1941/09/01 by Lloyd H Shinners · 14 citations
Agricultural and Biological Sciences · #Botany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies #Plant and animal studies #Botany and Plant Ecology Studies #Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer #Genus #Geography #Zoology #Biology #Archaeology #Forestry #Remote sensing
paper · doi:10.2307/2420967
published in The American Midland Naturalist 26(2), 398 (University of Notre Dame)
openalex publication_date 1941/09/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2025/11/06
Few genera of flowering plants have been so much condemned as hopelessly confused and impossible of satisfactory treatment as has the genus Aster. Yet most of its species are clearly definable and easily recognizable. The number of individuals which can be properly placed only with difficulty or not at all is admittedly larger than in most groups, but these still are only a small minority. The great bulk of wild populations is made up of characteristic and unmistakabe plants. The difficulties in Aster are largely confined to a few groups ? in Wisconsin, to A. saggitifolius and its immediate relatives, A. paniculatus and the A. pilosus var. Pringlei complex ? and are due to individual variations, or, to a slight extent, to interspecific hybridization.