Dear friends A lot of effort has gone during last few months to develop harmonious atmosphere, cordiality and mutual respect in this group. Interacting in the group is an enjoying feature. I think reintroduction of sentences like "you are the only one who seem to have done hard work........." and " otherwise its of no use misleading others." can only pull back the group to older atmosphere. I can only request members to avoid such comments. It would be healthy for the group to just give ones opinion and not sit on judgement about others. This is my humble request. It needs hard toil to develop good atmosphere but just one to break it. Let the good atmosphere prevail.
-- Dr. Gurcharan Singh Retired Associate Professor SGTB Khalsa College, University of Delhi, Delhi-110007 Res: 932 Anand Kunj, Vikas Puri, New Delhi-110018. Phone: 011-25518297 Mob: 9810359089 http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45/ On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Pankaj Kumar <sahanipan...@gmail.com>wrote: > I think there are some issues in this post. Will do some research to > check out. Hats off to you Dinesh sir, you are the only one who seem > to have done hard work that too when you are not a botanist. > Just for information Solanum indicum was rejected according to article > 69 which was proposed in 1978 after Leningrad Code (1975) and > rejection was accepted most probably in Sydney Congress in 1981 and > the rejection was published in 1986. > ICBN is very interesting for those who can understand the meanings of > the articles, otherwise its of no use misleading others. I still get > confused reading and understanding articles even after following both > Tokyo and Vienna code, that I have been following, so I believe its > not so easy, but yes, interesting. > I will try to get back on this....with more information. > Regards > Pankaj > > > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Dr Pankaj Kumar <sahanipan...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: tanay bose <tanaybos...@gmail.com> > > Date: Apr 5, 9:08 pm > > Subject: DV - 28SEP09 - 0330 :: Solanum species at Saphale Ghat > > To: efloraofindia > > > > > > Dear Rashida Ji, > > Thank you I am happy to know that all our efforts came into the good . > > Yes > > its bit complex to go through Codes but you get hold it it's easy as > > anything. > > Regards > > Tanay > > > > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 4:55 PM, rashida atthar > > <rashidaatt...@hotmail.com>wrote: > > > > > > > >> Good job Dinesh ji. Keep it up! Thanks a lot to Tanay ji and Dr. > >> Gurcharanji for further insights into the Vienna code and how it works, > >> quite complicated for non- botanists!. > >> I remember in a discussion some time back, Dr. Stephen had given some > >> explanations and good links for the same too. > > > >> regards, > >> Rashida. > > > >> ------------------------------ > >> Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 22:19:59 +0530 > >> Subject: Re: [efloraofindia:31509] DV - 28SEP09 - 0330 :: Solanum > species > >> at Saphale Ghat > >> From: tanaybos...@gmail.com > >> To: singh...@gmail.com > >> CC: dinesh.va...@gmail.com; phadke.sat...@gmail.com; > >> indiantreepix@googlegroups.com > > > >> Dear Gurcharan ji, > >> Very well difined , your description regarding the *Solanum* species > >> vividly describes why > >> *Solanum indicum* L., Sp. Pl.: 187. 1 Mai 1753 [*Dicot.: Solan*.]. > >> Lectotypus (vide Hepper in Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 76: 288. 1978): Herb. > Hermann > >> 3: 16, No. 94 (BM). > >> AND > > > >> *Solanum sodomeum* L., Sp. Pl.: 187. 1 Mai 1753 [*Dicot.: Solan*.]. > >> Lectotypus (vide Hepper in Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 76: 290. 1978): Herb. > Hermann > >> 3: 30, No. 95 (BM). > >> has been regarded as a regected name under the "*NOMINA UTIQUE > REJICIENDA*" > >> (Appendix V) of the ICBN Vienna Code 2005. > >> Thank you very much for focusing on the matter and explaing the reason > for > >> the rule in the code. > >> Thanky you > >> Regards > >> Tanay > > > >> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 7:46 PM, Gurcharan Singh <singh...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > >> Dinesh ji and Tanay > >> Looking for Species which could be the correct names now for specimens > >> named and described as Solanum indicum, there are three candidates: > > > >> 1. Solanum lasiocarpum Dunal, 1813 (S. ferox auct (non L.); FBI 4:233; > S. > >> indicum L.. nom. rej.; S. straminifolium sensu Kerr.(non Jacq.); Gandhi > in > >> Saldanha & Nicolson, Fl. Hassan Dist. 462, 1976)---- Plants hirsute, > >> inflorescence leaf-opposed few-flowered cyme, corolla white or purple, > fruit > >> densely hairy, 2 cm diam. > > > >> 2. Solanum anguivi Mam. (S. indicum auct. (non L.); *Solanum indicum* > >> subsp. *distichum* (Thonn.) Bitter)- Plants stellate-tomentose, leaves > >> sinuate or with rounded lobes, inflorescence many flowered, > extra-axillary, > >> flowers bluish purple or white with purplish lines outside, fruit ca 1 > cm > >> across, glabrous. > > > >> 3. Solanum violaceum Ortega, 1809 (S. indicum auct,; FBI 4: 234; S. > >> sodomeum L., nom. rej.). Plants finely tomentose, leaves sinuate, infl. > leaf > >> opposed or extra-axillary, fls up to 12, blue-purple, fruit orange, 1 cm > >> diam. > > > >> Now an interesting observation. Of the publications of Indian > subcontinent, > >> I know of eflora of Pakistan lists S. anguivi, and not S. violaceum. > Eflora > >> of China lists S. violaceum but not S. anguivi. Revised Flora of Ceylone > by > >> Dassanayake list S. violaceum but not S. anguivi. More interestingly > >> Dassanayake considers S. sodomeum L. (type Ceylone) as synonym of S. > >> violaceum, whereas GRIN taxonomy page considers S. sodomeum L. as > synonym of > >> S. anguivi. All this and the key above suggests that S. violaceum and S. > >> anguivi are closely related, and when looking for Indian equivalents of > S. > >> indicum we should be choosing between S. lasiocarpum (fruits ca 2 cm, > >> densely hairy) and S. violaceum (fruits glabrous, 1 cm). > > > >> Then then we should also be careful about S. torvum whenever we have > white > >> flowered plant with leaf having acute lobes, and slightly larger (1.5 > cm) > >> glabrous fruits. > > > >> -- > >> Dr. Gurcharan Singh > >> Retired Associate Professor > >> SGTB Khalsa College, University of Delhi, Delhi-110007 > >> Res: 932 Anand Kunj, Vikas Puri, New Delhi-110018. > >> Phone: 011-25518297 Mob: 9810359089 > >>http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45/ > >> , > > > >> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 6:15 PM, tanay bose <tanaybos...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> Dear Dinesh Ji, > > > >> According to the 17th ICBN Vienna Code 2005 (published in 2006) in the > …. > > > >> Chapter no: V > > > >> Article No: 56 > > > >> *Rule 56.1* States….. “Any name that would cause a disadvantageous > >> nomenclatural change may be proposed for rejection. A name thus > rejected, or > >> its basionym if it has one, is placed on a list of *nomina utique > >> rejicienda*. Along with the listed names, all combinations based on them > >> are similarly rejected, and none is to be used. > > > >> In simple words we can say “Any botanical name which is liable for the > >> inconvenience caused by it due to change of name is considered/proposed > to > >> be rejected. And also the basionym [*The basionym (base name) is the > first > >> name validly published ever given to a biological species or genus which > has > >> priority over other names later given to the same species by different > >> authors and the author of this name is called the basionym author*] for > it > >> and also all the combination of botanical name involving it are also > >> considered/proposed to be rejected and can’t be used under any > >> circumstances. > > > >> Uder the this rule the name *Solanum indicum* L., Sp. Pl.: 187. 1 Mai > 1753 > >> [*Dicot.: Solan*.]. Lectotypus (vide Hepper in Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 76: > 288. > >> 1978): Herb. Hermann 3: 16, No. 94 (BM). Has been considered has a > >> rejected name. > > > >> You have made a good research and have set a beautiful example that why > the > >> name *Solanum indicum* was rejected by ICBN in Vienna Code 2005. > > > >> Thanks you very much for your impeccable hard work. Hats off!!! To you > from > >> my side. > > > >> Regards > > > >> Tanay > > > >> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 4:15 PM, Dinesh Valke <dinesh.va...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > >> Tanay, ... going through *S. anguivi* and *S. indicum* : > > > >> *Solanum anguivi* Lam. > > > >> Native of tropical Africa to Arabian peninsula. > > > >> Synonyms: > >> (=) *Solanum hermannii* Dunal > >> (=) *Solanum indicum* auct. (previously associated with 2 accessions) > >> (=) *Solanum indicum* subsp. *distichum* (Thonn.) Bitter (previously > >> associated with 1 accession) > >> (=) *Solanum scalare* C. H. Wright (previously associated with 1 > >> accession) > >> (=) *Solanum sodomeum* L. (previously associated with 2 accessions) > > > >> Comment: = *Solanum indicum* auct. (non *S. indicum* L., nom. rej., a > >> rejected name (nomen utique rejiciendum) under Vienna ICBN Art. 56 & > App. V > >> that is unavailable for use) > > > >> Ref: NPGS / GRIN :: > >>http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?310328 > > > >> * > >> Solanum lasiocarpum* Dunal > > > >> Native to: > >> s China, Indian subcontinent, Indo-China, Malesia; cultivated in > tropical > >> Asia > > > >> Synonyms: > >> (=) *Solanum ferox* auct. (previously associated with 4 accessions) > >> (=) *Solanum indicum* L. (previously associated with 3 accessions) > > > >> Ref: NPGS / GRIN :: > >>http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?416240 > > > >> ... considering *Solanum anguivi* Lam. (syn. *Solanum indicum* auct.) > and > >> *Solanum indicum* L. (syn. of *Solanum lasiocarpum* Dunal) as separate > >> species. > > > >> Regards. > > > >> On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 12:42 AM, tanay bose <tanaybos...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> Dear Dinesh ji > >> I think my answer will be no . S anguivi is introduced plant in india i > >> hope based on the distribution pattern but had few changes in morphology > due > >> to abiotic conditions of the two regions are different hence named as S > >> indicum . > >> Regards > >> tanay > > > >> On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 12:30 AM, Dinesh Valke <dinesh.va...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > >> Tanay, already been through various pages for knowing the synonyms of > *S. > >> anguivi*. > >> Perhaps may not be competent enough to know the different *S. indicum* > ... > >> for instance > > > >> *S. indicum* auct. non L. ... understanding that this is synonym of *S. > >> anguivi* ... non-native of India > >> *S. indicum* Linn. ... found throughout India in the plains and > foothills. > > > >> My earlier query, refined : would we not be having *S. anguivi* a > >> non-native and *S. indicum*, a native of India, as separate species ? > > > >> Regards. > > > >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 7:30 PM, tanay bose <tanaybos...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> Dear Dinesh Ji, > >> Please go through the information provided in the link below there is > >> details about everything you want to know about *S anguivi* > > > >>http://database.prota.org/dbtw-wpd/exec/dbtwpub.dll?AC=QBE_QUERY&BU=h... > > > >> Regards > >> Tanay > >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Dinesh Valke <dinesh.va...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > >> 1) Is *Solanum anguivi* native to India ? > >> NPGS / GRIN shows nativity to be tropical Africa and Arabian peninsula > ... > >> ENVIS - FRLHT states Indo-Malesia. > > > >> 2) Please validate: *S. anguivi* the present name of *S. indicum* > > > >> Regards. > > > >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:58 AM, tanay bose <tanaybos...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > >> Dear Dinesh ji. > >> Also think this plant is *Solanum anguivi* .. > >> Regards > >> Tanay > > > >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Satish Phadke < > phadke.sat...@gmail.com > >> > wrote: > > > >> Appears to be* Solanum anguivi* > >> Dr Phadke > > > >> On 30 March 2010 23:08, Dinesh Valke <dinesh.va...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Dear friends, > >> Believing to be some Solanum species, ID please. > > > >> *Date/Time* : September 28, 2009 at 3.30pm IST > >> *Location Place* : Saphale Ghat, Maharashtra ... *Altitude* : 108 m ... > * > >> GPS* : 19°35'19.48"N, 72°50'50.96"E > >> *Habitat* : wild ... *Type* : along road > >> *Plant Habit* : armed shrub ... *Height *: about 1 - 1.5 m > >> *Leaves Type *: simple leaf, margin sinuated ? ... *Shape* : elliptic ? > >> ... *Size* : about 8 - 15 cm x 4 - 8 cm > >> *Inflorescence Type* : do not know ... *Size* : do not know > >> *Flowers Size* : about 20 - 25 mm ... *Colour* : lilac ... *Calyx* : do > >> not know ... *Bracts* : do not know > >> *Fruits Type* : berry ... *Shape *: globose ... *Size* : about 8 - 10 mm > >> ... *Seeds* : do not know > > > >> *Other Info* : > >> *Fragrance* : do not know ... *Pollinator* : do not > > > > ... > > > > read more » >
