Kew Checklist

Kew Checklist
Name	Kew Checklist
Type	Botanical database
Established	1990s
Owner	Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew
Country	United Kingdom
Website	Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew

Kew Checklist The Kew Checklist is a botanical names and taxonomic information resource maintained by the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew in the United Kingdom. It compiles nomenclatural data and accepted names for vascular plants and selected non-vascular groups, supporting research at institutions such as the Natural History Museum, London, the Smithsonian Institution, the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh and the Missouri Botanical Garden. The Checklist underpinned projects linked to the Global Biodiversity Information Facility, the International Plant Names Index, and the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Overview

The Checklist functions as an authoritative index of plant names used by curators at Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew and collaborators at the Herbarium, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, the Royal Horticultural Society, the Botanical Society of Britain and Ireland and the New York Botanical Garden. It synthesizes taxonomic opinions from regional floras such as the Flora of China, the Flora of North America, the Flora of Australia and monographs produced by institutions like the Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle and the Institut de recherche pour le développement. Its datasets support global checklists maintained by organizations including the Catalogue of Life, the World Checklist of Selected Plant Families project predecessors, and collaborative initiatives with the International Union for Conservation of Nature.

History and Development

Origins trace to specimen curation practices at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew during the 19th and 20th centuries when collectors such as Joseph Dalton Hooker and institutions like the Kew Herbarium amassed holdings parallel to expeditions by Alexander von Humboldt, David Livingstone, and later 20th-century surveys supported by the Natural History Museum, London. Formal database development arose alongside digital initiatives at the British Museum and the Royal Society in the late 20th century, integrating printed indices such as the Index Kewensis and contributions from taxonomists affiliated to universities like University of Oxford, University of Cambridge and University of Edinburgh. Collaborations expanded with global programs under the United Nations Environment Programme and data standards advanced through the Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG) community.

Scope and Content

The Checklist covers angiosperms, gymnosperms, pteridophytes and selected bryophytes as interpreted by specialists from institutions including the Missouri Botanical Garden, the New York Botanical Garden, the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh and the Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle. Entries include accepted names, synonyms, basionyms and author citations following conventions influenced by the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants and taxonomic treatments published in journals such as Taxon, Kew Bulletin, Brittonia and the Journal of Systematics and Evolution. Geographic annotations reference floristic regions recognized in works by the International Association for Plant Taxonomy and compilations like the Atlas of Living Australia.

Taxonomic Methodology

Taxonomic decisions within the Checklist derive from peer-reviewed monographs, type specimen examinations at herbaria including the Herbarium of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, molecular phylogenetic studies published by groups at the Smithsonian Institution and the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, and global consortiums such as the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group. Nomenclatural assessments adhere to principles formalized by the International Botanical Congress and utilize electronic typesetting standards endorsed by the Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG). Curatorial workflows involve cross-referencing authoritative sources like the Flora Neotropica series, regional checklists produced by the African Plant Database partners, and specialist networks including the International Plant Names Index community.

Data Access and Publication

Data from the Checklist have been disseminated through portals maintained by the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew and fed into aggregators such as the Global Biodiversity Information Facility, the Catalogue of Life and the Encyclopedia of Life. Publication modes ranged from printed indices (informed by the Index Kewensis) to downloadable datasets compliant with Darwin Core standards, and web services integrated into platforms used by the Natural History Museum, London, the Royal Botanic Society, and academic projects at the University of California, Berkeley. Licensing and data-sharing arrangements intersected with policies of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya Protocol in collaborative research contexts.

Use and Impact

Researchers at institutions like the Smithsonian Institution, the Missouri Botanical Garden, and universities such as University of Oxford and Harvard University have used the Checklist for floristic inventories, conservation assessments with the IUCN Red List, and biodiversity informatics work with the Global Biodiversity Information Facility. Botanical gardens including the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, and the New York Botanical Garden applied its content for accession management, interpretation in public displays, and horticultural labeling guided by standards from the Royal Horticultural Society. Policy makers and conservation NGOs like World Wildlife Fund referenced Checklist-derived taxonomies in regional conservation planning and treaty reporting to the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Criticisms and Limitations

Critiques centered on taxonomic decisions, completeness and update frequency have been raised by specialists from the International Association for Plant Taxonomy, the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group, and regional herbaria including the Herbarium, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew and the National Herbarium of New South Wales. Concerns mirror those voiced in debates at forums hosted by the Royal Society and publications in journals such as Taxon and Systematic Biology regarding reconciliation of molecular phylogenies with traditional treatments, regional synonymy issues documented by the Flora of China authors, and data integration challenges encountered by the Global Biodiversity Information Facility. Efforts to address these limits involved partnerships with the International Plant Names Index, expanded digitization programs with the Natural History Museum, London and community curation experiments supported by the Biodiversity Heritage Library.

Category:Botanical databases