There’s an interesting paper in Italian Botanist by Lorenzo Peruzzi, “Some claim for the end of Botany… but what is Botany today?” He argues that Botany is potentially in a very good place. The public has an increasing interest in plants and it’s obvious there’s a real human need for botany in the world today. But who or what is a botanist? What is it that makes a garden botanic? As the study of plants becomes increasingly intertwined with cell biology or global ecology, what is Botany?
The question appeals to me, because botanists, plant scientists and plant biologists also seem slightly confused over what they are. From our point of view Botany is the science of the study of plant life, but I’ve met Cell Biologists who only work with plant cells who insist they’re not botanists. Peruzzi suggests refining definitions so that the public can understand the role of Botany.
Drawing from the history of Botany, Peruzzi introduces a “Triangle of Botany”, in which study of plants overlaps with agriculture and medicine. This crossover might seem a bit odd to some people, but botanical gardens developed from Physic Gardens, gardens where herbs were grown for their medicinal properties. Similarly, much early botanical knowledge came from studying food crops and understanding plant growth for agriculture. Peruzzi’s Triangle of Botany helps provide a way to define and distinguish true botanical research. In his paper Peruzzi says: “I suggest defining Botany as a biological discipline where studies have a predominant (> 50%) component of basic plant science…”
The value of being able to define a botanist is that it helps guide the public to plant-related professionals based on what they focus upon. Botanical gardens become clearly defined as spaces dedicated primarily to scientific research and conservation. The clear boundaries help the public, policymakers and the media find the relevant researchers for plant inquiries.
There is potential for botany to get lost in research. Many research problems these days are interdisciplinary, and while knowledge of plant life is important, even critical to the research, it’s not the only element. Yet Botany’s value in interdisciplinary research is that it is a discipline of its own that brings specific expertise to problems. This, for Peruzzi, is the value of having a definition: “reminding the scientific community and society of what Botany actually entails serves the important purpose of emphasizing the value of botanists and their research.”
Peruzzi L (2025) Some claim for the end of Botany… but what is Botany today? Italian Botanist 19: 15–20. https://doi.org/10.3897/italianbotanist.19.145382
Since writing this up I’ve become aware of Classical Botany in the Shadow of Molecular Science: Why It Still Matters on Plantae, which covers some similar ground.
Cross-posted to Bluesky & Mastodon.
The post #WhoIsABotanist? appeared first on Botany One.
