Introduction Collections at Meise

Evaluation

Case studies Conclusions

Botanic gardens increasingly required to justify their existence to fund-raisingbodies, trustees and the public.

Plant collections at the NBGB began over a century ago. Currently, 17,000 taxaare curated with the indoor collection alone boasting c.10,000 taxa.

Living Collection statistics:an overview of the collections at Meise

Introduction Collections at Meise

Evaluation

Case studies Conclusions

number of: indoors outdoors total

plants 28,280 ------ ------

accessions 13,643 11,467 25,051

taxa 9,862 7,533 17,216

species 7,787 4,923 12,710

genera 2,120 1,367 3,170

families 277 232 338

percentage (accessions): verified & id: 37%from wild: 22%

cites taxa accessions 3,037 44 3,081(12%)

cultivar accessions 1,374 2,467 3,841(15%)

Meise’s ‘big five’

Introduction Collections at Meise

Evaluation

Case studies Conclusions

Living Collection statistics:

largest families taxa accessions % v. & id. % wild

Cactaceae 1642 2430 19% 11%

Orchidaceae 1057 1885 48% 31%

Liliaceae 716 1146 29% 16%

Crassulaceae 700 912 35% 12%

Asteraceae 529 663 39% 27%

Rubiaceae (11th) 294 461 24% 63%

Evaluating a Living Collection:some preconditions to consider

Introduction Collections at Meise

Evaluation

Case studies Conclusions

A thorough evaluation will take an enormous amount of time and effort involvinga range of stakeholders. Its benefits, however, should be clear.

Pre-requisites to evaluation:

The institute should have a Collection Policy.

Few collection statistics have been published. General guidelines for targets are difficult to determine. The RBG Edinburgh [Sibbaldia, 1, 2, 3] offers a notableexception.

Quantitative statistics are the quickest and easiest way to obtain an insight into a collection. However, it must be followed by qualitative analysis.

Collection data is stored in a database.

Confidence in that data.

Data can be extracted to provide a range of holdings statistics.

An increase in botanical wealth will enable an increase in ‘botanical performance’ And thus contributing to:

Evaluating a Living Collection:

Introduction Collections at Meise

Evaluation

Case studies Conclusions

The main purposes of an evaluation process is to increase the botanical value of our holdings and to aid ex situ conservation.

supporting targets and legislation

CBD

GSPC

European Community Biodiversity Strategy

The European Plant Conservation Strategy

The Biodiversity Strategy of the European Union

an insight into the collections

Introduction Collections at Meise

Evaluation

Case studies Conclusions

Evaluation at differing scales:

Evaluating a collection is a huge task. There are countless institute-specific ways this may be done.

‘most’ and ‘least’ important plants

overview of all plant families

a specific family

a genus

our ‘most’ and ‘least’ important plants

Introduction Collections at Meise

Evaluation

Case studies Conclusions

Evaluation - case study one:

Criteria: Number: % of collection

IUCN 1997 (taxa) 641 3.7%

IUCN 2001 (taxa) 656 3.8%

Cultivars (accessions) 3,841 15%

Cultivars (plants [indoors]) 3,323 12%

Ornamental plants made way for research specimens in the glasshouses

CITES 1 (taxa) 199 <1%

CITES 2 (taxa) 2,884 12%

recalcitrant taxa ?,??? ??%

identifying our most vulnerable families

Introduction Collections at Meise

Evaluation

Case studies Conclusions

Evaluation - case study two:

24

3533

46

39

48

39

28

62

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

>1000

1000 - 500

499 - 100

99 - 50

49 - 20

19 - 10

9 - 54 - 3

2 1

number of taxa

nu

mb

er

of

fam

iles

identifying our most vulnerable taxa

Introduction Collections at Meise

Evaluation

Case studies Conclusions

Evaluation - case study two:

62

36

43

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

single taxafamilies

single taxaaccessionfamilies

monophyleticfamilies

nu

mb

er

of

fam

ilie

s

identifying our most vulnerable taxa

Introduction Collections at Meise

Evaluation

Case studies Conclusions

Evaluation - case study two:

15

1110

23

10

2

0

18

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >10

number of plants per family

nu

mb

er o

f fa

milie

s 8%

Evaluation - case study three: a prickly dilemma

Collections at Meise

Conclusions

Case studiesEvaluation

Introduction

genera taxa accessions % v. & id. % wild

Cactaceae 200 1642 2430 19% 11%

c. 800 accessions require taxonomic updates and c. 2,000 plants need new labelling.

Taxonomic updates are normally done on the basis of correct identification. But only 1 in every 5 has been examined.

Currently, the Cactaceae take up 4 collection glasshouses and a large public display house. No recent research conducted.

Yet, the majority of the plants reside in CITES 1 & 2, but only 11% are wild collected.

Evaluation - case study four: in need of a Gasteria guru

Collections at Meise

Conclusions

Case studiesEvaluation

Introduction

representation on the benches

species accessions plants % v. & id. % wild

Gasteria 56 115 246 0.6% = 1 16.7%

According to Van Jaarsveld (1994), only 16 species of Gasteria exist, these comprised of many synonyms.

Only 1 accession is verified. So updating taxonomic updates also involves a verification process which is difficult for a genus that exhibits great morphological plasticity.

We seriously have to consider the ‘value’ and purposes of this ‘collection’ to our institute before taking any action.

Ex-situ conservation:

Introduction 1

Collections at Meise

Evaluation Case Studies

Ex-situ cons.

Conclusions

acknowledgments

potentially, our most valuable contribution...

Ex situ conservation

The fact these two words are married is fundemental to:

Target 8: GSPC

Article 9: CBD

Ex-situ conservation:

Introduction 1

Collections at Meise

Evaluation Case Studies

Ex-situ cons.

Conclusions

acknowledgments

potentially, our most valuable contribution...

Evaluation process will free-up room and labour that could be used for

ex situ conservation.

Although seed banks are extremely useful, they do not represent the solution to ex situ conservation in isolation.

Not all seeds can be stored.

Difficulties may arise that hamper the successful cultivation of germinated plants.

The botanical community therefore needs to enter dialogue with all relevant stakeholders and consider potential protocols for best practice techniques.

Initially concentrate on our own, threatened, European flora.

Ex-situ conservation:

Introduction 1

Collections at Meise

Evaluation Case Studies

Ex-situ cons.

Conclusions

acknowledgments

getting Europe’s house in order...

2 – 3,000 species are threatened on our continent.

800 facing global extinction.

Need for a quantitative as well as a qualitative gap analysis of the

each threatened species status in botanic gardens.

Implementation of IPEN will significantly aid the traceability of specific accessions and enable us to see more clearly duplications in genetic material between gardens.

Evaluating the living wealth of botanic gardens:a necessity for maintaining our own ideals

Introduction Collections at Meise

Evaluation

Case studies Conclusions

Concluding remarks

acknowledgments

We believe that evaluation is an important part of curation management. The result of such an undertaking will strengthen the word ‘BOTANIC’ in our institutes’ names.

Failure to do so will result in a large percentage of holdings having no more botanical value than plants from a local garden centre - “Stamp collections”.

As we look towards 2010 and beyond, it is vital that each and every garden represented here today practices what we preach.

Time has come for an International Coordinated Action, to place living collections at the heart of legitimate ex situ conservation.

Evaluating the living wealth of botanic gardens:a necessity for maintaining our own ideals

Collections at Meise

Evaluation

Case studies Conclusions

Dave A

plin

, Resp

on

sib

le fo

r Scie

nce a

nd

H

ortic

ultu

re[G

lassh

ou

se C

olle

ctio

ns] d

avid

.aplin

@br.fg

ov.b

e

Introduction Acknowledgments

Thierry Vanderborght – for complex data retrieval from in-house database LIVCOL

Acknowledgments

Visit us at: www.botanicgarden.be

Viviane Leyman, Gert Ausloos, Jan Rammeloo and Delegates of Eurogard, 2006 – for informative discussions