Research of plant resources of the European North of the USSR in the first half of the twentieth century.

Roshchevskaya Larisa Pavlovna ORCID: 0000-0003-2608-0996 Doctor of History Chief Researcher, Department of Humanities Interdisciplinary Research, FIC "Komi Scientific Center of Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences" 167982, Russia, Komi Republic, Syktyvkar, Kommunisticheskaya str., 24 lp38rosh@gmail.com Other publications by this author

The interest in the plant world is explained by the need for hunger relief, economic activity, and medicines. The development of the northern and Arctic regions of the country is especially difficult. The problem of providing the European north of Russia with food and fodder worsened after the civil war in the process of a significant increase in the population while solving national economic tasks for the development of the territory. This prompts us to turn to the analysis of scientific and organizational activities of corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences Alexander Petrovich Shennikov (1888-1962).

University lecturer and researcher A.P. Shennikov studied the meadow vegetation of the European North and the Middle Volga region, developed issues of vegetation classification and geobotanical zoning. He left a large geobotanical legacy about the territory of the European north of Russia and created scientific socially oriented knowledge about the northern region of the country.

            The novelty of the work lies in the characterization of previously unknown documents to clarify the role of A.P. Shennikov in the development of geobotanical knowledge about the European north of the country. The research methodology is based on historical and biographical techniques of cultural and intellectual history, which allows us to highlight the historical circumstances that influenced the formation and development of Shennikov's views.

            In the 1920s, in Soviet reference publications, the activities of A.P. Shennikov and his father Pyotr Pavlovich were interpreted from a local history angle. At the same time, the father was called an ethnographer, and the son was called an agricultural expert ^[1]. In the 1960s, his wife Maria Mikhailovna contributed to the coverage of Shennikov's activities ^[2], but she admitted that "there is no complete data on all the details of Alexander Petrovich's personal participation in the northern expeditions" ^[3].

            By the end of the twentieth century. The merits of the scientist in identifying previously unknown plants and in herbarization began to be given increasing importance. In the encyclopedia of the Komi Republic, Shennikov is named the largest expert on flora, who studied the composition of meadow vegetation and the patterns of its formation in various areas of the country. In our century, biographical literature pays attention to Shennikov's role in studying vegetation during the flooding of the Rybinsk reservoir, his extensive herbarium at the Botanical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg, Shennikov is shown as an authoritative Soviet botanist, author of works on meadow science, ecology and geobotany ^[4].

            A.P. Shennikov studied the plant resources of the Komi Region for decades, explored remote areas, participated in the largest expedition projects of the USSR Academy of Sciences, collaborated with the Komi branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences. All this led to the availability of various documents by A.P. Shennikov (publications, manuscripts, herbariums) in different archives of the country. The personal archive fund of A.P. Shennikov is available in the St. Petersburg branch of the Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences. This fund contains correspondence between A.P. Shennikov and employees of the Komi branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences V.M. Bolotova, A.A. Dedov, O.N. Zvereva, N.S. Kotelina, A.N. Lashchenkova and I.S. Huntimer for 1945-1962.

The documents of the Scientific Archive of the Federal Research Center "Komi Scientific Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences" in Syktyvkar expand information about the personality and contribution of A.P. Shennikov to the study of the European North. Clerical and accounting documents, as well as his correspondence, are available in the departments of geobotany and agriculture. Let's name the reports of young colleagues A.P. Shennikov N.V. Dylis, A.M. Leontiev A.I. Leskov, S.M. Tazba, Yu.P. Yudin, V.N. Andreev, who worked in expeditions to the Komi ASSR in 1925-1937 under his leadership. V.N. Andreev mentioned participation with Shennikov in the Izhemsko-Ukhta the detachment of the Pechora colonization expedition of the People's Commissariat of Agriculture of the RSFSR K.F. Malyarevsky in 1929 as a significant event in his life (5. F. 1. Op. 2. D. 15. L. 1). Post-war documents reflect the leading role of A.P. Shennikov in the development of botanical research and the creation of the herbarium of the Institute of Biology of the Komi branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

The personal archive fund of the Candidate of Biological Sciences A.A. Dedov (No. 38) contains letters from the Shennikov couple from Leningrad related to clarifying the composition of the herbarium and the definition of plants, reflections on the work done, optimal planning of postgraduate training by N.S. Kotelina for 1945-1950. (5. F. 38. Op. 3. D. 16. 8 l.) In the N.S. Kotelina Foundation (No. 36) there are letters and extracts from the works of Alexander Petrovich; candidate of Biological Sciences A.N. Lashchenkova (No. 25) – her manuscript about Shennikov for the encyclopedia "Komi Republic" (5, F. 25. Op. 1. D. 8). Collectively, the archive documents reflect creative contacts with the botanical community of the region in the process of long-term study of vegetation.

The scientist's personal library was transferred to Novosibirsk when the Siberian Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences was created. But the staff of the Scientific Library of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences reported that the books were sent without a document confirming the fact of donation. They turned out to be in various sections of the book fund. A.P. Shennikov owns more than 250 scientific papers, but a little more than twenty were found in the Scientific Library of the Komi National Research Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, except for articles in collections or journals. Syktyvkar University has books in the personal libraries of professors A.I. Tolmachev and N.P. Akulshina.

            Together, the identified sources allow us to set the following tasks in the article: to highlight the contribution of A.P. Shennikov to the study of botanical resources in the territory of the modern Komi Republic, the role of his personal collections in the creation of the herbarium of the Institute of Biology of the Komi National Research Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the scientific and organizational activities of his graduate students N.S. Kotelina and N.P. Akulshchina.

Alexander Petrovich Shennikov came from a family of Vologda teacher and local historian, who collaborated with the museum of the Vologda Society for the Study of the Northern Territory and the Dialectological Commission in Moscow, published several articles in local newspapers. During his studies at the Natural Sciences Department of the Physics and Mathematics Faculty of St. Petersburg University (1907-1912), the young man independently explored the vegetation of the Vologda and Arkhangelsk provinces. Since 1912, while still a student, Alexander conducted practical classes in botany at the Psychoneurological Institute, at the Stebutovsky Higher Women's agricultural courses, at the St. Petersburg Forestry Institute and even at the junior courses of the university and soon received the position of professor. Alexander Petrovich taught at Leningrad State University for more than 40 years (1919-1960), from 1925 he worked at the Main Botanical Garden and the Botanical Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences. In 1935 he received the degree of Doctor of Biological Sciences. In 1946, Shennikov was elected a corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences, in 1948 he was awarded the title of Honored Scientist of the RSFSR.

           As a student, Alexander became a member of the Imperial Society of Naturalists, the Russian Botanical Society (1915) and the scientific secretary of the Commission for the study of vegetation of this society. At the same time, his organizational and pedagogical abilities manifested themselves quite early.

            Expeditions to study vegetation were an integral part of Alexander Shennikov's activities. In 1903-1909, on behalf of the Society of Naturalists, Shennikov conducted a botanical study of the area of R. Vychegda from Ust-Sysolsk to the mouth. In 1910, he visited the villages of Kokvitsy, Palevitsy, Seregovo, Ust-Sysolsk and collected 685 plants. To identify the collected plants, he attracted reputable knowledgeable botanists. Researcher from St. Petersburg R.R. Polye looked at sedges, Professor K.R. Kupfer from Riga – violets, German botanist K.G. Zahn – seed plants, D.I. Litvinov – other plants. But most of the definitions were fulfilled by Shennikov himself. As a result, 16 plants were discovered that were previously unknown in the Vologda province. Shennikov transferred the collected herbarium material to the Botanical Museum of the Academy of Sciences, the St. Petersburg Botanical Garden and the Forestry Institute. It should be noted that from 1910-1911 he processed his own herbariums at the Department of Botany of St. Petersburg (Leningrad) University ^[6].

           In 1917, a young botanist conducted a "botanical journey" through Ust-Sysolsky district to the upper reaches of the Pechora River in Cherdinsky district of Perm province. By boat along the Pechora, the travelers reached the mouth of the R. B. Empty, went on foot to the ridges of the Northern Urals, crossed the Shizhim Pechorsky River to a tributary of the R. Ilych and went down the Ilych to the mouth. Then the way lay along the Pechora to the village of Troitsko-Pechorskoye in Cherdyn. The main task of the trip was to identify the quantity and productivity of the meadow area. Shennikov was struck by the mountain meadows, which are "used only by bears", and the diversity of the flora. In the lower reaches of the Ilych, the edges of valley forests introduced a peculiar feature into the landscape. The weed vegetation was poor, which the traveler explained by the low population of the region, but he noted the ability of weeds to penetrate with humans into uninhabited areas.

           Subsequently, A.P. Shennikov wrote that the population of the area is negligible. There are no dirt roads between villages and settlements. He saw only turnips in the fields, and the forests had a depressed look. Botanically, the area is very little known ^[7]. Shennikov reported on this very difficult trip to the Vologda Society for the Study of the Northern Territory on June 30, 1921. One of the listeners noted that "the report was accompanied by vague pictures and was listened to with great attention by a large audience." Indeed, about a hundred photographs of the expedition are preserved in the personal archive fund of A.P. Shennikov in the St. Petersburg branch of the Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

           Most of the herbarium collected during the trip belonged to the Cherdinsky district of the Perm province. The types of vegetation collected were determined by the staff of the Academy of Sciences in Petrograd D.I. Litvinov, B.N. Gorodkov, S.S. Ganeshin, employees of the Main Botanical Garden S.V. Yuzepchuk and the Forestry Institute E.L. Wolf. The herbarium was transferred to the Botanical Museum of the Academy of Sciences, the doublets – to the Department of Applied Botany of the Northern Regional Experimental Station in Vologda. In the early 1940s, Shennikov noted that the expedition prompted him to engage in geobotanical mapping of forage lands and geobotanical zoning.

            In 1913-1921, five articles by Alexander Petrovich appeared in the proceedings of the Department of Agriculture, the Ministry of Railways, the St. Petersburg Society of Naturalists and the Journal of the Russian Botanical Society.

In the conditions of civil war, political turmoil and famine, Shennikov managed to organize several scientific expeditions, which to some extent helped to survive in those difficult years. In 1919-1924, he was the head of the Department of Meadow Science and Meadow Management and the permanent station of meadow science, led the stationary study of meadows at the Vologda Dairy Institute. From the same time, he became an associate professor at Petrograd University, and from 1919 – a professor and until 1922 headed the Department of Botany of the Petrograd Agronomic Institute in Detskoye Selo, was a member of the Vologda Regional Department for Agricultural Experimental Business and an employee of the Main Botanical Garden.

Consequently, soon after the October Revolution, Shennikov acquired a certain scientific influence as a geobotanist specialist.

The young researcher was also recognized in Moscow, where he made a report on agricultural experimental work and meadow research, gave a course of lectures on meadow science for agronomists at the Timiryazev Agricultural Academy (1920). From the Vologda Agricultural Experimental Station and the State Botanical Society Shennikov participated in the I All-Union Agricultural Exhibition in Moscow (1923), for which He received a certificate of honor from the Academy of Sciences.

            Thus, the beginning of Shennikov's scientific activity was carried out mainly on the territory of the European northeast. Specific studies allowed him to establish which plants grew in the area and identify previously unknown specimens. The analytical principle of generalizing the accumulated material allowed the researcher to put forward a reasonable classification of vegetation and conclude that the territory can be divided into several parts and it is advisable to systematize these areas from south to north. Already in these years, Shennikov identified a group of Arctic plants capable of developing in extreme conditions.

            Choosing remote, unknown regions of the north for expeditions, Alexander Petrovich, possessing the skills of marching life, correctly determined the goals of each trip and achieved the set goals. Teaching in several higher educational institutions and cooperation in research centers made it possible to attract experienced specialists and teach young people relevant knowledge. In addition, he considered it necessary to publish the results obtained and thereby make them available to the scientific community. Since 1925, Shennikov, as an employee of the Botanical Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences, began to engage in geobotanical zoning of the Northern Territory.

Since the 1920s, expeditionary and stationary studies of the vegetation of the Northern Territory have been determined by the economic and socio-political circumstances in the country. Stalin's theory of the rise of class struggle became a key principle of mass political repression. The main type of detention facilities were correctional labor camps located in areas, including in the European Northeast, where freelance workers did not want to go. Coal, oil and gas fields were discovered here, and large-scale logging was launched. To develop natural resources, the construction of the North Pechora Railway from Kotlas to Vorkuta began.

Soon, the difficulties with the food supply of prisoners and displaced persons became all-encompassing. It was also necessary to increase and improve livestock feed, which means that the task of studying meadow pastures and weed control in the fields arose.

In order to clarify the colonization and resettlement land fund, the study of natural forage lands and, in general, the agricultural suitability of the region, since 1926, large-scale systematic soil and geobotanical studies began in the European North, which had not only scientific, but also economic tasks, since they were associated with railway construction projects.

In the 1929-1930s, A.P. Shennikov participated in the colonization expedition of the regional land administration. The expedition was led by soil scientist and geographer K.F. Malyarevsky (1879-1934). Even before studying at St. Petersburg University, he participated in zemstvo research, performed major soil science work along the route of the Murmansk Railway in Karelia and on the Kola Peninsula (1923-1926). Using this experience, in 1926, as a lecturer at the Leningrad Agricultural Institute, he led an expeditionary colonization survey of the route of the future Syktyvkar–Pinyug railway (5 F.1. Op. 2. d. 116. L. 6).

As can be seen from the expedition report, A.P. Shennikov led a detachment to study the vegetation of the Sysola River floodplain and drew attention to the increase in the number of migrants. The scientist believed that population growth requires solving food and feed problems, that is, searching for local plant resources and new sources of plant raw materials, including from wild plants.

A new stage of A.P. Shennikov's expeditionary and research activities began in 1930 with the study of the meadows of the Komi Autonomous Region. The expeditions were carried out at the expense of various metropolitan and local institutions. They had different names, but their main purpose for Shennikov was a continuous survey of the Northern Territory area. In addition, these expeditions formed the composition of his students, whose reports are available in the Scientific Archive of the Komi Scientific Research Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

The archive contains the materials of N.I. Temnoyev with the characteristics of meadows and meadow lands along the Vym River in 1930. The report contains the social and demographic characteristics of the area: "The beginning of the work of the detachment coincided with the logging company, where all the adult and healthy population was recruited. There were very few who were urgently recruited by the forestry enterprise for the reclamation of floating rivers. The rest of the population (in fact, the elderly and children) were waiting for the hay harvest time." "In essence, the issue of labor would not be so acute if we could be satisfied with the migrants, among whom there were many unemployed, but they are absolutely helpless in a boat, are not adapted to the scarcity of food and are not oriented in the area." Other observations showed that the actual data obtained did not correspond to the boundaries of the available vegetation maps. Temnoyev brought a lot of processed material to Leningrad and compared the data obtained with the data of the Botanical Garden. According to Shennikov, the report testified "to a lot of work on behalf of the regional land administration." "These data make it possible to plan activities for the cultural development of the area with sufficient confidence" (5, F. 1. Op. 2. D. 5. L. 71).

           Continuing the work in 1931, Shennikov and Temnoyev surveyed about 60 thousand hectares along the Mylva River at a distance of one and a half to five kilometers from the riverbed. In addition, Temnoyev conducted a soil and botanical survey in the area of the former Ulyanovsk Monastery, where agriculture was successfully practiced in the late XIX – early XX centuries.

Geobotanical studies of the Komi territory were also dictated by the needs of the development of horse-drawn transport for the export of timber. In 1931, the Komi regional branch of the State Land Trust organized a reconnaissance geobotanical survey in order to find land convenient for the organization of large forage farms. Comiles held a meeting in June 1931, which was attended by geobotanists A.M. Leontiev and S.M. Tazba. They were instructed to identify at least 1 thousand hectares of convenient land for a fodder state farm and allocate such plots in order to prepare them for haymaking in the coming season in six months. At the same time, the costs were provided for no more than 50 rubles per hectare. Despite the fact that the illusory nature of the task was obvious, the geobotanical expedition surveyed from 60 to 130 thousand hectares and concluded that there were no required lands in the area (5. F. 1. Op. 2. d. 7. 114 l. l. 1-3).

The author of two more reports was Sofia Moiseevna Tazba, a researcher at the Botanical Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences. In 1931, she conducted a soil and botanical survey. The Northern Keltma river identified up to 400 hectares of pastures and assumed that up to 1800 hectares of meadow land could be freed up for extensive use, because the forest would not make it difficult to create a forage base. When the forest is reduced, a large amount of productive herbage will appear. However, sedge-coarse grasses will be of poor quality (5. F. 1. Op. 2. d. 8. 56 l.). The following year, 1932, during a survey of the Timshor River valley, S.M. Tazba revealed a different picture. In this area, the swamps did not allow the organization of a hay-forage base, and the lands "for the most part do not have agricultural significance" (5. F. 1. Op. 2. D. 9. 40 l.). In Syktyvkar district, abundant meadows were available only in the Nizhny Chov state farm, but in general, the feeding issue in the area was unfavorable. Tazba considered it necessary, during collectivization, to raise the yield and quality of the developed meadows here (5. F. 1. Op. 2. d. 12. 44 l.). Estimates of the hay lands of the Komi Republic made by S.M. Tazba were generally unfavorable for the deployment of camps. A.P. Shennikov in one of the letters of 1962 recalled: "I don't remember exactly anymore, but it seems that it was Kokvitsy who mapped the Basin in detail. It would be interesting to compare the vegetation of that time and modern vegetation in specific areas" (5. F. 36. Op. 3. D. 3. L. 17).

Based on the results of research in 1932, rich botanical materials were collected and the mechanical composition of soils was determined at the Forestry Academy (5. F. 1. Op. 2. D. 7. l. 2, 98).

The information that in the 1940s S.M. Tazba was searching for land for future GULAG farms in the Subarctic is reflected in the memoirs. Their author "for completing the experimental station and new state farms" identified "in the farms of Vorkuta and along the river. We have specialists in the field of agriculture.". As a result of "land management works, the state farm received accurate data on the size of land in the floodplain of the Pechora River, specific quantitative and qualitative indicators on meadows, herbage <...>, forest and shrub vegetation." This allowed the state farm "Medvezhka" to keep 1,500 cattle. When the surveyors completed their task, "geobotanist S.M. Tazba in 1948 went to work at the Naryan-Mar experimental agricultural station and began studying the vegetation cover in the lower reaches of the Pechora" (5. F. 20. Op. 1. 87. pp. 13, 17).

During the first expeditions to the northern regions, the interests of botanical local lore prevailed, but Shennikov had already identified three types of northern forests and gradually approached the development of the concept of specificity of the plant resources of the north. The principles of geobotanical zoning developed during these expeditions became the basis for the geobotanical zoning of the country conducted by the Botanical Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

           By 1933, Alexander Petrovich had gained considerable fame in the scientific world and in the European North, as a teacher, an erudite botanist, a skillful organizer and leader of complex expeditions. This explains that he became a member of the Pechora Brigade of the Polar Commission of the USSR Academy of Sciences in 1933. The Pechora Brigade was a temporary team of researchers from various institutions to study natural resources and develop the European north of the USSR in order to further develop and create a large mining industry. The head of the brigade was the President of the USSR Academy of Sciences, academician A.P. Karpinsky.

However, in the literature about Shennikov, participation in the brigade is mentioned only briefly: "In 1933 he worked in the Ukhta area, was on the lower Pechora," the Ukhta trip turned out to be especially difficult and dragged on until late autumn, "besides, Alexander Petrovich returned ill." Most often, there is no clarification that the work of the Pechora brigade was the largest event of the Academy of Sciences of that time and had a significant impact on the scientific and organizational development of the region.

Alexander Petrovich participated in the discussion of the tasks of the expedition. On January 10, 1933, at a meeting on the study of the Ukhto-Pechora district of the Northern Territory, he said that for the agricultural development of the Northern Territory, it was necessary to conduct soil and geobotanical studies on the middle Pechora, Izhma, Ukhta and in the upper reaches  Take it out.

At that time, the center of geological oil and gas developments of the GULAG system was the village of Chibyu (modern Ukhta), where all members of the brigade worked for 10 days. The documents recorded Shennikov's speeches at meetings when they discussed the organization of geophysical work of the USSR Academy of Sciences and in a joint meeting of the brigade with employees of the Ukhto-Pechora Trust. He reported on the agricultural work of the Uthpechtrest in the Ukhta district and prepared a resolution on agriculture; worked at a meeting on the development of the national economy and the tasks of scientific research in the Izhma district.

As part of the brigade, Shennikov visited the basins of the Ukhta, Usa and Nizhnyaya Pechora rivers. In the village of Izhma, ten members of the brigade, including Shennikov, worked for four days, because Izhma at that time was a large regional center, more than two thousand people lived here and the Pechora Veterinary and Bacteriological Institute operated.

A.I. Tolmachev wrote that Shennikov worked in "Ust-Us and Ust-Tsilma (mainly at the [Yelsko]-x[agricultural] station)", visited the Kochmes state farm in the Usa Valley, which had the task of "supplying vegetables and dairy products to the mining area located higher up the Usa" (5. F. 1. Op. 1. d. 6. L. 1-24). After visiting Kochmes, A.P. Shennikov recommended that instead of exporting deer meat outside the district, reorient part of the reindeer herding farms to supply Vorkuta. As a botanist, he advocated the intensive development of horticulture in the upper reaches of the Usa, the cultivation of early vegetables in greenhouses and greenhouses.

A.I. Tolmachev highly appreciated Shennikov's work as part of the brigade: "I refused to enter the Kosya River, because a simple cursory inspection of the meadows would not have given anything new <...>," and the Kochmes state farm was examined by A.P. Shennikov." But Shennikov had to return to Leningrad before the expedition was completed, according to A.I. Tolmachev, "for the sake of directing a number of works of the Botanical Institute."

Two speeches by Shennikov were of great importance for solving the problems of agricultural development in the region. The first took place on October 9 at a meeting of the Polar Commission of the USSR Academy of Sciences after the return of the expedition on the results of the work. The participants of the meeting recognized the need for the Academy to carry out "stationary botanical works on the basis of the Ust-Tsilemskaya zonal station" in 1934. The second presentation took place in Moscow at a meeting to discuss the "Working hypothesis of the national economic development of the Ukhto-Pechora Region", compiled based on the results of the work of the brigade. He believed that "the growth of the Pechora population and the growth of needs will need to be provided with food first," but this problem cannot be solved "by importing almost the entire mass of food from afar" ^[8].

It is also necessary to note Shennikov's important contribution to the creation of a series of visual sources. He was a good photographer and was able to reflect the main moments of the expedition's everyday life. Some of these illustrations have been published. As part of the Pechora Brigade of the USSR Academy of Sciences, A.P. Shennikov began completing a personal collection of mosses in the vicinity of the village of Adak-Shchelya in the Intinsky district.

Shennikov's active participation in the work of the Pechora Brigade, erudition and competence explain that he was included in the editorial board of the projected edition of the Komi Soviet Encyclopedia and intended to place an article about him there. Unfortunately, the publication was cut short in 1935 by political repression. In addition, Shennikov joined the Northern Bureau of the Polar Commission of the USSR Academy of Sciences in Arkhangelsk ^[9], which will be discussed below.

When intensive work was still underway to comprehend the results of the Pechora brigade of the USSR Academy of Sciences, A.P. Shennikov began to study the flooding area of the future Rybinsk reservoir. The government was forming a large-scale project "Bolshaya Volga" for the reconstruction of the internal waterways of the USSR and the connection of the White, Baltic, Caspian, Azov and Black Seas with a single canal system. The creation of the Rybinsk reservoir meant that the forest zone of the Yaroslavl and Vologda regions and the vast flood meadows of the Mologo-Sheksninsky interfluve would be flooded. Shennikov attracted S.M. Tazba and A.M. Leontiev to the botanical and geographical description of these forests and meadows, and was one of the initiators of the creation of the biological station "Borok" of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

Expeditions of the Botanical Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences to study forests in 1934 included several field detachments led by Shennikov. V.N. Andreev studied the forest vegetation of southern Timan and the area of the Ukhta and Izhma rivers (5. F. 1. Op. 2. D. 15. 88 l.). Yu.P. Yudin – vegetation of Vymsko-Vychegodskaya parts (5. F. 1. Op. 2. D. 24). A.M. Leontiev and N.V. Dylis – vegetation of the basin of the Lokchim river, Vymsko-Izhemsky and Vymsko-Mezen interfluves. P.P. Polyakov and N.V. Dylis, an employee of the Northern Expedition of the Central Scientific Research Institute of Forestry of the Sevgoszemtrest of the Northern Land Administration, characterized the forests of the right bank of the Lokchim River. Yu.D. Tsinserling, an employee of the Polar Commission of the USSR Academy of Sciences, also participated in this expedition. The Scientific Archive of the Komi Scientific Research Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences also contains the final reports of the head of this complex expedition, A.P. Shennikov (5. F. 1. Op. 2. d. 23. 62 l.).

As a result of an expedition to the western Pritiman part of the forest strip of the Pechora Region in 1934, A.P. Shennikov came to the conclusion that the differences were due to the climatic and altitude characteristics of the Timan ridge ^[10]. Then this conclusion was justified and applied to the entire territory of the forest northeast of the European part of the USSR. The scientific and organizational results of the expedition were noted by the scientist's widow: "... many famous geobotanists came out of the participants of these expeditions, mainly university students of Alexander Petrovich and then employees of the Botanical Institute" ^[11].

The Pechora Complex Geobotanical Expedition of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1935) became the next stage of vegetation survey and geobotanical zoning of the European North. A.I. Leskov, A.A. Korchagin, Yu.P. Yudin, N.V. Dylis, S.A. Doyarenko, L.V. Bakhtin and A.A. Shakhov worked in the expedition under the leadership of A.P. Shennikov (5. F. 1. Op. 2. D. 29. 83 L.). (5. F. 1. Op. 2. d. 30. 16 l.). The collected original data allowed N.V. Dylis, A.I. Leskov and Yu.P. Yudin, edited by A.P. Shennikov, to compile a geobotanical sketch of the Izhma-Pechora interfluve (5. F. 1. Op. 2. d. 27. 177 l.; d. 23. 62 l.). In the final report, a 1 :3,000,000 scale blank geobotanical map of the Komi ASSR was presented. When Yu.P. Yudin discovered plants in the eastern part of the Izhmo-Pechora interfluve that were not typical of this subzone of the middle taiga, he assumed that these were islands of the Arctic-Alpine flora (5. F. 1. Op. 2. d. 35. 11 l.).

M.M. Shennikova named another participant of the Pechora geobotanical expedition – a graduate of the Agricultural Institute in Petrograd (1920) and subsequently the children's writer A.A. Shakhov. Shakhov recognized "the valuable results of the Pechora expeditions of the Academy of Sciences under the leadership of A.P. Shennikov", wrote that Shennikov has a lot of material, the publication of which will give "a more complete picture of the nature of the Pechora region and better illuminate the prospects of agriculture" ^[12]. Shakhov himself got acquainted with the works of the first researcher of the Pechora Region, biogeographer A.V. Zhuravsky, in Ust-Tsilma. Zhuravsky's widow recalled that A.A. Shakhov "cited many references to his work," but firmly stated "that the work would be published only if references to A.J.[Uravsky] were removed" (5. F. 1. Op. 1. D. 197. L. 39). After the publication of Shakhov's book, in her opinion, he turned out to be the "discoverer" of the Pechora meadows.

A.P. Shennikov presented the results of the 1935 expedition on geobotanical zoning of the Northern Territory at the Northern Regional Planning Commission in Arkhangelsk and at a joint meeting of the Botanical Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences with the Council for the Study of Natural Resources in Leningrad when discussing the research work of the Northern Bureau of the Polar Commission of the USSR Academy of Sciences. The bureau stressed that the Pechora Integrated Geobotanical Expedition had completed the study of the western half of the region and had begun relevant work in the Pechora River basin ^[13]. Shennikov's students and followers have published a list of Arctic plants identified in the area.

As an employee of the Academic Botanical Institute and a lecturer at Leningrad University, Alexander Petrovich actively participated in the work of the Northern Base of the USSR Academy of Sciences and the Northern Bureau of the Polar Commission of the USSR Academy of Sciences in Arkhangelsk.At the initiative of the professor, the Northern Bureau organized an independent expedition to study the weed flora and conducted a study of mosses on Novaya Zemlya together with the Botanical Institute. Since that time, Shennikov began to pay great attention to the study of sphagnum plant communities that appeared in the low-lying parts of flood meadows, swamped and eventually turned into sphagnum peat.

Many of A.P. Shennikov's initiatives were supported by a self-taught botanist, Doctor of Biological Sciences I.A. Perfiliev. Their friendship began during the years of working together at the Dairy Institute in Vologda. Shennikov reviewed Perfiliev's publications, expanding the significance of his botanical research, sent his students V.N. Andreev, A.A. Dedov, F.V. Sambuka, 3.P. Savkin, Yu.P. Yudin to I.A. Perfiliev in Arkhangelsk to assimilate the principles of the work of an original researcher ^[14]. The activities of A.P. Shennikov, I.A. Perfiliev and their colleagues are highly appreciated in the report of the Northern Base of the USSR Academy of Sciences for 1939: "Scientific materials <...> can serve as a serious basis for work on the flora of the north <...>, in connection with the beginning in 1940 of the compilation of a monographic summary on the flora of the European North of the USSR" ^[15].

But the tragic circumstances of the Great Patriotic War caused the evacuation of the Northern Base of the USSR Academy of Sciences from Arkhangelsk to Syktyvkar. The relevant documents are preserved in the National Archive of the Komi Republic. On June 24, 1941, the director of the Northern Base of the USSR Academy of Sciences, A.I. Tolmachev, informed the Council of People's Commissars that "the Northern Base of the USSR Academy of Sciences decided to concentrate the processing of all materials on the Komi ASSR collected by its forces in Syktyvkar" and continue all work on geobotanical and soil topics. The head of the botanical sector, A.A. Dedov, and several employees had to be transferred to a permanent job in Syktyvkar. Tolmachev wrote that "scientific funds and equipment necessary for <...> works, in particular collections and archival materials related to the Komi ASSR," were taken to Syktyvkar.

Thus, Syktyvkar received documents on botanical expeditions led by A.P. Shennikov and the herbarium of the Northern Base of the USSR Academy of Sciences, created in Arkhangelsk since 1936. There were 6-7 thousand sheets in the herbarium. The vegetation of the surroundings of Ukhta and Syktyvkar was better represented, but plants from other regions of the republic were absent.

            The details of completing the herbarium, when it was transported to Syktyvkar, reveal the personal file and correspondence of Shennikov's wife and colleague, Maria Mikhailovna Golubeva-Shennikova.

           A graduate of Leningrad University with a degree in geobotany botany (1918), Maria taught as a student, so after graduating from the university she was left at the university to prepare for scientific and pedagogical activities. In her autobiography, M.M. Shennikova wrote that in 1920-1924 she was engaged in geochemical research in Vologda for the purpose of geobotanical zoning and technology for studying vegetation. Later, as a researcher at the Leningrad Agricultural Institute (1920-1926), she was almost simultaneously a researcher at the Vologda Regional Agricultural Experimental Station (1923-1927). In 1932-1941, she taught at Leningrad University and the Leningrad Agricultural Institute. Since 1934, she worked at the hospital of the USSR Academy of Sciences in the Zhiguli Nature Reserve, at the Severo-Dvinskaya Meadow Research Station (1936-1937). To clarify the conditions for increasing the productivity of meadows and pastures of the Severodvinsk basin in the Kotlas district of the Arkhangelsk region, she described the types of meadows and pastures, observed the development of grass under the influence of the timing of mowing, found out the yield of meadows and pastures. their qualitative characteristics, studied the biology of harmful plants. As a result of these studies, Maria Mikhailovna made practical recommendations for rationalizing the use of meadows and pastures ^[16].

In 1936, Maria Mikhailovna was awarded the degree of Candidate of Biological Sciences for her scientific work and became a researcher at the Northern Base of the USSR Academy of Sciences, and in 1938-1945, together with her husband, she was at the Borok biological station in the Yaroslavl region. All the moves were related to her husband's career movements.

           On January 1, 1945, when the Great Patriotic War was still underway, and the return to Leningrad was difficult, M.M. Golubeva-Shennikova became a junior researcher at the geobotany sector of the USSR Academy of Sciences Base in Komi ASSR (concurrently) with a stay in Leningrad at the Botanical Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences. As stated in the order, she performed "work related to the compilation of the geobotanical map of the Komi ASSR and with the preparation for the compilation of the "Flora of the Komi ASSR" and "Vegetation of the Komi ASSR", first of all, the description of a personal collection of mosses collected by Alexander Petrovich. A.P. Shennikov wrote that she needed to do "the definition of mosses, in particular first of all, sphagnum" and continue disassembly in the herbarium of the BIN: "moss and lichen collections with samples from the Komi ASSR, identification of not yet defined collections, including sphagnum and other mosses." Alexander Petrovich complained that "there is absolutely no time to do this work myself" (5. F. 38. Op. 3. D. 16. l. 2).

A.A. Dedov petitioned for the continuation of the employment contract with Maria Mikhailovna for 1946 and wrote that "the geobotany sector is extremely interested in Golubeva-Shennikova continuing in 1946 the work begun in 1945. We are preparing the "Flora of the Komi ASSR", included in the study plan in 1946. <...> This is a multi-month work." To design this "time-consuming and special preparation work," Golubeva-Shennikova was tasked with "determining the collection of mosses collected by the Base's expeditions in recent years" and viewing the herbariums of the Botanical Institute.

Alexander Petrovich continued to study the vegetation of the European North after the Great Patriotic War, striving to collect the most complete herbarium of the local flora of the Vologda, Arkhangelsk, Olonets provinces and Komi ASSR. Shennikov's herbariums are kept in the Botanical Museum of the USSR Academy of Sciences, the Botanical Garden, Leningrad University, the Forestry Institute and Vologda.

The plants identified in the territory of the European Northeast of the USSR, their description and systematics led to the appearance of the largest collection of A.P. Shennikov and in the herbarium of the Institute of Biology of the Komi Scientific Research Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Syktyvkar. The documents of the Scientific Archive of the Komi Scientific Research Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences make it possible to find out how the herbarium of the modern Institute of Biology was formed and what role A.P. Shennikov played in this process.

In turn, in the middle of 1945, A.P. Shennikov came to the conclusion that it was necessary to describe "moss samples collected in the Komi ASSR, stored in my personal herbarium for identification, labeling and transfer to the herbarium of the Base." The letter ended with the information that "the number of herbarium sheets "cannot be counted, at least several hundred."

On September 4, 1945, A.A. Dedov and the Deputy director of the USSR Academy of Sciences Base in Komi ASSR, I.I. Oplesnin, appealed to the Botanical Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences with a request to transfer doublets to replenish the herbarium in Syktyvkar. They knew that the Botanical Institute had collections from the Komi ASSR F.V. Sambuk, Yu.D. Tsinserling, V.N. Andreev, A.A. Korchagin "and especially the collections of the BEAN expeditions in 1934-1935 under the leadership of A.P. Shennikov." In addition, it was assumed that the BIN included the collections of A.V. Zhuravsky, collected back in 1904-1910. Syktyvkar was asked to "select from the available <...> collections for the Komi ASSR of all doublet material (or even entirely separate collections)" (5. F. 38. Op. 3. D. 1. L. 1). Candidate of Biological Sciences, senior researcher A.S. Polyanskaya, was sent to Leningrad for negotiations.

Shennikov wrote from Leningrad on December 28, 1945 to A.A. Dedov that O.S. Polyanskaya "will bring you all the folders with handwritten and cartographic materials. It was possible to obtain several texts of the Lokchim expedition. A large herbarium has been selected from my northern herbarium of higher plants. As for mosses and lichens, they have not yet been dismantled. There are a great many of them, including those sphagnum meadows, the definition of which is difficult in Syktyvkar."

As can be seen from the report of the base on the work in 1946, the inventories of the Shennikov herbarium in Leningrad numbered more than one and a half thousand sheets, and the A.A. Dedov herbarium, collected in 1941-1942 in the Ukhta district, amounted to more than two thousand sheets (5. F. 1. Op. 1. D. 89. L. 58).

            In the Scientific Archive of the Komi Scientific Research Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences in the A.A. Dedov Foundation, several letters of Maria Mikhailovna reflecting her work in the Database of the USSR Academy of Sciences in the Komi ASSR are preserved. On June 2, 1946, she made a report on the work since January 1, 1946 and attached lists of mosses by A.N. Lashchenkova, moreover, about two thousand labels were needed for the card file. O.S. Polyanskaya sent for the report "a complete list of her mosses by district, due to the fact that the last box was not received."

In July 1946, Maria Mikhailovna sent two boxes of mosses to Syktyvkar and wrote to Dedov: "... completed the determination of sphagnum mosses from the collections of Doyarenko (Tsilma district), Koroleva and Leontiev (r. Vychegda and Sysola), Yudin (Mylva district, Vel-Yu, Let-Yu); compiled a summary of expeditions led by A.P.[Shennikov] and yours, Bolotova and Lashchenkova." It is noteworthy that this business enumeration of the completed works ends with a theoretical and scientific-organizational conclusion: "Thus, it is possible to describe (bearing in mind the published articles by Dylis and Leontiev) the geography of sphagnum mosses of the Komi ASSR, and in the future, ecology" (5. F. 38. Op. 3. D. 16. L. 2, 17, 8, 20).

The transfer of herbarium collections from Leningrad to Syktyvkar continued later. A.P. Shennikov wrote to Syktyvkar on December 31, 1948: "The herbarium of flowering and spore plants collected in the Komi region in various years by Leningrad botanists (A.A. Korchagin, Leontiev, Temnoyev, Yudin, etc.) is kept at the Department of Geobotany. Informing about this, the Department of Geobotany asks you to tell us how to proceed with this collection in the future. Due to lack of space, the department is unable to store it at home and requests that measures be taken to forward the herbarium to your address, which will require the necessary funds for packaging and shipment. The collection contains 16 packs of plants." According to Dedov, "obtaining the specified herbarium is highly desirable" (5. F. 38. Op. 3. D. 16. L. 4).

The collection of mosses in the herbarium of the Institute of Biology of the Komi Scientific Center is very impressive, since since 1940 materials on mosses have been received annually. In 1999, seven inventory books contained almost 30 thousand samples of mosses and more than 500 species of mosses from the classes of liver and leaf-stem mosses, and according to monitoring data in 2020, there are 56 thousand herbarium samples of mosses and liverworts in the collection of mosses.

... Now in the herbarium of the Institute of Biology, the sheets of A.P. Shennikov are arranged by genus and species. Judging by several cards we have viewed, herbarium sheets were received from Shennikov after the Northern expeditions of the Botanical Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences in Onega, Primorsky, Plesetsk, Vinogradovsky, Kotlas and Leshukon districts of the Arkhangelsk region, as well as in the Velsky district of the Vologda province for 1925-1937.

Valuable consultations about the Shennikov collection were provided by a former researcher at the Laboratory of Geobotany and Comparative Floristics of the Department of Flora and Vegetation of the North with the Scientific herbarium of the Institute of Biology Z.G. Ulle and curator of the Scientific Herbarium of the Institute of Biology (SYKO) Candidate of Biological Sciences, senior researcher at the Laboratory of Ecology and Protection of Tundra E.N. Patova in April 2022. However, according to experts It is impossible to accurately calculate the number of herbarium sheets compiled by Shennikov until the completion of the electronic catalog of the herbarium.

The long-term description of the herbarium of the Komi branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences was completed when the team of geobotanists of the branch published the "Determinant of higher Plants of the Komi ASSR" ^[17] and a brief history of the herbarium appeared ^[18]. Nowadays, the Scientific Herbarium of the Komi Institute of Biology of the National Research Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences (SYKO) is among the largest in Russia. It contains 296 thousand sheets (Scientific, 2022) collected in the Komi Republic and the Arkhangelsk Region with the Nenets Autonomous Okrug ^[19].

           The professor's extensive teaching experience was used when A.P. Shennikov was appointed a scientific consultant at the Base of the USSR Academy of Sciences in the Komi ASSR (since 1949 – Komi branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences). Such a position existed to assist in the preparation of dissertations for the degree of Candidate of Sciences. In this status, Shennikov came to Syktyvkar during the war, in February 1945, and made a presentation at the scientific and practical agricultural conference "Seed production of vegetable crops" (5. F. 1. Op. 3. D. 157).

To guide the scientific research of young people, postgraduate studies in the Komi branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences were opened after the war. The scientific supervisors were experienced reputable scientists, including A.P. Shennikov. Under his leadership, N.S. Kotelina (1925-2004) studied meadows. She studied in graduate school for four years, as for people of indigenous nationality, including Komi, they added a year to the preparatory course. At first, she was offered to study the degeneration of meadows, which corresponded to the theory of W. R. Williams, who argued that meadows gradually turn into swamps. When A.P. Shennikov agreed to be the scientific supervisor, he formulated the problem "Vychegda floodplain meadows within the Komi ASSR in natural and agricultural terms."

The foundation of the Candidate of Biological Sciences N.S. Kotelina has preserved 16 letters from her supervisor for a fairly long period (1950-1964). The letters reflect the pedagogical and scientific principles of Professor Shennikov as an educator and mentor of a future researcher. On November 18, 1950, he gave recommendations on what to use in preparing for the geobotany exam, discussed the graduate student's work plan and programs. On November 27, 1951, it was about the timing of the exam in the specialty. Shennikov asked if "you have the necessary literature at your disposal" and offered to send the necessary publications. On September 7, 1953, he was worried about the situation with the printing of the abstract, offered his services in organizing this process in Leningrad. He was interested in: "How did the branch treat your dissertation?". In January 1954, he found out: "Will you arrive in Leningrad soon so that we can elevate you to the rank of Candidate of Sciences, as you have deserved for so long?" (5. F. 36. Op. 3. D. 3. L. 10).

Shennikov considered it necessary at first to inform the head of the department, A.A. Dedov, what the graduate student needed to do, apologized for the "delay in calling Kotelina", because "he was busy beyond measure" handing over the manuscript "Plant Ecology" to the publisher, then left for Moscow "on Bork's business." He warned that Kotelina "would have to stay in Leningrad for a month" in order to be able to "do a lot, including on the abstract. She still needs to prepare for the soil science exam." In addition, as a scientific supervisor, he asked Kotelina "to give a job in a nursery or in the experimental field of the branch" (5. F. 38. Op. 3. D. 16. L. 5).

            The analysis of Shennikov's correspondence with Kotelina allows us to characterize his pedagogical principles and approaches to the education of top-level specialists through graduate school. He paid great attention to the development of not only specific calendar plans for a year and a longer period, but also the thematic content of a specific work, demanded the exact fulfillment of the planned. It was more important to involve a graduate student in the development of the substantive part of the scientific program, not only to pass one or another exam, especially in the specialty. In his opinion, compulsory philosophy exams should be focused on a specific science, since it is necessary to understand the essence of a particular department of biology for meadow science. Shennikov did not hesitate to recommend his own textbooks and publications for study. Thus, he formed a group of his students, who became the successors of his theoretical principles, that is, he created a new social direction of geobotany, which was adopted by N.S. Kotelina with his other students and followers – the method of field experiment and stationary research. He emphasized how important the study of seasonal vegetation changes is for the organization of rational use of plant resources.

            Alexander Petrovich attached great importance to the moral and psychological climate wherever he worked (the Department of Geobotany of BIN and the Department of Geobotany of the University, which he headed in 1944-1960). This position is characterized by his wish to convey greetings to the head of numerous botanical expeditions in the Komi ASSR, participant of the Great Patriotic War Yu.P. Yudin: "... tell him to come to take the candidate's exam <...>. Everything will be done here so that he will not be afraid" (5. F. 38. Op. 3. D. 16. L. 5).

N.S. Kotelina recalled: "A.P. Shennikov said that work should be continued for a long time in one place, experiments should be laid and not abandoned further," that "you can not transfer from one collective farm to another, you need to get some serious results." "I carried the idea of long–term observations through my whole life," Nina Stepanovna wrote. After that, the research was transferred to the tundra, where the first sown meadows were created: "we have been working in the tundra for more than 40 years, the meadow does not degenerate if you take care and apply fertilizers." Nina Stepanovna ended her memoirs with a wish not to abandon the idea "with which the research began, to continue for many years" ^[20].

The second topic in the letters of the supervisor to Kotelina was observations of meadows and their role in the research of botanists. On June 9, 1951, Alexander Petrovich asked eight questions about the field season and suggested paying attention to the differences between meadows in different areas, sometimes far apart from each other. In January 1952, he asked to bring "descriptive, digital and auxiliary" materials to Leningrad.

Since January 1954, the professor began to share his scientific plans and involved in their implementation not only a former graduate student, but also botanists of the Komi branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences. At first, he asked to write in detail about the results of a comprehensive survey of the Vychegda River floodplain and asked: "Is it planned to continue this survey in 1954? There or elsewhere? Who is going to participate?" He also asked if there was a discussion of the problems of grasslands in the Komi branch according to the program of the Botanical Institute? The questions were explained by the fact that Shennikov collected information about research work on grasslands in all regions of the USSR and began a stationary study of the impact of measures to improve meadows and productivity of Vychegod meadows. Kotelina wrote about this: "These stationary studies were conducted under the guidance of A.P. Shennikov, who insisted on long-term observations, since in the country they were mostly short-term. To support these studies, A.P. Shennikov sent his students for two years, and then graduates who graduated from the Department of Geobotany at LSU" ^[21].

On April 20, 1960, Shennikov wrote that he was "very interested to know whether stationary observations on the Vychegodsky and Pechora meadows would be continued in 1960" and asked if Kotelina would agree to organize experiments on the use of fertilizers on flood meadows and the conditions of these experiments "for a number of years!".

In the late 1950s, N.S. Kotelina and I.S. Huntimer prepared a collective work, which was edited by Alexander Petrovich ^[22]. From that time on, the letters invariably sounded concerns about the health of Ismail Saddikovich, and since April 1961 Shennikov wrote them general letters.

In another letter, informing about the new scientific conference, Shennikov suggested to his pupil: "After all, you have something to say about the academic work and because it can be useful for strengthening your research. It is useful to do the same for Ism[ailu] Sadd[ykovich]. Please tell him about it" (5. F. 36. Op. 3. D. 3. L. 17).

Since Shennikov's scientific contacts with the botanists of the Komi branch were constant, since 1959, his messages have always wished all the best to "acquaintances in the branch." According to colleagues, N.S. Kotelin "honors the authority of A.P. Shennikov all his life."

There was also a socio-political note in Shennikov's letters. For the first time on September 27, 1953, he expressed bewilderment: "It is surprising that the thesis is considered secret. It would seem that after the September plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU, one should shout with a full voice about the state of the Vychegod meadows, and not keep secrets." It should be recalled that at the September 1953 plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU, for the first time, the agrarian policy of I.V. Stalin was sharply criticized and measures for the development of agriculture were discussed, noting that the nutritional needs of the population were not satisfied. On April 29, 1961, he was worried: "The academic perturbations of 1961 will somehow respond to the Komi branch. In particular, how will your rulers treat him and how can all this affect meadow research in general and hospitals in particular? Of course, it is still difficult to imagine this concretely, as it is with us. However, the B[otanic] Institute and the C[oological] Institute remain in the Academy system and apparently without any special changes. At least until the New Year, because all academic institutions in 1961 will live according to the estimates already approved before the reform" (5. F. 36. Op. 3. D. 3. L. 17).

The resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR dated April 3, 1961 raised questions. "On measures to improve the coordination of scientific research in the country and the activities of the USSR Academy of Sciences," published in the newspaper. Pravda on April 12, according to which seven branches and over 50 institutes were withdrawn from the Academy

In 1961, the positions of the biologists of the Komi branch were significantly strengthened. In May, the first republican conference on nature protection was held, organized by the branch of the All-Union Geographical Society, the Society for Nature Protection and the Commission for Nature Protection of the Komi branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences. In June, the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences, signed by Academician M.V. Keldysh, issued a resolution on the organization of the Institute of Biology of the Komi branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences. The director of the Institute was appointed Candidate of Agricultural Sciences, participant of the Great Patriotic War P.P. Vavilov (1918-1984), later Doctor of Agricultural Sciences (1964), academician (1973) and President (1978-1984) of the VASHNIL, corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1979) in the Department of General Biology.

The Komi ASSR solemnly celebrated the 40th anniversary of the republic's formation. On this occasion, Shennikov wrote to Kotelina: "It is necessary that the anniversary of the Komi ASSR and you, the branches, bring something good. I have your summary report here. After all, it's worth printing." In the following letter on September 10, 1961, he returned to the anniversary celebrations: "Did the solemn 40th anniversary of the Komi ASSR somehow affect the fate of the branch? Tikhomirov [B. A. Tikhomirov (1909-1976) Doctor of Biological Sciences, head of the vegetation sector of the North of the Department of Geobotany BIN] said that at his insistence, the government commission visited the branch, where the exhibition made a great impression on everyone and was very favorable. At the same time, it turned out that the republican leaders did not know much about the branch: the chairman of your Gosplan admitted this. I also really liked your botanical garden. The representative of the Karelian branch said that he would send his employees to study at the Komi branch. So cheer up, comrades from the Komi branch! And it would be very, very useful to write briefly about this exhibition and other affairs of the branch in the Bulletin of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR so that the Academy would feel" (5. F. 36. Op. 3. D. 3. L. 18) In the letter it was about the new exhibition of the republican museum "Man in the struggle for the transformation of the nature of the North", which was traditionally prepared by employees of the Komi branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

By the anniversary of the Komi Republic, the book publishing house has published a collection of articles in which, among the "works of great scientific importance", "The Determinant of Higher Plants" and "Meadows of the Komi ASSR" ^[23], published with the active participation of Shennikov, are named.

In almost every letter, he wrote how he wanted to visit Syktyvkar: "From my letter to Ism [ailu] Sadd[ykovich] You will find out why it is not yet clear to me whether I will be able to visit Syktyvkar this year." In 1961, he complained: "I don't know if I will be able to visit Syktyvkar in the summer. There's a lot to do, I have to write. And old age is taking its toll." The last postcard came from Shennikov on December 30, 1961: "I kindly ask you to convey New Year greetings from me to the branch botanists" (5. F. 36. Op. 3. D. 3. L. 17). ... on May 23, 1962, Alexander Petrovich died.

           Another pupil of Shennikov worked in Syktyvkar – a graduate of the Biological faculty of Leningrad University, an employee of the Botanical Institute, later associate professor of Syktyvkar State University Nadezhda Petrovna Akulshina (1927-1999). In the personal fund of A.P. Shennikov in the St. Petersburg branch of the Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences, N.P. Akulshina's letters to A.P. Shennikov from Stalinabad, where she worked at the Tajik University (1950-1958), her report on botanical research in the Stone Steppe, and A.P. Shennikov's review of one of her manuscripts were deposited.

Since 1974, N.P. Akulshina – PhD, specialist in geobotany, floristics and plant ecology, became head of the Department of Botany at Syktyvkar University. She was the initiator of the creation of the botanical garden of the university ^[24] and is considered one of the first large collectors of the university herbarium ^[25]. N.P. Akulshina studied vegetation of different geographical areas in the mountains of the Caucasus and Pamir-Alai, noted the pulsating advance of glaciers in the Quaternary period in the North. The personal library of N.P. Akulshina, transferred to the Scientific Library of Syktyvkar State University, contains literature for 1874-1995 on experimental botany, geobotany, floristics, plant ecology, dendrology and has about 600 copies. ^[26] The library has several books published under the editorship of A.P. Shennikov, about 30 works of geobotanists of the Komi branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences, including N.S. Kotelina, with whom Nadezhda Petrovna maintained friendly contacts.

So, the documents of the Scientific Archive of the Komi Scientific Research Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences show that Alexander Petrovich was the head of several long-term scientific topics, supervised graduate students and had close professional and friendly ties with the staff of the Komi branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences until the last days of his life. In the field of natural sciences, he identified previously unknown plants, identified different forms of plant communities, put forward the idea of botanical zoning and proved the need for special care of meadows. A.P. Shennikov's achievements in completing the herbarium for the Institute of Biology of the Komi branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences, which became part of the Institute of Biological Research in the European Northeast, are significant. One of the important mentoring principles of A.P. Shennikov was the creation of a team of like-minded people to study the plant diversity of the European Northeast. Possessing outstanding pedagogical talent, A.P. Shennikov educated several generations of scientists, in the field of social relations created an original scientific and organizational community of geobotanists for the study of meadow resources. Together, various documents of the Komi Scientific Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences on the activities of a scientist are of great scientific and cultural value.