Manudev ji Can you describe in short what is meant by Protologue in botanical terms?(and may be other related terms)
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:24 PM, manudev madhavan < [email protected]> wrote: > Thank you all... > > My guide use to tell the necessity of the protologues to reach conclusions > in the circumscription of a species.And i always try to do the same when I > get a plant, atleast for genus *Arisaema*. We knew that during the > preparation of a flora, one have to process thousands of plants, and has to > make lot of data sheets of each plant he/she come across. I am not sure how > sincerely one can finish all these things in a stipulated time. > Unfortunately I myself have seen few workers who just "cut & copy" > some preceding floras available, even "Flora of British India & Flora of > Presidency of Madras". It does not mean that "all" the floras are made like > that. > > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Yazdy Palia <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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 >> > >> > > > > -- > *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 > > -- Dr Satish Phadke
