Classification of trees
redoak at forestmeister.com
Mon Mar 31 18:28:34 EST 1997
Bob Weber wrote:
> I am an amatuer naturalist with more than an average knowledge of
> plants. Someone recently asked me how trees should properly be
> classified. My answer was by leaf types or possibly as gymnosperms or
> angiosperms. This person thought that trees should be classified as
> either deciduous or evergreen. However, I wasn't comfortable with that
> description. Can anyone help me?
Your answer is the correct one; based on evolutionary principals.
Because some gymnosperms are deciduous and some angiosperms are
evergree; your friends method doesn't reflect biological origins which
governs how they should be "properly classified". Unless you are a
creationist; then anything goes. <G>
"The ONLY forester's web page in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and
most likely the only one that ever will be".
More information about the Ag-forst