Species Plantarum aims to provide in concise format, and with standardised data fields, basic taxonomic information on the vascular plants of the world, including accepted names and synonyms with bibliographic data, types of names, keys and descriptions from family to varietal levels, geographical distributions, ecological information and other related matters, and to publish it in both hard copy and electronic form.
The format of the Species Plantarum is based on that of Flora of Australia, with some departures made necessary by the different scale of the project. Initially at least, the series is being edited and published for the Species Plantarurn Project and IOPI by the Australian Biological Resources Study (ABRS), producers of Flora of Australia.
Treatments are contributed on a voluntary basis. Each part of Species Plantarum is intended to provide a complete account of a farnily, subfamily, large genus or other related taxonomic group. While treatments of small families may be shorter, it is intended that contributions will, in general, cover at least 50 to 100 species. The taxonomy adopted is that of the author, although the family delimitations recommended are initially those of R.K.Brummitt, Vascular Plant Families and Genera (1992). The order of taxa within families, genera and species in the Species Plantarum is intended to reflect natural relationships, so far as this is possible in a linear sequence.
Maps are provided for each species, or in those cases where infraspecific taxa are recognised, for each of the terminal taxa. Distribution maps are based on those in S.Hollis & R.K.Brummitt, World Geographical Scheme for Recording Plant Distributions (1992), and the ‘countries’ adopted are those of Level 3 and 4 of that work. Description of distribution follows the same work, with a two-digit code for regions and a three-letter code for the ‘country’. Upper case letters for the ‘country’ indicate native distribution; lower case letters indicate that the taxon is only present in that ‘country’ as an introduced and naturalised plant. If a taxon is extinct in a ‘country’, this is indicated by a dagger. Distribution of species as cultivated plants is not included.
Misapplied and invalid names are, in general, omitted. Journal titles are abbreviated according to G.D.R.Bridson & E.R.Smith, Botanico-Periodicum-Huntianum / Supplementum (1991). Book titles are abbreviated according to F.A.Stafleu & R.S.Cowan, Taxonomic Literature (2nd edn) Vols 1—7, and Supplements (1976—), except that upper case initial letters are used for proper names and significant words. Authors of plant names are abbreviated according to R.K.Brummitt & C.E.Powell, Authors of Plant Names (1992).
A separate part, Introduction to the Series, provides a history of the project, a glossary, guide for contributors and key to the conventions used in describing distribution. These resources will also be available on the World Wide Web, initially through the ABRS site (currently http://www.anbg.gov.au/abrs/flora/spplant/spplant.htm) with links from the IOPI site (currently http://life.csu.edu.au/iopi/iopihome) and others.
E.M.A.Steyn & G.F.Smith
Welwitschiaceae Markgr., in A.Engler & K.Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. 2nd edn, 13: 419 (1926)
Type: Welwitschia Hook.f.
Dioecious perennial xerophytes; stem woody, unbranched, broadly obconical, often split into two lobes, outer covering corky; taproot elongate, usually branching near apex. Leaves 2, opposite, persistent, simple, entire, with continuous basal growth, tearing lengthwise into strips and wearing away at tips, leathery, parallel-veined, isobilateral, amphistomatic. Strobili in dichasial branch systems; ultimate branches terminating in 1 or 3-5 cones; cones small, subquadrate, comprising numerous reproductive, flower-like units (‘flowers’) subtended by bracts. Units unisexual, single, decussate. Male: bracteoles (‘perianth’) 4, outer 2 lateral, boat-shaped, inner 2 anterior-posterior, broadly obovate, fused; microsporangiophores 6, in single whorl, eventually exserted, basally fused in a cup-like structure, each bearing 3 fused microsporangia opening with 3 terminal pores; ovule non-functional, with single integument extending upwards into tubulus (micropylar tube) with funnel-shaped disc at apex. Female: bracteoles basically 4, outer 2 often absent, lateral, boat-shaped, inner 2 (‘perianth’) anteriorposterior, fused from inception, persistent, laterally expanded into conspicuous, fibrous wings; ovule functional, comprising a nucellus and single integument, crassinucellate, eventually containing embryo sac tubes with egg nuclei (archegonia not formed), integument extending upwards into tubulus terminating in fringed, stigma-like apex; tubulus exserted at maturity. Seed with tubulus, enclosed in persistent winged bracteoles; wings papery, fibrous, hygroscopic; embryo small, axile, usually with 2, rarely 3 cotyledons, imbedded in lipid and protein-rich nutritive tissue, attached to long coiled suspensor, developing a feeder at germination.
The family is represented by the single species, Welwitschia mirabilis, limited in distribution to the desert or desert margin along the south-west coast of Africa. This land strip, about 1 000 km long, stretches from the Kuiseb River, just south of Waivis Bay in Namibia, to the Nicolau River (approximately l4°S) in Angola (L.E.Kers, Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 61: 97—125 (1967)).
Ever since Hooker’s illustrated account of Welwitschia appeared in Trans. Linn. Soc. London 24: 1—48 (1862), conceptions of, especially, the female reproductive structures have been controversial. The interpretation adopted here is mainly based on the exhaustive ontogenic studies of P.Martens, Cellule 60: 171—286, t. 1—13 (1959). We further followed K.Kubitzki, in K.U.Kramer & P.S.Green (eds), Fam. Gen. Vasc. Pl. 2: 378—391 (1990), who pointed out the inappropriateness of using angiosperm-orientated terminology with regard to the Gnetales — neither the derivation of the group nor their relationship with angiosperms is fully understood. The gnetalean genera, Welwitschia, Ephedra and Gnetum, have been regarded as the closest living relatives of flowering plants on the one hand and the extinct Bennettitales on the other (P.R.Crane, Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 72: 716—793 (1985); K.Kubitzki (1990)). The three obviously very old and rather bizarre genera share a mixture of gymnospermous and angiospermous characters. They are nevertheless considered as so distinct and isolated from one another that views about intergeneric relationships have been extremely controversial (Kubitzki (1990), and references cited therein). However, most authors regard Welwitschia and Gnetum as more closely related to each other than to Ephedra.
J.D.Hooker, On Welwitschia, a new genus of the Gnetaceae, Trans. Linn. Soc. London 24: 1—48, t. 1—14 (1863); I.C.Verdoorn, Welwitschiaceae, in L.E.Codd, B. de Winter & H.B.Rycroft (eds), Fl. S. Afr. 1: 48—51 (1966); C.H.Bornman, Welwitschia, paradox of a parched paradise (1978); E. van Jaarsveld, The cultivation and care of Welwitschia mirabilis, the extraordinary caudiciform from the Namib desert, Aloe 27: 69—82 (1990); K.Kubitzki, in K.U.Kramer & P.S.Green (eds), Fam. Gen. Vasc. Pl. 2: 378—391 (1990); Hasebe, M., Ito, M. Kofuji, R., Iwatsuki, K. & Ueda, K., Phylogenetic relationships in Gnetophyta deduced from rbcL gene sequences, Bot. Mag. (Tokyo) 105: 385—391 (1992).
Welwitschia Hook.f., Gard. Chron. 1862: 71(1862), nom. cons.
Type: W. mirabilis Hook.f.
Tumboa WeIw., Gard. Chron. 1861: 75 (1861). T: Welwitschia mirabilis Hook.f.
A monotypic genus, confined to western Africa.
Welwitschia mirabilis Hook.f., Gard. Chron. 1862: 71(1862)
T: Specimen not cited. Angola: Cabo Negro, F. Welwitsch s.n.; syn: K, photo PRE.
Tumboa bainesii Hookf, Gard. Chron. 1861: 1008 (1861), nom. prov.; Welwitschia bainesii Carr., Traité Gén. Conif., 2nd edn, 783 (1867), nom. prov.
Tumboa strobilifera Welw. ex Hook.f., Gard. Chron. 1862: 71(1862), nom. nud. pro syn.
Illustrations: Trans. Linn. Soc. London 24: 6, t 1—14 (1863); K.R.Sporne, Morphol. Gymnosp., 181, fig. 40A—D; 182, fig. 41A—D (1971), as W. bainesii; K.Kubitzki, in K.U.Kramer & P.S.Green (eds), Fam. Gen. Vasc. Pl. 2: 388 (1990); Anon., Linnean 13(3): 20 (1997).
Maps: L.E.Kers, Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 61: 116, fig. 5 (1967); E. van Jaarsveld, Aloe 27: 71(1990).
Trunk mainly subterranean, with up to 200 cm emergent. Leaves with basal growth, eroding at tips, to 900 cm long, 200 cm wide. Male strobili 1—4 cm long, 5—7 mm wide, on a pedicel 2—5 mm long; bracteoles 1—3 mm long; microsporangiophore cup to 3.5 mm long; free stalks 0.5—1.5 mm long; microsporangia 0.2 mm wide. Female strobili 3.5—8 cm long, 2—3 cm wide; outer bracteoles 5 mm long; inner bracteoles 8 mm long; micropylar tube with bulbous base 4 mm long and narrow tube 5 mm long; ovule 4 mm long. Seed white to creamish white, including persistent bracteoles and micropyle c. 3.5 cm long, c. 3 cm wide. Figs 1—3, and cover.
Coastal strip from Nicolau River, Angola (c. 14°S) to just south of Walvis Bay, Namibia (c. 24°S). 26: ANG. 27: NAM. Deserts and desert margins. Map 1.
26. ANGOLA: Cabo Negro, 1863, J.J.Monteiro s.n. (K); near main road across desert between Moçãmedes [Namibe] and Porto Alexandre, R.J.Poynton s.n. (PRE); 32 km S of Mosamedes [Namibe], R.J.Rodin 9354 (PRE). 27. NAMIBIA: Damaraland, T.Baines s.n. (K, photo PRE); 31 km W of Khorichas on Twyfelfontein road, D.S.Hardy 7184 (PRE); 1.5 km W ftom Howeb and 0.5 km N of Kuiseb river bed, W.Geiss 9540 (PRE).
It’s obviously being used as nothing more than a marketing term.
All plant life is organic.
All plant fertilizers, whether labeled organic or not, contain the same raw “minerals/nutrients” in general, just in different concentrations, and some add more trace, or micro nutrients,or carbohydrates to speed up metabolic rates, ect. for a price.
NONE contain chemicals, as I’m sure it’s quite illegal to sell any sort under the guise of saying plants feed on them when they don’t and regulator administrations that are a must wouldn’t let that fly for anything to go onto the market.
I’m still looking into the regulation of labeling food organic since there is no such thing as an inorganic vegetable.
This is why recent testing has shown organic food to only contain less pesticides, and not none.
No matter what any plant is sprayed with, chemical or not, it is still defined as organic.
This is a big play for marketing from farmers, and quite frankly I don’t blame them, or think it’s that big a deal.
Aside from the fact we do need better regulation of the amounts of pesticides used(commercial farming is not considered profitable enough to be done without any spraying at all), and the distinction when labeled for sale.
There is no difference between what the plants feed on from one farm to another.
They’ll only feed on the same raw nutrients no matter what medium they are growing in much less location.
If they are not present they don’t grow well, if at all.
If it looks healthy it was grown well, if not look longer for one that does.:)
Far as taste goes, remember where you get your tasties, it will vary from farm to farm, and be dictated by many many variables, just as wines do due to soil, as well as feeds, and even harvest production, and shipping techniques.
Otherwise there is no difference on a biological level.
Since sprayed or not the produce is still definable as organic, my opinion is that there is no legal way to regulate the use of it in relevance to what we want to know.
The pesticides are the big problem with our food supply, and the only real one it has IMO.
This can also be avoided by going small/local farming, grow your own, or start calling around to civil servants until the message of regulating pesticides better gets out, and followed through on.
This is a little scattered s far as writing, I’m sure, but the subject really does involve alot from organic chem and biology to legalese around terms and uses of such terms ect.
Fight for less pesticides, shop local, and remember where you get your faves, is about all I can figure to do myself for now with commercial food.
Happy health all, and I hope some of this was of help to ppl.:)
See Through The Trees
Some protective measures and incorrect referring might also be discussed. The names listed below may not be used to describe this disease.
Blue Waffle Disease
These are commonly confused or wrong descriptions
- Blue Berry Waffle
- Black Berry Waffle
- Quick Drying Towels
- Itching Vagina
- Dirty Waffle
These should never be used to mention or describe this condition. A Blue Waffles is sometimes referred to as an STD (sexually transmitted disease). People are seen joking about this disease that is ethically wrong as this a disease to be seriously dealt with. Lack of knowledge is a primary cause of this among the women. This is also seen in men but in very rare cases.
Some protective measures
- Keep the vagina dry
- Keeping the vagina clean
- Resistance from unprotected sex
- Staying away from the infected
Some common causes can not be any different from stress and bad diet. Both can equally result in Blue Waffle infection. Moreover, tight clothing and hygienic sprays can also cause irritation inside the vagina.
A few common symptoms as explained by professional doctors around the web are described below. You should not trust this information or use it to cure your disease at home as it could be entirely different from this.
- Itching of Vagina
- Vagina irritation
- Smelling of Vagina
- Coloring of Vagina usually blue
- Color changes or dis-colorization
- Purple colorization in the vagina core
Thanks for your time in reading. This article was solely dedicated to defining the true meaning of this wide-spreading disease. You must be aware of all the facts if you want to cure or help in the spreading of Blue Waffle Disease.
Our current population is often characterized by quite a large number of people, who are struggling with being overweight. The marketers have taken advantage of the situation, by bringing mediocre products in every given shelf in beauty shops and supermarkets, that claim to help them in losing weight. In our currents markets, you are bound to come across several diet plans, pills and products too help you lose weight. They all claim to have the magical effect that will make you shed weight the very minute you buy them. However, it has been frustrating to many customers to know that, the products do not live up to their promises, and they are just another way of making money. They will not make anyone lose any weight whatsoever. In any case, they will give you several side effects that the marketers will not be honest enough, to let you know. Dr Eric Berg who is a nutritional researcher, gives ultimate solutions by giving people advice for free, which shows that he is not only honest, but also reliable since he is not out to reap money from your pockets.
One of the most common methods that Dr Eric Berg uses, is outlining an exercise routine after evaluating the diet of the person’s involved. He also uses the hormones used in increasing burning of fat to help such persons in losing weight, in a relatively short time. Stress elimination is another technique, which is commonly referred to as acupuncture where, after relieving stress and pain a patient is able to lose weight at faster rate. The doctor also gives advice saying that, having plenty of vegetables in your diet will speed up the rate of the weight loss program. He also adds that, a complex supplementation will help you achieve effective results. Dr Eric Berg is quite experienced hence you will not only find his weight loss practices effective but also safe with no given side effects. Get the stresses off by seeking for advice from this doctor, and have your dream of losing weight come true.