A History of Philippine Botanical Exploration
by J.F. Barcelona
Early History of Philippine Botany (1688-1900)
Early European Philippine Botany
The written history of Philippine Botany may very well have started
with the Jesuit missionary and pre-Linnean botanist, Georg Joseph Kamel
(also known as Camellus). Born in Brünn, Moravia (now Brno,
the Czech Republic) on 21 April 1661. Kamel arrived in Manila in 1688
where he established the first pharmacy in the Philippines. Here,
he formulated remedies from local plants and dispensed these freely to
the poor (Vallejo, 2007). Kamel’s botanical sojourns were
concentrated in and around the already established Chinese gardens in
Manila and he sent many of those plants to London. The results of
his work were presented in his
Herbarium aliarumque stirpium in insula Luzone Philippinarum
(“Herbs and Medicinal Plants in the island of Luzon,
Philippines”), published in 1697-1698. Copies of this
pioneering ethnobotanical work were sent to the eminent English
botanist John Ray and apothecary-botanist James Petiver; however, those
manuscripts, accompanying botanical drawings and specimens fell into
the hands of pirates and were subsequently lost. The following year,
Kamel sent another volume which was subsequently appended in John Ray's
Historia plantarum;
species hactenus editas insuper multas noviter inventas & descriptas complectens
(1703) and later published in the Philosophical Transactions of the
Royal Society of London. Kamel was not only interested in plants but
also in birds. In fact, he wrote
Observationes de Avibus Philippensibus,
the first account of the birds of the Philippines published in 1702 in
the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. Kamel died in
Manila on 2 May 1706. In his honor, Linnaeus named the popular
ornamental flowering plant genus
Camellia.
The 300th anniversary of Kamel’s death in 2006 was listed by
UNESCO as one of the most important anniversaries of the world.
The Malaspina Expedition
About a century after Kamel’s contributions to Philippine botany,
the country was explored as part of Spain’s Malaspina Expedition.
This mission was carried out by two corvettes,
Atrevida (commanded by José de Bustamante y Guerra) and
Descubierta
(commanded by Alessandro Malaspina), that left Cadiz, Spain on July 30,
1789 on a five-year journey in which much of America’s west coast
was explored and mapped. When this was completed, the expedition
crossed to Guam and the Philippines, and then proceeded southward to
New Zealand, Australia, and Tonga. Naturalists aboard the ships
included Antonio Pineda, the head of the team, and botanists Luis
Née and Thaddäus Haenke who missed the boat in Cadiz but
joined the expedition in Santiago de Chile in 1790 (Wikipedia).
The corvettes visited Luzon from March to December 1792. During this
period, Malaspina sent Bustamante, who was aboard the
Atrevida, to Macau, China (Wikipedia) while he and his team aboard the
Descubierta
visited Manila and nearby provinces including Bulacan, Illocos,
Panquasing, Pampanga, W. Luzon, Sorsogon, Albay, Camarines, Tayabas,
Laguna, Cavite, Cagayan, and Pangasinan. From mid-September, they spent
some time at Taal Volcano and Laguna de Bay to study cinnamon. While in
the Philippines Pineda died of a tropical disease whereas the remaining
crew proceeded on Nov. 22 to New Zealand and Australia via Mindanao.
Specimens of the Malaspina expedition are now at MA, with duplicates in
B, BM, BR, C, DS, F, FI, G, GH, K, KIEL, L, M, MO, MPU, NY, PNH, PR,
and W. Most of Haenke's material were from South America.
Of the 10,000 collection numbers that Née, gathered, four
thousand were considered new (Merrill, 1915; van Steenis, 1958). His
Philippine collections totalled 2,400 but only ca. 1,000 specimens were
left in Madrid (MA) (Ashton in van Steenis, 1958) because some were
lost in transit from Manila to Spain (Madulid, 1989). No duplicates
were distributed of Née's Philippine collections and much of
these still remain unidentified. Née’s drawings and
manuscripts are nowadays in Madrid (MA), as well as his fern
collections which are part of the Cavanilles herbarium. From his
collections, a few species were described by Cavanilles in his
Description de las Plantas
(1802-1803) as well as come by Lagasca and by Née himself.
Née’s most significant contributions to botany were his
numerous botanical collections that at that time formed the core
collection of MA. Erroneously labelled specimens, however, resulted in
some Philippine species being attributed to South America. For
instance,
Ophioglossum pendulum,
a species collected in either Guam or the Philippines, was credited to
South America “in Regno Quitensi,” by Cavanilles whereas
Chloris dolichostachya, which may have originated from Australia, was reported to have come from the Philippines (Merrill, 1915).
The Malaspina Expedition resulted in several botanical publications. In his “De la abaca que es la
Musa textilis”
(1801), the Philippine endemic source of fiber more popularly known as
“Manila hemp”, Née described in detail this plant
including its economic uses, local names, geographical distribution and
propagation techniques. “Del buyo” was Née's
account of the betel nut (
Areca catechu L.), describing its economic and masticatory importance in some areas in the Philippines (Madulid, 1989).
Blanco and his Flora de Filipinas
Father Francisco Manuel Blanco was a Spanish Augustinian friar who
arrived in the Philippines in 1805. His position as Curate and
later as delegate of the Augustinian order brought him to Luzon and the
Visayas. Here, he not only accomplished his religious duties but also
satisfied his botanical curiosity, the latter resulting in the
publication of the three editions of his
Flora de Filipinas.
The first edition (1837), written in Spanish, consisted of 887 pages in
which the genera were arranged in classes following the Linnaean
classification system. It provided treatments for 903 species and
varieties under Latin names and an additional 31 were presented with
only their common names. Included in this edition were economically
important species, especially cultivated ones. Most of the large
families (e.g. grasses, orchids, and sedges) were, however, almost
ignored. Shortly after Blanco’s death in 1845, the second
edition of the
Flora was
published. This was a 619 page volume, in which 1131 species and
varieties were described using scientific names and 27 using their
vernacular names. As Merrill (1905) stated, the second edition of
Blanco’s
Flora was full
of typographical errors, perhaps because Blanco died months before it
was printed and therefore had not seen the proofs himself. In other
respects this edition was, unfortunately, not an improvement on the
first edition. Blanco arbitrarily changed the generic and specific
names for some species, whereas for others, that had been correctly
identified in the first edition, incorrect names were used. The
third edition (Gran Edicion or the Augustinian Edition) of
Blanco’s
Flora was
published between 1877 and 1883. Two priests, Andreas Naves and
Celestino Fernandez-Villar, were solely responsible for its
publication. It consists of four volumes of which the first three were
mere reprints of the second edition with slight and negligible
modifications. The fourth volume contains the Novissima Appendix
which consisted of an index of the species pages from Blanco’s
three editions of the
Flora de Filipinas.
This volume also provides a Latin translation of Blanco’s Spanish
plant descriptions, thus making his works more widely accessible.
Interestingly, of the total of 4479 included species (classified in
1223 genera and 155 families), 116 genera, 1 family and about 1948
species (44%) do not occur in the Philippines. These mistakes likely
stemmed from many sources including 1) the authors’ lack of
knowledge of the Philippine and its neighboring Indo-Malayan flora, 2)
the failure to communicate with and send materials to European
botanists to verify identifications by comparing these with types
deposited in public and private herbaria, 3)the absence of Philippine
and extra-Philippine herbarium specimens with which to compare their
specimens, 4) the lack of a good botanical library and 5) their
inadequate knowledge of phytogeography. The botanical legacy of
the Gran Edicion was summarized in the following statement by Merrill
(1918):
"The errors of Blanco, working between
1805-1845 and of Llanos, working between the years 1850-1873, sink into
insignificance when compared to the authors of the third edition of
Blanco's Flora".
While the work of Blanco was considered a great accomplishment in the
Philippines, most of his European contemporary botanists, especially
DeCandolle, considered his work of little importance and even claimed
that it has retarded rather than advanced the knowledge of the
Philippine flora (Merrill, 1905). Hooker f., likewise, considered it
undesirable to devote much time on identifying Blanco’s plant
species on the grounds that his account of the Philippine flora was
unsatisfactory (Merrill, 1918). Most of Blanco's generic and
specific descriptions were based on materials collected near heavily
settled areas in the provinces around Manila, few from other provinces
in northern Luzon and still fewer were from the islands of Mindoro,
Cebu, and Marinduque. Hence, most species discussed are
cosmopolitan in distribution. The mountain flora was nearly absent in
his Flora. Likewise, the large families/classes, e.g., orchids,
grasses, sedges, and the pteridophytes, were underrepresented, if not
ignored. However, considering the unfavorable conditions under which
Blanco’s Flora was accomplished and that most of the data
presented were the result of one man’s field observations,
Blanco's Flora de Filipinas is a monumental work that must be
acknowledged for its initiative, industry, and perseverance (Merrill,
1918). In his Species Blancoanae, Merrill provided
interpretations of Blanco’s species and initiated a collection of
plants that would represent these species in the absence of preserved
types.
Hugh Cuming (1791-1865)
Cuming was a 19th century English collector who was interested in
gathering natural history specimens, especially in conchology and
botany. He arrived in Manila on 24 July 1836 and spent the next three
years exploring mostly forested and otherwise inaccessible areas
(ignoring settled areas and shorelines) in the Philippines. He
collected plants, terrestrial snails, and other animals with the
exception of fishes and aquatic invertebrates. Cuming visited all the
major Philippine islands and islets except Palawan. His itinerary
included Calauan, Laguna in the centre of Luzon and areas around Laguna
Lake. Most of 1837 was spent exploring Panay, Guimaras, Negros,
Siquijor, Cebu, Bohol, Camiguin de Misamis and Mindanao, Samar, Leyte,
Masbate, Ticao, Burias, Mindoro and the SE provinces of Luzon, namely,
Albay, Camarines, Tayabas and Batangas. In Nov. 1838, he was at
Manila preparing for a trip to the northern part of Luzon. Cuming
left Manila on Nov. 1839 for Malacca, Sumatra, and Singapore and
visited St. Helena in the South Atlantic Ocean before arriving back in
England on 5 June 1840.
His collections of dried plants during his travels between 1836 and
1840 totaled 130,000, some 10% of which were ferns. His snail
collection was vast, about 30,000 specimens, and he also collected a
substantial number of specimens of other animals. Cuming was the first
to successfully ship live orchids from Manila to England, of which 33
species were unknown to science. He was responsible for the
introduction of the orchids
Aerides quinquevulenerum, Dendrobium anosmum, Dendrobium superbum, Grammatophyllum scriptum, Phalaenopsis ambilis var.
aphrodite, and
Vanda lamellata,
amongst others. Unfortunately, Cuming did not maintain field numbers,
and the distribution numbers for his collections were not added until
after the ferns and other cryptogams, orchids, figs, and specimens of
some other groups had been separated. These numbers were given as the
bundles were successively distributed, and only partially indicate the
sequence in which the collecting localities were visited (Rolfe, 1908).
Hence, some of his Malaccan collections were erroneously labeled as
from the Philippines (e.g.
Henslovia philippinensis,
Eriocaulon truncatum, and
Mangifera lagenifera).
About 140 species of plants have been described from Cumming’s
Philippine collections with their scientific names chosen to honor this
remarkable collector (Merrill, 1926, p. 162) (e.g.
Coelogyne cumingii, Podochilus cumingii, the tree fern
Dicksonia cumingii,
Selaginella cumingiana and
Pleocnemia cumingiana).
Cuming's vast collection formed the basis of much of the knowledge on
Philippine plants at the turn of the 20th century. Tagged as the
“Prince of Collectors,” no collections of a single person
have surpassed the value of Cuming’s plant (and conchological)
collections because a high percentage of them were types of new species
(Orchids.co.in).
Fedor Jagor (1816-1900)
Jagor, a German ethnologist of Russian descent, travelled to Singapore,
Malacca, Java and the Philippines in 1857-1860. He was in the
Philippines in 1859-1860 and visited Manila, Bulacan, Bataan, Laguna,
most of the Bicol region, Samar, and Leyte. Jagor’s contribution
to the study of the Philippine flora is his collection of 345 specimens
(Van Steenis, 1958) now deposited in Berlin (B) with duplicates at
Leiden (L). Jagor returned to some parts of the Malaysian region
between 1873-1876 and 1890-1893, although no botanical collections have
been reported from these later trips. Some of the plants named
after Jagor by Warburga (a German botanist) are
Begonia jagori,
Sterculia jagori,
Vaccinium jagori, and
Freycinetia jagori (Perkins, 1904). Hieronymous named
Selaginella jagori
after him. Jagor’s contributions to the study of the
natural history of the Malesian region also included significant
zoological collections, including
Microphis jagorii (a fish),
Enhydris jagorii (Jagor's water snake),
Phoniscus jagorii (Peter's Trumpet-Eared Bat).
Sebastian Vidal y Soler (1842-1889)
In 1871, Vidal came to the Philippines as Inspector General of the
Forestry Bureau. From 1873 to 1875 he was back in Spain but
returned to Manila in 1876 where he was appointed Chief for the
Commission of the Forest Flora of the Philippines (van Steenis, 1958).
Vidal was the first botanist based in the Philippines to recognize the
significance of having a good library, a herbarium, in comparing new
collections with existing ones in herbaria abroad, and in collaborating
with known botanists during his time. He collected in Luzon,
Panay, Guimaras, Marinduque, Palawan, Samar, and Cebu. His
herbarium, which included collections by R. Garcia, Maximo Ramos, and
Maeso, was housed at the then Forestry Bureau Building in Manila.
Unfortunately, this collection and his botanical library were destroyed
by fire in 1897. His botanical collections were estimated to be 14,000
numbers with duplicates at K, MA, Fl, L, G, A, and P. Of the 4000
or so numbers promised (by MA?) to Manila, only 319 were brought back
by E. Quisumbing from Madrid in 1954 (van Steenis, 1958).
August Loher (1874-1930)
August Loher was a German botanical pharmacist who was a resident of
the Philippines since 1889. His Philippine plant collections made
from 1889 to 1896 numbered over 5200 and were mostly from Luzon,
especially from Rizal and adjacent Umirey (Umiray) region of Tayabas
(Quezon) and Provinces, Caraballo Mountains in Nueva Viscaya, Polillo
Island and the vicinity of Lake Mainit in Surigao, Mindanao. Most
of his specimens are now deposited at Kew (K) with duplicates widely
distributed among different herbaria, including M, B, P, L, CAL, US,
GH, NY, UC, PNH (van Steenis, 1958). Most of his botanical
collections after 1908-1915 (over 3000 numbers) were deposited in the
Herbarium of the Bureau of Science in Manila in 1923 and became the
basis of Merrill’s New species of Philippine plants collected by
Loher (1925). In this publication, Merrill described 41 new
species of plants based solely on Loher’s collections.
Genera with the specific epithet '
loheri' in this paper include
Pilea,
Cinnamomum, Cryptocarya, Clausena, Dysoxylum, Xanthophyllum,
Dimorphocalyx, Ilex, Saurauia, Garcinia, Diplocasia, Embelia,
Palaquium, Fragraia, Rauwolfia, Paveta, Randia, and
Williamsia.
References
Hay I. 1998. E. D. Merrill, from Maine to Manila. Arnoldia Spring: 11-19.
Hugh Cuming (1791-1865).
Website by Sinu (http://www.orchids.co.in/orchidologists/hugh-cuming.shtm)
Madulid, D.A. 1989. The life and work of Luis Née, botanist of
the Malaspina Expedition. Archives of Natural History 16(1): 33-48.
Merrill, ED. 1905. A review of the identifications of the species
described in Blanco's Flora de Filipinas. Publication No. 27 of the
Bureau of Government Laboratories. Bureau of Printing, Manila. 132 pp.
Merrill, E.D. 1902-1906. Notes on Cuming's plants in the
herbarium of the Bureau of Government Laboratories, No. 28-36: 69-77.
Merrill, E.D. 1915. Genera and species erroneously credited to the Philippine flora. Philipp. J. Sci. 10(3): 171-194.
Merrill, E.D. 1918. Species Blancoanae: A critical revision of the
Philippines species of plants described by Blanco and Llanos. Bureau of
Science Publications No. 12. 425 pp.
Merrill, E.D. 1925. New species of Philippine plants collected by A. Loher. Philip. Journ. Sci. 27: 21-59.
Merrill, E.D. 1926. Hugh Cuming's letters to Sir William J. Hooker. Philipp. J. Sci. 30(2): 153-184, with portrait.
Née, L. 1801. Del abacá, que es is Musa textilis. Anal. Cienc. Nat. 4: 123-130.
Née, L. 1803. Del Buyo. Anales de Ciencias Naturales 6: 289-297.
Perkins, J. 1904. Enumeration of the recently collected plants of
Ahern, Jagor, Loher, Merrill, Warburg and others in Fragmentae Florae
Philippinae: Contributions to the Flora of the Philippine Islands.
4-66; 77-202.
Robbins, W. J. 1958. Elmer Drew Merrill 1876—1956: A
Biographical Memoir Biographical Memoir. National Academy of Sciences,
Washington, DC. 333pp.
Rolfe, RA. 1908. The localities of Cuming's Philippine plants. Bulletin
of Miscellaneous Information (Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew): 116-119.
Vallejo, B.M. Jr. 2007. Georg Joseph Kamel, SJ (1661-1706): First
Biodiversity scientist in RP. Star Science. Philippine Headline News
Online, Jan. 10, 2007.
Van steenis, C.G.G. J. 1950. Cyclopaedia of collections. Flora
malesiana, Vol. 1, ser .1.
(http://www.nationaalherbarium.nl/fmcollectors/Home.htm)
Vidal y Soler, S. 1883. Sinopsis de familias y géneros de
plantas leñosas de Filipinas. Introducción a la flora
forestal del archipiélago filipino (+ Atlas).
Vidal y Soler, S. 1885. Phanerogamae Cumingianae Philippinarum,
ó Indice numérico y catálogo sistemático de
las plantas fanerogamas colleccionadas en Filipinas por Hugh Cuming,
con caracteristicas de algunas especies no descritas y del
género Cumingia (Malváceas).
Vidal y Soler, S. 1886. Revision de plantas vasculares Filipinas.