Very good discussion & points. I hope everybody learnt a bit from this very fruitful discussion. Let's take this thread as closed now. 2009/11/4 Satish Phadke <[email protected]>
> I think it was nice to have a lot of discussion on this important subject. > I thank and appreciate the comments made by members, which everybody will > keep in their mind. This has helped in the growth of the group. > I can say that we should close this topic here only. > Regards > Satish Phadke > > 2009/11/3 Satish Phadke <[email protected]> > > I want to make clear that I am not in favour of or against digital >> photography. >> One point in favour of digital photography: >> Taxonomist and botanists use small hand held lenses to observe tiny parts >> of the plants. >> The macro lenses replace these and to one's surprise when he goes back to >> his computer after the field visit the observations are found to be far >> better than actual field observations. Even the freshness of the parts is >> preserved in the picture as against the herbarium samples. >> >> After some time the era of digital herbarium is going to come. The >> limitations about it will be sorted out by some experts e.g.pictures can be >> taken with ruler kept by the side of specimen etc. >> (Myself being a medical doctor can site one comparable example: Earlier >> use of sonography(Ultrsound test) in pregnancy for monitoring fetal >> development used to be taken with a pinch of salt because of its limitations >> but now a days no pregnancy continues without at least one sonography >> test... Technology used judiciously has its own advantages. The interpreter >> behind it of course matters a lot.) >> I urge in this forum to all experts to device methods to sort out problems >> and limitations of digital photography similar to what Gurcharan ji and >> Aparna ji have always suggested. In this way the internet and other >> technologial gadgetary will be properly used for the benefit of the science. >> Dr Satish Phadke >> >> 2009/11/3 Gurcharan Singh <[email protected]> >> >> >>> I know such discussions will crop up when persons from so many fields >>> interact. The main aim of this group, I think is to encourage more and >>> more >>> people to look at plants, know about their uses, local names, and >>> ultimately >>> it would be a big step towards environmental management. >>> I have been practicing taxonomy for last 40 years, but the madness >>> about plants started only after I joined this group. We the taxonomists >>> are >>> often happy to pick up the local flora and identify the plants, not >>> realising that a few related species must have cropped in into the area >>> after that local flora was published. Only after joining this group I >>> came >>> to know about plants which I thought something else from Maheshwari's >>> Flora >>> of Delhi. This I know must have also been the experience of other >>> colleagues. Sometimes I am amazed by the critical eye of Tabish ji, Garg >>> ji >>> and others not professional taxonomists. >>> I know and many others must be feeling how useful the FlowersofIndia >>> website is for identification. We are all learning and let us encourage >>> others. >>> All of us know Poaceae and Cyperaceae are difficult to identify, but >>> once >>> one of us has spent time on identification, there are always some >>> physical >>> markers to remember identification of that grass or sedge. When we >>> identify >>> hundreds of plants (including grasses and sedges) in our ecology/taxonomy >>> classes, or herbarium identification, we seldom look for books. If these >>> photographs go to our websites, it would help in awareness about grasses >>> and >>> sedges. >>> >>> My personal request! Let us not discourage members from taking >>> photos >>> of grasses and sedges, rather encourage them and urge them to include >>> shots >>> of auricles and ligules, closeup of spikelets. The digital photography >>> today allows clearer view than our naked eyes. >>> >>> Today herbaria are discouraging taxonomists from handling of actual >>> specimens, and rather use their virtual herbaria. We should be happy that >>> we >>> are using photgraphs of live plants with everything preserved. >>> Good photography for all >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Dr. Gurcharan Singh >>> Associate Professor >>> SGTB Khalsa College >>> University of Delhi, Delhi >>> India >>> http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45 >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Aparna Watve" <[email protected]> >>> To: "Vijayasankar Raman" <[email protected]> >>> Cc: "J.M. Garg" <[email protected]>; "Nayan Singh" >>> <[email protected]>; "indiantreepix" >>> <[email protected]>; "grassman" <[email protected]>; >>> "Avinash dada" <[email protected]>; "Rani Bhagat" >>> <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 8:18 PM >>> Subject: [indiantreepix:22157] Re: Grass for id 031109jm2 >>> >>> >>> > >>> > Dear all, >>> > As a short answer to the earlier mails, - I stand by what I said in >>> > spite of the issues Garg ji has raised. Some reasons have already >>> > been pointed out by Vijay ji. >>> > >>> > Before I proceed to give a long answer, I would like to ask all here >>> > some questions, >>> > a. What is the accuracy of identification that we are aiming for? >>> > My answer -for every plant I want a "scientifically accurate" >>> > identification. >>> > >>> > b. What is the reason for scientific accuracy? >>> > Because I see that handbooks and electronic databases, are now very >>> > commonly being used for ecological surveys, environment impact >>> > assessments, teaching, making books, making environment education >>> > material, species distribution mapping, natural resource management >>> > planning, ( For each of this- I can give an example from real life >>> > where it was done). All this work requires scientific accuracy of >>> > identification. Even many of the laymen (-a word I dont like to use) >>> > are experts in their own field where they use this knowledge, for >>> > example ayurvedic doctors who want to know plants to be used in >>> > medicine. >>> > >>> > c. Can we guarantee scientific accuracy of identification from a photo? >>> > But before that, what kind of photo? - a simple reporting picture (as >>> > are most on this mailing list) lacks most characters of id. I always >>> > try to point out what more is required and some like Dr. Satish Phadke >>> > are taking more and more pics with necessary key characters. >>> > >>> > For the tricky families, if a person can take a picture showing all >>> > necessary characters for the identification it will be possible to id >>> > even grasses,sedges, eriocaulons clearly. But with the characters in >>> > question, it will mean not only macro photos, but scanning electron >>> > micrographs for characters of nut. How many can do this? >>> > >>> > It is true that an expert, with his vast field knowledge can take one >>> > look at a specimen and tell you what it is. Rani and Anilkumar (I know >>> > both of them personally) on this group who know grasses well can do >>> > it, . They have certain field characters in their mind by which they >>> > do it, and they will turn out to be correct in most cases. But if >>> > others try to use that photo for more identifications from similar >>> > looking plants, they might get it wrong. >>> > >>> > Dr. S. R. Yadav, of Kolhapur university and his PHD students working >>> > on Poaceae of Maharashtra have developed an EXCELLENT set of >>> > photographs of grass genera, from which identification is easy and >>> > ACCURATE. I do hope they publish it soon. If one can get pictures like >>> > that, then I will not mind id from digital photos. >>> > >>> > for the rest of garg ji's points- >>> > >>> >> We can't wait for the perfect things (which never will in any case) to >>> >> happen. >>> > - It is not perfection but ACCURACY being discussed. Even a bad photo >>> > of a tiger is enough for id. But with the greatest photo of flowering >>> > sedge it still is difficult to accurately distinguish Pycreas and >>> > Cyperus. >>> > >>> >> Our Floras only bulky technical details, hardly readable to a laymen. >>> > Well I agree only partially to this, some floras of present are not >>> > even good enough for a trained experienced taxonomist to use. But >>> > please remember that floras were and will be written for those trained >>> > in the subject. If a person trains him/herself to understand the >>> > subject (like many notable examples on this group) they will follow it >>> > too. >>> > BTW, any technical subject book is going to be difficult to follow for >>> > a person not from the background. I can hardly hope to easily >>> > understand medical textbooks, or computer software books, though I >>> > would love to diagnose my own sickness and write my own software >>> > programmes. >>> > >>> >>Or we simply stop photographing or knowing about Poaceae, Cyperaceae >>> etc. >>> > Well this is subjective. Those who want, can continue to do it as it >>> > is, (and I attach the taxonomist's warning) or do it after reading up >>> > technical literature on identification of these species and try and >>> > get as many characters in the photo as possible (in that case my >>> > warnings become little diluted, depending on the nature of the >>> > photograph....) >>> > >>> > Also as I have worded the warning, - it says "confirm" the >>> > identification. A "confirmed identification" is where there is no >>> > doubt remaining about the identity of the species in that photograph. >>> > A simple identification is where there remains a chance that the >>> > identification is wrong, and hence use of that identification is at >>> > the person's own risk. The photo and subsequent comments on it can >>> > give pointers, indications, as I usually try to give (for less complex >>> > families), if I am not sure about identification based on the photo >>> > alone. >>> > >>> > Perhaps you should also put this subject on the mailing list of Indian >>> > Association of Angiosperm Taxonomists. It will be most interesting to >>> > hear their views. >>> > >>> > Regards >>> > Aparna >>> > >>> > > >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > -- With regards, J.M.Garg ([email protected]) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jmgarg1 'Creating awareness of Indian Flora & Fauna' Image Resource of thousands of my images of Birds, Butterflies, Flora etc. (arranged alphabetically & place-wise): http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:J.M.Garg For learning about Indian Flora, visit/ join Google e-group- Indiantreepix: http://groups.google.co.in/group/indiantreepix?hl=en --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "indiantreepix" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.co.in/group/indiantreepix?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
