No way brother, you have not written anything to hurt anyone. Such suggestions must keep coming. Incidentally, I learned something today, having gone through your mail, I have learned what a protologue is. For the integrity of the information on the site, I am with you. We non botanists are enjoying the experience of sharing photographs, learning from the knowledge of the experts. With regards to your suggestions, I at least think the knowledgeable should decide. Regards Yazdy.
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 2:35 PM, manudev madhavan <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear all, > My intention was to point out the fact that there are few errors do occur in > floras and monographs and not to blame anyone..!! > I know the limitations of our members (including me) identifying the plants > from few photographs.. > In fact myself also start with some regional floras or district floras when > I get plant. I use to check the descriptions of the floras and the original > description if it is available with me. i know we may not be able to check > the protologue all the time. But If we had checked the character set of the > plants from the images available to us,with the protologues, we can reduce > the percentage of errors in eflora india. > I apologize if my comments had hurt anyone.. > with warm regards > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Gurcharan Singh <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I also generally start with regional flora and then verify it with other >> resources. That helps in fixing it properly. >> Perhaps many people think it obsolete, but Flora of British India has >> great value. It is this Flora which has initiated the description of >> numerous new species from India or redefining its status. >> I don't know if all members know the two paragraph significance of FBI. >> The upper paragraph starts with accepted name and its full reference and >> diagnosis taken from original description, followed by synonyms. >> The second paragraph is wholly Indian. It starts with distribution and >> then description based entirely on Indian specimens and special comments >> which helps to assess the level of affinities with first paragraph. It is >> these comments which helped segregating Indian Sambucus as S. wightiana >> distinct from S. ebulus and Hedera nepalensis as distinct from H. helix, and >> many more independent taxa. Even while merging Indian taxa with European >> ones, FBI gave minor or significant differences in second paragraph, helping >> greatly the subsequent Indian workers. >> >> -- >> 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 Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Giby Kuriakose <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Dear Manudev, >>> I agree with you that the identification would perfect when we do it >>> based on protologue and monographs. >>> By the way, It was my mistake that I ided the plant in this thread >>> wrongly and it was not the mistake in any flora. I realized the same when >>> Prabhu pointed out. >>> I apologized for the same. >>> I do not think we have monographs for even 10% of genera in India. >>> And I do not think that we can always go and check the protologues and >>> monographs especially when we get photographs to id. >>> If at all it is necessary, the person who upload has to check and get >>> back because he handled the specimen. It is been happening here. >>> Many of the members are cross checking the id based on >>> expert suggestions. It is a collective effort that we are handling. >>> Further, district flora will give us a clearer picture (provided that the >>> id and the information are correct) about the plants in that region. That >>> mostly reduces the burden of going through long keys (at least for >>> new comers) wherein the key would be for a broader region (eg. Gamble, >>> Presidency of Madrass, covers almost the whole peninsular India and some of >>> the keys are too complicated to handle, especially for a layman or a >>> newcomer). >>> I suggest experts to write the concerned author and the publisher, of >>> whatever publication, pointing out the mistakes. I hope you have done the >>> same for what you found with Arisaema. >>> I use to do so. >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Giby >>> >>> >>> >>> On 31 October 2011 12:18, manudev madhavan <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> A humble suggestion from my side.. >>>> Whenever we make a comment on the identity of a plant, I request to >>>> you to check the characters of the plants with the protologue. I have >>>> seen many floras give wrong identifications and misleading >>>> descriptions. Can you imagine a a wrong identification even in a >>>> monograph?? Myself has encountered such a situation recently in an >>>> Arisaema revision. Such mistakes can carry forward easily. Almost all >>>> the Kerala floras have followed this wrong ID in their treatment of >>>> the genus. I agree many times we may not able to check the protologues >>>> but we can select most reliable works. >>>> I would suggest you people to refer monographs or family revisions >>>> rather than district floras for the confirmation of the ID. Since the >>>> mistakes are even found in such monographs and revisions, it would be >>>> much better if it is the original description or type illustration >>>> of the plant. I think accessing a protologue is not a himalayan in >>>> this era >>>> >>>> with warm regards >>>> >>>> On Oct 25, 9:32 am, Giby Kuriakose <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > I have written to few people whose id is misleading referring this >>>> > thread >>>> > and few other relevant online references. >>>> > >>>> > Thanks and Regards, >>>> > Giby. >>>> > >>>> > On 24 October 2011 18:56, Dinesh Valke <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > > Yes Prejith ji ... I am one of the contributors in misleading !! >>>> > > Some of pictures in my photostream need to be rectified. >>>> > > Will revisit them shortly. >>>> > >>>> > > Giby ji was kind enough to at least two instances. >>>> > >>>> > > Regards. >>>> > > Dinesh >>>> > >>>> > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 6:28 PM, PreSam <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >> Thanks to everybody for the identification. A lot of pictures of >>>> > >> Murdannia pauciflora on the internet are misleading. >>>> > >>>> > >> Regards, >>>> > >> Prejith. >>>> > >>>> > >> On Oct 24, 11:07 am, Giby Kuriakose <[email protected]> >>>> > >> wrote: >>>> > >> > I am very sorry for a mistake from my side as I have taken notes >>>> > >> > wrongly >>>> > >> on >>>> > >> > to my notebook and my identification of plant in this thread went >>>> > >> > wrong. >>>> > >> I >>>> > >> > do not know how it had happened. >>>> > >> > Thank you Prabhu for pointing out that and made me to recheck the >>>> > >> > same. >>>> > >>>> > >> > Yes this is *M. pauciflora* only. >>>> > >>>> > >> > I further agree with Mayur jis explanation on *M. languinosa. * >>>> > >>>> > >> > *Murdania pauciflora* >>>> > >>>> > >> > ....stem creeping rooting at nodes, villous on one side. Leaves >>>> > >> > up to 5X >>>> > >> > 1.6cm sessile base usually cordate; more or less hairy, sheaths >>>> > >> > with >>>> > >> ciliate >>>> > >> > margins >>>> > >> > Flowers in 1-5 flowered, axillary cymes. Sepals narrowely oblong >>>> > >> > petals >>>> > >> > brownish yellow >>>> > >> > Stamens and staminodes 3 each..... (Flora of Udupi, G K Bhat) >>>> > >>>> > >> > Thanks and Regards >>>> > >> > Giby >>>> > >>>> > >> > On 24 October 2011 08:53, Mayur Nandikar >>>> > >> > <[email protected]> >>>> > >> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >> > > Dear all................. >>>> > >> > > Prabhu ji is may be right and again I am writing here flowers >>>> > >> > > in >>>> > >> *Murdannia >>>> > >> > > pauciflora *are orange to brick red in colour. >>>> > >> > > * >>>> > >> > > * >>>> > >> > > In *Murdannia lanuginosa *leaves are linear to linear >>>> > >> > > lanceolate with >>>> > >> a >>>> > >> > > broad base, finely acuminate apex, conspicuously striate and >>>> > >> > > with >>>> > >> acuminate >>>> > >> > > margin. Grow always erect. >>>> > >>>> > >> > > Above posted plant is may be *M. pauciflora *coz of its >>>> > >> > > prostrate >>>> > >> habit >>>> > >> > > (apparently look likes), leaves ovate, apex acute, and margins >>>> > >> > > aren't >>>> > >> that >>>> > >> > > much of undulate. >>>> > >>>> > >> > > To compare herewith I am attaching image of *M. lanuginosa * >>>> > >>>> > >> > > * * >>>> > >>>> > >> > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 10:10 PM, Satish Phadke >>>> > >> > > <[email protected] >>>> > >> >wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> *Murdannia lanuginosa* >>>> > >> > >> A common plant at Kaas in Sep. >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Prejith Sampath >>>> > >> > >> <[email protected] >>>> > >> >wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >> > >>> This is a plant found growing on the roadsides in South Wynad >>>> > >> > >>> at >>>> > >> about >>>> > >> > >>> 700 to 800 msl. Is it a Commelina sp. ? >>>> > >>>> > >> > >>> Regards, >>>> > >> > >>> Prejith >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> -- >>>> > >> > >> Dr Satish Phadke >>>> > >>>> > >> > > -- >>>> > >> > > Mr. Mayur D. Nandikar, >>>> > >> > > Research Student, >>>> > >> > > Department of Botany, >>>> > >> > > Shivaji University, >>>> > >> > > Kolhapur. >>>> > >> > > 07507013607 >>>> > >>>> > >> > -- >>>> > >> > GIBY KURIAKOSE PhD >>>> > >> > Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), >>>> > >> > Royal Enclave, >>>> > >> > Jakkur Post, Srirampura >>>> > >> > Bangalore- 560064 >>>> > >> > India >>>> > >> > Phone - +91 9448714856 (Mobile) >>>> > >> > visit my pictures @http://www.flickr.com/photos/giby >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > GIBY KURIAKOSE PhD >>>> > Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), >>>> > Royal Enclave, >>>> > Jakkur Post, Srirampura >>>> > Bangalore- 560064 >>>> > India >>>> > Phone - +91 9448714856 (Mobile) >>>> > visit my pictures @http://www.flickr.com/photos/giby >>> >>> >>> -- >>> GIBY KURIAKOSE PhD >>> Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), >>> Royal Enclave, >>> Jakkur Post, Srirampura >>> Bangalore- 560064 >>> India >>> Phone - +91 9448714856 (Mobile) >>> visit my pictures @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/giby >> >> >> > > > > -- > Manudev K Madhavan > Junior Research Fellow > Systematic & Floristic Lab, > Department of Botany, > Centre for Postgraduate Studies & Research > St. Joseph's College, Devagiri > Kozhikode- 673 008 > Mob: 9496470738 >
