43 
Crossosoma 34(2), Fall-Winter 2008 
Yet they are extremely useful to confirm or disconfirm tentative determinations, 
or to quickly seek similar plants at the level of family or genus. Good field guides 
(we have many for southern California) are written, illustrated, reviewed, and 
edited by experts. While they may contain some errors, these are scarce. Still, the 
effective use of a field guide necessitates an understanding of its strengths and 
weaknesses. As with any approach to plant determinations, effective field guide 
use requires an occasional skeptical step backwards, even when an identification 
is seemingly correct. 
CalFlora is an online field guide written, illustrated, and edited by volunteers. It 
has the strengths and weaknesses of any volunteer project. As a volunteer online 
resource, it is comparable to Wikipedia. It is a fine resource for casual overview. 
But neither CalFlora nor Wikipedia meet standards for stand-alone professional 
research. None of us would trust a surgeon or airline pilot who used Wikipedia 
alone to diagnose medical conditions or flight anomalies. 
CalFlora offers many photographs, some of them verified, some not. Some of 
the photographs are remarkable. Others are simply wrong. Used alone, it is 
not a reliable resource. Used carefully, with an understanding its strengths and 
weaknesses, and with an occasional step backwards, CalFlora can be extremely 
useful. 
- Scott D. White 
