EDITORIAL. 
THE PUBLICATION of “state floras,” when well done, has many im- 
portant uses. These floras have become so numerous that almost 
every state is represented. Those who are preparing general manuals 
of ate monographing groups are much interested in learning the range 
of their plants, a thing which herbaria seldom completely record. 
The artificia! boundaries of States, however, are not biological bound- 
aties, and, while they serve to divide a large area into smaller ones 
much more convenient to explore, they rob the term “flora” of much 
of any biological significance it may have. This unfortunate condi- 
tion of affairs is further encouraged by the fact that the state appro- 
Priates money for such purposes to be expended only within its bord- 
ts. Thus the artificial boundary line and the state appropriation 
have resulted in “state floras.” It is well, perhaps, for local botanists 
'odiscover and record the plants of their county or their state; but it 
Salso well to remember that this is but preliminary to a proper study 
tthe flora. A flora in nature does not recognize state boundaries, 
unless those boundaries happen to be coincident with biological bar- 
ers; therefore, the real study of a flora is something which does not 
Concern itself in general with such boundaries. We have lists of the 
Plants of Ohio, and Indiana, and Illinois, these lists being usually styled 
foras:” but we have no definite biological areas, no real floras, 
Tapped out in these states, whose plant lists largely repeat each other. 
That there are such distinctive floras is often indicated in the intro- 
ductory remarks which preface the lists. 
T's Nor our intention to decry the useful work of making lists, but 
tee that the time has come for the presentation of real floras. If 
,, a0y reason such work must be confined to a single state, even 
though that state merges biologically into others on every side, that 
“tele state can be treated biologically. The prairie flora of one state, 
stead of being intercalated among its forest and sand-dune floras 
tg distinctly set apart, and left in a condition to be fitted * » = 
'Nuation in the neighboring state. The sand-dune flora of no : 
hdiana should never be torn violently away from that of north- 
bs Minos and lost sight of in the forests, and swamps, ant ppstte 
| tig noe” of Indiana. Repetition of plant names and “a ae joi 
| tain] “ Presenting these real floras are both full of signi i. 
Ymuch more so than they are in lists of neighboring states. 
[303] 
