Cover- American J Botany; 101(1)

It is safe to say that research in botany in the future will continue to follow the developments in biomedical research, where technical innovations (not necessarily conceptual advances) seem to originate. In the near future, and as hard as it is to believe, that means all sub-disciplines of botany will be touched by rapid advances in DNA sequencing technology, genomics and bioinformatics. Ecological genetics is already here and comparative genomics in an ecological context isn’t far away. Although not well funded, plant systematics and phylogeny is very much devoted to analysis of DNA sequences, as you know. The real challenge of the future will be keeping alive and supporting organism-level knowledge and research. If there are no longer any scientists who “know grasses,” or spiders or jelly fungi or red algae, human knowledge of our world is no longer increasing and what we already have accumulated is in danger of being lost. This is doubly tragic since there have never been greater threats to biodiversity, biological habitats, and ecosystems. It is very discouraging to think that many elements of life on earth will be lost before they are even known to have existed. But to summarize, we as botanists must be open to non-botanical technical advances, but we who study and know plants must also be our own best advocates for the green part of biology, upon which humanity depends.

As a student of botany, I feel that there is a shortage of ‘field botanists’ and botany is becoming more confined to laboratory. How do you co-relate the field botany with laboratory experiments?

 An emerging area of research in North America and Europe is ecological genetics, as I mentioned above. It is true the emphasis now is on model species and crop plants, but researchers in this discipline are beginning to appreciate what ecology and systematics can offer to their studies. They are coming to realize that people who know plants in the field have a special kind of knowledge that can only be acquired by spending time in the field. I would encourage field botanists to offer to collaborate with the lab botanists–to learn the lab botany techniques and their way of thinking and just as importantly, to share their field botany knowledge and techniques. One outcome for the field botanists is that they will be forced to think explicitly about hypotheses, appropriate controls, replications, and rigorous data analysis and interpretation. This will not be a bad thing, because fairly or not, field botany is often perceived as lacking rigor. To the extent that it can be done given its complicated and multitudinous variation and variables, field work framed, conducted, and presented the way lab botanists do their research will increase the respect lab botanists have for their field botanists colleagues and for the work the field botanists do. One practical approach is to require all young students of botany/plant biology to have courses in both field and lab research techniques, if this is not already the case.

The message from the founding of the AJB is that the journal is for all botanists in all disciplinary areas and in all regions of the globe. My message from the beginning of my term as Editor-in-Chief is that everyone who works on plants should consider submitting his or her best research to the AJB. As described in the Scope and Aims of the Journal, AJB requires authors to frame their research questions and discuss their results in terms of major questions of plant biology. Papers are evaluated for innovations in, significant contributions to, and noteworthy advances in the theoretical or conceptual bases of the subdisciplines of plant biology, and/or novel insights of general relevance to fundamental questions of biology. Some keys to successful publication in AJB are careful framing and planning of the research, competent execution of the planned research, and insightful interpretation and discussion of the results. It helps to keep in mind why you are doing the specific research, why anyone else would care about your project and results, and what is it you have discovered or concluded that is important enough that other botanists need to know about.

As plant scientists, we are often ignored and usually under-funded compared to biomedical scientists. Fame, fortune, and political power do not often flow to plant scientists, nor are those what motivate most of us. However, when one thinks about the greatest needs of humanity and our planet, adequate nutritious food and a safe and sustainable environment have to be at the top of the list. Knowledge of plants and conservation of plants and their habitats are integral to both of these human needs and botanists in the broadest sense are essential for these endeavors. Whatever we call ourselves–botanists, plant scientists, plant biologists, agronomists, horticulturist, plant geneticists/breeders, etc.)–we must be strong advocates for the work that needs to be done and for which we are uniquely qualified. Better than many, we know that every bite of food humans eat and every molecule of oxygen humans breathe comes directly or indirectly from plants. Therefore, it is up to us to educate the public and the policy makers about this, for the sake of the survival of the planet and its inhabitants. It won’t be easy and the job will never be finished, but we must try.

As far as AJB goes, we have an Associate Editor, R. Geeta, at the University of Delhi, Department of Botany (Faculty of Science) who is deeply committed to Indian botanists, both young and established, and to science in India. If readers of the Indian Botanists are not acquainted with her, I suggest you, as a group or individually, introduce yourselves to her. She may have some thoughts about the questions you asked me and it might be interesting to see how her and my thinking compares.

 Thank you for offering this opportunity to share information and thoughts about botany in general and the American Journal of Botany in particular.