PREFACE VII 



(Constance, 1955; Gibbs, 1958) are hardly distinguishable from those 

 of a generation ago (Redfield, 1936) or nearly a century ago (Abbott, 

 1886). 



Classical cytogenetic methods, which offer far less, poten- 

 tially, than does comparative biochemistry in over-all application to 

 plant systematics, were quickly assimilated into the discipline, and as 

 a result some of the highest intellectual achievements are represented 

 by classical cytogenetical investigations (e.g. Cleland, 1949, 1954; 

 Clausen, 1953). Therefore, the conspicuous retardation of real prog- 

 ress in the development of sound principles of biochemical system- 

 atics is considered to reflect, in part, the wide technical and intellec- 

 tual separation of taxonomy and chemistry. Partly because of the 

 emergence of new research tools, and partly because a relentless 

 and natural trend toward molecular biology will otherwise turn the 

 field of biochemical systematics over to biochemists by default, the 

 writers believe that a reappraisal of biochemical systematics and the 

 development of a strongly positive attitude toward the field by tax- 

 onomists is desirable. 



In our judgment the chief weakness of biochemical system- 

 atics has been and remains the threat of superficiality. If the present 

 book serves merely to foster a host of superficial shotgun chromato- 

 graphic comparisons miscellaneous irresponsible correlations and 

 naive interpretations, we will have failed completely in our purpose. 

 We hope that it will encourage an approach to biochemical system- 

 atics which is reflective and cautiously optimistic. 



The book is offered with humility in recognition of our indi- 

 vidual and collective limitations. We have tried to avoid both pedantry 

 and oversimplification. In numerous instances we have taken the 

 liberty of professing a personal evaluation or criticism, always with 

 the objective of establishing a better perspective for viewing bio- 

 chemistry in its relation to systematics. 



To our knowledge, there is no precedent for this book. Conse- 

 quently, it is based almost entirely upon research contributions from 

 technical journals. Because of the breadth of subject matter encom- 

 passed it is virtually impossible to cover the literature completely, 

 and it is likely that some work of major significance was not detected. 

 The words of Sir Francis Galton* come to mind: 



I trust the reader will pardon a small percentage of error and inaccu- 

 racy, if it be so small as not to affect the general value of my results. 

 No one can hate inaccuracy more than myself, or can have a higher 



* Galton, Francis. 1869. Hereditary Genius. 1st Edition. Reprinted, 1952. Horizon 

 Press, New York. 



