Calif. Flora - Jepson or Munz?
halh at ix.netcom.com
Sat Jun 17 03:12:01 EST 1995
In <3rqcqp$399 at peach.america.net> Scott Ranger <ranger at america.net>
>I cut my teeth on Munz! It is a comprehensive flora, especially with
>supplement from 1973. Current printings include the flora and
>supplement. Many taxonomic and nomenclatural changes have taken place
>since 1968 and 1973, so any work using Munz would require a double
>with more recent works. That would be the great value of the new
>flora. The Jepson folks have asked for errors in the first printing
>that they may be corrected in the next, but that any corrections
>requiring page changes would not be considered until a new revision.
>scuttlebut is that the book was rushed to press and is full of small
>problems. Since it is a work of a committee, it is going to be uneven
>quality across the families. Munz used lots of folks to deal with
>complex genera and species, so his coverage can be uneven as well.
>If you are seriously interested in the California flora, you need both
This is my $.02:
The differences I've seen between the two books are in the family
arrangement. The Jepson Manual is arranged alphabetically, whereas the
Munz follows a taxanomic order, grouping similar families together in
Also, the Jepson Manual is stronger in pictures; the Munz (while
still weighing a hefty bit) is smaller in size than the Jepson.
Enjoy! This has been a FANTASTIC year for California wildflowers!
Lara at slip.net
More information about the Plantbio