Subject: Horticultural database on the net - shall we write one?

From: [email-masked] (Dave Rusin)
Date: 24 Sep 1994 23:06:22 -0500

Some time ago I proposed we collect net wisdom on cultivation of specific
plants in one spot, hoping rec.gardeners would seek data there (and reduce
netnews traffic). My suggestion was that we write up data files, one per
cultivated genus. This drew little notice, and response was limited to two
ideas:
	a) It can't be done.
	b) It's already been done.
Continued postings about garden databases prompt me to write again.

The reasoning in (a) is that there are tens of thousands of plant genera, and
even more "kinds" of plants; about each one might reasonably ask for many
data fields. This is a lot of data -- the Flora of North America will run
over a dozen volumes. Other valid objections question author credentials,
editorial consistency, etc. The reasoning in (b) is that, well, we do have
taxonomic and horticultural data -- they're in datasets called "books". I
have also found several gopher or WWW sites with good databases, as well as
stand-alone programs and CDROMS. Many people evidently keep private databases.

On the other hand, people on rec.gardens seem to keep asking about common
flowers. I have looked at a couple dozen of the catalogs most commonly seen
(in the US), and I notice that together they don't offer more than a few
hundred genera of flowering plants, excluding categories like vegetables and
houseplants. (Partial listing below.)

So maybe I should offer a new version of my previous proposal. I am seeking
100 volunteers, each one to write up a data file on the cultivation of common
garden plants in one genus. I would expect the data to come from a mixture of
experience, library work, garden lore, and whatever mailings or catalogs you
have handy. Your final product will probably be shorter than this post.
Your file will be publicly available on the net (FTP/gopher/WWW/email?).
Others will inevitably comment on or modify your work. I will provide a
template and some guides.

I'm just trying to act as a conduit for the exchange of plant-lovers
information on the net. If you have preferences for how this should be
accomplished I'd be happy to hear from you.

If you are interested in participating, email me for more information. I
expect most people would prefer to write about some genus/genera more than
others; please indicate your preference(s). If I can get commitments on most
of these genera I'll consider the project a 'go', otherwise all bets are off.

         Dave Rusin,  [email-masked]
	
TODAY'S LIST: I excluded non-flowering plants (ferns, some hedges,...); plants
not primarily ornamental (veggies, fruits, nuts, herbs); and plants not
appropriate for a common N. American garden (aquatic plants, tall trees,
tropicals, etc.) (If you think this is too autocratic and limiting, write
about any genus that excites you!) Of the genera remaining, these seem to
be in the top quartile or so, and are common in local gardens too:

Achillea Ajuga Allium Althaea Alyssum Anemone Antirrhinum Aquilegia Artemesia
Asclepias Aster Astilbe Begonia Buddleia Caladium Campanula Campsis Canna
Celosia Centaurea Ceratostigma Cercis Chrysanthemum Clematis Coleus Convallaria
Coreopsis Coronilla Cosmos Crocus Dahlia Delphinium Dianthus Dicentra Digitalis
Echinacea Euonymus Freesia Gaillardia Geranium Gladiolus Gypsophila Helianthus
Helichrysum Hemerocallis Heuchera Hibiscus Hosta Hyacinthus Hydrangea Iberis
Impatiens Ipomoea Iris Kniphofia Lathyrus Lavandula Liatris Lilium Limonium
Linum Lobelia Lobularia Lonicera Lupinus Monarda Myosotis Narcissus Oenothera
Paeonia Papaver Pelargonium Phlox Portulaca Potentilla Primula Pyretheum
Ranunculus Rhododendron Rosa Rudbeckia Salvia Scabiosa Sedum Sempervivum
Syringa Tagetes Thymus Tropaeolum Tulipa Verbena Veronica Viburnum Vinca Viola
Weigela Wisteria Yucca Zinnia

---

From: [email-masked] (Gary VG)
Date: 25 Sep 1994 08:59:03 -0400

I like your idea of putting together a collective database of the 100 most
common genera grown in the US, and you can count me in as a contributer. I
will read your listing offline and get back with my preferences. 

It may be tough to get commitments from 100 different people for a project
like this. If each who offers to contribute was willing to do several
genera, there may be a more realistic possibility of actualy getting
enough contributers.

Gary VanGelder

---

From: [email-masked] (ThomasW321)
Date: 25 Sep 1994 10:07:02 -0400

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
(Dave Rusin) writes:

Hi Dave:
I would be very interested in helping out with the creation of the kind of
database you describe.  I would prefer to work with mums, and related
plants (i.e. asters), roses, geraniums, poinsettias, etc.  If I could
offer another suggestion, it would be to include any folklore, history, 
and other related stories about the plants in addition to the basic
cultural information.  Let me know what I can do to help.  Thanks, Tom.

---

From: [email-masked] (JHaneyZZ)
Date: 26 Sep 1994 23:24:05 -0400

-- Horticultural database on the net - shall we write one?

Absolutely a great idea I would love to contribute. Let me know what I can
do. Particular fancier of Digitalis, larkspur, Lavatera, aster, Althea and
lots of others and have a nice library of resource materials. 

I would love to make this a winter project as that is when I do most of my
research and planning for the following year.

james haney -- chicago IL
[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (William Allen)
Date: 27 Sep 1994 10:31:43 -0500

I like the idea a lot.  I would be willing to help someone compile info
on hydrangeas.  I'm reluctant to say that I could do it by myself.  My
passion for hydrangeas exceeds my expertise.
william allen
[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (Joanne Darrington)
Date: 28 Sep 1994 13:42:51 GMT

Dave Rusin ([email-masked]) wrote:
: Some time ago I proposed we collect net wisdom on cultivation of specific
: plants in one spot, hoping rec.gardeners would seek data there (and reduce
: netnews traffic). My suggestion was that we write up data files, one per
: cultivated genus. This drew little notice, and response was limited to two
: ideas:
: 	a) It can't be done.
: 	b) It's already been done.
: Continued postings about garden databases prompt me to write again.

Count me in!  I think it's a wonderful idea.  Would prefer to work on 
perennials.

[email-masked]