To what extent do the large plants and small plants match?

[Koen G]

Several people have brought up this question, pointing to its importance for a variety of reasons, most recently Anton You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. 

To me this is an open question, so I would like to hear what others think. I'm at home in the small plants section, but have spent little time comparing them with big plants so far.

- I do remember having read in D'Imperio's book that she had a team of determined students trying to match the plants, without success.
- There are more small plants than big plants.


So what are your ideas about this? And what could the amount of matches/mismatches mean?

[Wladimir D]

The presence of unknown plants in the "pharma", can be partly be explained by the that many  the root of the plants in the first section  is drawn associatively (eg crocodile, mine, head, lion with tail ...) and in the "pharma" It can be painted in real as.

[Koen G]

Yes, I agree with that Wladimir. Although I would say that the plants in both sections are both drawn 'associatively', but for different reasons. This makes them look entirely different. Generally speaking, the large plants are deformed to give practical hints (what is the commercial or practical use of this plant?) while the small plants contain linguistic hints (how can I remember the foreign name for this plant?)