| 
| 
INTRODUCTION 
Julian A. Steyermark’s (1963) Flora of Missouri was a monumental 
addition to our knowledge of the native and introduced flora of 
Missouri. Since its publication, this book has served as an inspiration 
to amateur and professional botanists in the state and as a model 
floristic manual for those in other states to follow. the 26 years 
(and six printings) since the volume was first published, substantial 
botanical exploration has been carried out 
number of workers. Many authoritative taxonomic revisions also have 
been published, which have modified our understanding of species 
limits and interrelationships in a number of plant groups. These 
additions and changes have become so numerous that a revision of 
Steyermark’s Flora is urgently needed to satisfy the demand for up- 
to-date information on all of the state’s flora by botanists, ecologists, 
interpretive naturalists, land managers, and plant lovers of all types 
e Flora of Missouri Project was initiated in 1987 as a cooperative 
venture between the Missouri Department of Conservation and the 
Missouri Botanical Garden to meet this need for a revised floristic 
manual and will result in the eventual publication of a new book to 
e known as the second edition of Steyermark’s Flora of Missouri. 
The present catalogue is intended to serve as an interim update 
of the state’s flora. It should allow users to bridge the gap between 
Steyermark’s Flora and the more recent taxonomic and floristic 
literature. In addition, its relatively small size will allow its use as a 
checklist of the Missouri flora both indoors and in the field. The 
catalogue has many limitations and is not intended to supersede the 
existing, excellent, floristic manual, but rather to supplement it. 
ORGANIZATIONAL PHILOSOPHY 
The publication of catalogues such as this one seems to be a 
natural step in the process of compiling or revising a floristic manual, 
and a number of other catalogues provide ample precedent. Not all 
such catalogues have identical organization, however, and each meets 
somewhat different needs. At one extreme are catalogues containing 
copious taxonomic, distributional, and nomenclatural annotations. 
Examples of this style include the Palmer and Steyermark (1935) 
catalogue for Missouri and Smith’s (1988) volume on Arkansas. At 
the other extreme are simple checklists such as the one for Indiana 
Vii 
