ID: Prejith006. Unidentified plant from Western Ghats

[Prejith Sampath]

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

[Neil Soares]

Hi,   This is Murdannia lanuginosa.                  With regards,                    Neil Soares. --- On Fri, 10/21/11, Prejith Sampath <pres...@gmail.com> wrote:

[PreSam]

Thanks Neil ji.

On Oct 21, 8:31 am, Neil Soares <drneilsoa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>   This is Murdannia lanuginosa.
>                  With regards,
>                    Neil Soares.
>

> --- On Fri, 10/21/11, Prejith Sampath <presa...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Prabhu kumar KM]

Dear Prejithji and Neilji, Please also check with Murdannia pauciflora. I feel the picture is more closer to M. pauciflora.
--
Prabhu Kumar K M
Scientist 

Plant Systematics & Genetic Resources Division
Centre for Medicinal Plant Research (CMPR)

& 'CMPR' Herbarium

Kottakkal Arya Vaidya Sala
Kottakkal, Malappuram

E-mail: prabhum...@gmail.com

[Prejith Sampath]

Dear Prabhu ji. I'm no expert in Botany so I'll leave it to you to decide but based on pictures from the net it looks like what Neilji says it is. 

Prejith.

[Giby Kuriakose]

I too think that this is Murdannia lanuginosa of Commelinaceae family. In Murdannia pauciflora the flowers are blue/ violet in color and leaves are narrow-linear.

Regards

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

[Satish Phadke]

Murdannia lanuginosa
A common plant at Kaas in Sep.

--
Dr Satish Phadke

[Mayur Nandikar]

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   

--
Mr. Mayur D. Nandikar,
Research Student,
Department of Botany,
Shivaji University,
Kolhapur.

07507013607

[Giby Kuriakose]

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

  

[PreSam]

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 <giby.kuriak...@gmail.com> 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 <mayurnandi...@gmail.com> 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 <drsmpha...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >> *Murdannia lanuginosa*

> >> A common plant at Kaas in Sep.
>

[Dinesh Valke]

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

[Giby Kuriakose]

I have written to few people whose id is misleading referring this thread and few other relevant online references.

Thanks and Regards,

Giby. 

[manudev madhavan]

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 <giby.kuriak...@gmail.com> 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 <dinesh.va...@gmail.com> 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
>

[Giby Kuriakose]

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

[Gurcharan Singh]

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/ 

[manudev madhavan]

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

--

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

[Gurcharan Singh]

Manudev ji

Why did you believe that any body was hurt? Not at least me. We on this forum believe in free exchange of information and opinions, and you I think did nothing wrong to hurt any one. Just enjoy your interactions  here. If you enjoy, all interactions are worth it.

-- 
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/ 

[Giby Kuriakose]

Dear Manudev,

There was nothing to hurt anybody in your mail, I think. 

At least, I didn't find anything. Healthy discussions on different aspects and thoughts are always welcome here, I think. 

I still feel that you brought up a very valid point as far as research and working with local or regional flora is concerned. If this happens when people make local or regional flora then there would be near zero error in such publications. 

Here, in this forum we all have limitations. Mistakes and corrections are part and parcel as we are guessing from images, especially people are reluctant to give or explain the characters of the plant/s. And I personally don't claim that my guess or suggestions are 100% perfect. 

I would be happy when the uploader get back to say that "Yes, I cross checked and found your suggestion matches with the description". 

[Satish Phadke]

Dear Manudev ji Giby ji and Gurcharan ji
Thanks for opening up with your thoughts.
Everybody knows about the limitations of identifying a plant.
So many members of the group eager to see the plants posted itself shows the interest of the members. If you people were not willing to share your knowledge many members like me would have kept on believing our old knowledge acquired from very few people with whom we have seen the plants in the field.
These healthy discussions is a mandatory part of the group.
Regards

--
Dr Satish Phadke

[Yazdy Palia]

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

[manudev madhavan]

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. 

[Satish Phadke]

Manudev ji
Can you describe in short what is meant by Protologue in botanical terms?(and may be other related terms)

--
Dr Satish Phadke

[Vijayasankar]

Interesting discussion, Manudev ji and Giby.

Satish ji, let me try to answer your query.

In simple terms, Protologue is the original description of a plant published for the first time. It may be a book or a paper in a journal. The (herbarium) specimen of the newly described plant is the 'Type specimen', with which the botanical name is permanently attached.

It is customary to refer and quote the protologue and Type, when we write a taxonomic article, espl. to be sure that we work on the correct plant and correct name. This is what being stressed by Manudev ji here.

I know, many botanists in the group spend time to refer digital protologues and scanned herbarium images from various sources, to identify some of the not-so-common plants that are posted here. This may not be necessary for all plants, but it is essential to sort out doubtful id. Thanks to the IT, we are now able to at least see these treasures digitally, because, Type specimens of many of the Indian plants are not available in India, and we can not travel to herbaria for every plant.

Pankaj has posted protologues and Types of several orchids in this forum.

 

Regards 

 

Vijayasankar Raman
National Center for Natural Products Research
University of Mississippi

[manudev madhavan]

Thanks vijayji..

[Samir Mehta]

Apologies for entering the thread late but can someone tell us
amateurs the popular websites where these Protologue's can be
accessed, especially for our plants?

Thanks & Regards,

Samir Mehta




On Nov 1, 6:57 pm, manudev madhavan <manudevkmadha...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Thanks vijayji..

>
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Vijayasankar <vijay.botan...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Interesting discussion, Manudev ji and Giby.
>
> > Satish ji, let me try to answer your query.
>
> > In simple terms, Protologue is the original description of a plant
> > published for the first time. It may be a book or a paper in a journal. The
> > (herbarium) specimen of the newly described plant is the 'Type specimen',
> > with which the botanical name is permanently attached.
>
> > It is customary to refer and quote the protologue and Type, when we write
> > a taxonomic article, espl. to be sure that we work on the correct plant and
> > correct name. This is what being stressed by Manudev ji here.
>
> > I know, many botanists in the group spend time to refer digital
> > protologues and scanned herbarium images from various sources, to identify
> > some of the not-so-common plants that are posted here. This may not be
> > necessary for all plants, but it is essential to sort out doubtful id.
> > Thanks to the IT, we are now able to at least see these treasures
> > digitally, because, Type specimens of many of the Indian plants are not
> > available in India, and we can not travel to herbaria for every plant.
>
> > Pankaj has posted protologues and Types of several orchids in this forum.
>
> > Regards
>
> > Vijayasankar Raman
> > National Center for Natural Products Research
> > University of Mississippi
>

> > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 5:13 AM, Satish Phadke <drsmpha...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >> 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 <
> >> manudevkmadha...@gmail.com> 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 1:50 PM, Gurcharan Singh <singh...@gmail.com>

> >>>> giby.kuriak...@gmail.com>

> >>>> manudevkmadha...@gmail.com>

> ...
>
> read more »

[Mayur Nandikar]

Samir ji,

There are few websites, or online libraries for archives of old journals and books (for Protologue's) might be you aware with this. Even you can search plant name from Tropicos http://www.tropicos.org/ they will provide all the details of taxa furthermore you can access the original protologue from this site.

Following are few libraries... 

Biblioteca Digital

Biodiversity Heritage Library

Botanicus

BPH

e-journals

Gallica

Guide to the plant species descriptions published in seed lists from Botanic Gardens for the period 1800 - 1900

Kurt Stüber's Online Library

Linnaean Dissertations

Martius's Flora Brasiliensis

Philological Museum 

Thank you.......:)

[Samir Mehta]

Thank You Muyur ji for the details though I cannot see your post here
in this thread;
For the benefit of group-members on this thread and all others I am
pasting the reply below:

'Samir ji,

There are few websites, or online libraries for archives of old
journals
and books (for Protologue's) might be you aware with this. Even you
can
search plant name from Tropicos http://www.tropicos.org/ they will
provide
all the details of taxa furthermore you can access the original
protologue
from this site.

Following are few libraries...

Biblioteca Digital <http://bibdigital.rjb.csic.es/ing/index.php>

Biodiversity Heritage Library<http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/
About.aspx>

Botanicus <http://www.botanicus.org/browse>

**BPH <http://fmhibd.library.cmu.edu/fmi/iwp/cgi?-db=BPH_Online&-
loadframes>

**e-journals <http://www.e-journals.org/botany/>

Gallica <http://gallica.bnf.fr/>

Guide to the plant species descriptions published in seed lists from
Botanic Gardens for the period 1800 -

1900<http://www.nationaalherbarium.nl/seedlists/home.htm>

Kurt Stüber's Online Library <http://www.zum.de/stueber/>

Linnaean Dissertations <http://128.2.21.109/fmi/xsl/LinnDiss/home.xsl>

Martius's Flora Brasiliensis <http://florabrasiliensis.cria.org.br/
index>

Philological Museum<http://www.philological.bham.ac.uk/bibliography/
index.htm>

Thank you.......:)

- Show quoted text -

--
Mr. Mayur D. Nandikar,
Research Student,
Department of Botany,
Shivaji University,
Kolhapur.

07507013607 '

On Nov 1, 7:19 pm, Samir Mehta <samirmeht...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apologies for entering the thread late but can someone tell us
> amateurs the popular websites where these Protologue's can be
> accessed, especially for our plants?
>
> Thanks & Regards,
>
> Samir Mehta
>
> On Nov 1, 6:57 pm, manudev madhavan <manudevkmadha...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Thanks vijayji..
>
> > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Vijayasankar <vijay.botan...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > Interesting discussion, Manudev ji and Giby.
>
> > > Satish ji, let me try to answer your query.
>
> > > In simple terms, Protologue is the original description of aplant
> > > published for the first time. It may be a book or a paper in a journal. The

> > > (herbarium) specimen of the newly describedplantis the 'Type specimen',

> > >>> same when I get aplant, 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 eachplanthe/she come across. I am

> > >>>> > I getplant. I use to check the descriptions of the floras and the

> > >>>> >>> By the way, It was my mistake that I ided theplantin 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 toid.
> > >>>> >>> 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 theidbased on

> > >>>> >>> expert suggestions. It is a collective effort that we are handling.
> > >>>> >>> Further, district flora will give us a clearer picture (provided
> > >>>> that the

> > >>>> >>>idand 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 <
> > >>>> manudevkmadha...@gmail.com>
> > >>>> >>> wrote:
>
> > >>>> >>>> Dear all,
>
> > >>>> >>>> A humble suggestion from my side..

> > >>>> >>>> Whenever we make a comment on the identity of aplant, 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 wrongIDin 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 theID. 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  theplant. I think accessing a protologue is not a himalayan in

> > >>>> >>>> this era
>
> > >>>> >>>> with warm regards
>
> > >>>> >>>> On Oct 25, 9:32 am, Giby Kuriakose <giby.kuriak...@gmail.com>
> > >>>> wrote:

> > >>>> >>>> > I have written to few people whoseidis misleading referring

> > >>>> this
> > >>>> >>>> > thread
> > >>>> >>>> > and few other relevant online references.
>
> > >>>> >>>> > Thanks and Regards,
> > >>>> >>>> > Giby.
>
> > >>>> >>>> > On 24 October 2011 18:56, Dinesh Valke <dinesh.va...@gmail.com>
>

> ...
>
> read more »

[Samir Mehta]

Thread broken;

See original thread = 'https://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix/
browse_thread/thread/93913c9f37f4cd31?hl=en'

On Nov 2, 8:59 am, Mayur Nandikar <mayurnandi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Samir ji,
>
> There are few websites, or online libraries for archives of old journals
> and books (for Protologue's) might be you aware with this. Even you can

> search plant name from Tropicoshttp://www.tropicos.org/they will provide

> all the details of taxa furthermore you can access the original protologue
> from this site.
>
> Following are few libraries...
>

> Biblioteca Digital <http://bibdigital.rjb.csic.es/ing/index.php>
>
> Biodiversity Heritage Library<http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/About.aspx>
>
> Botanicus <http://www.botanicus.org/browse>
>
> **BPH <http://fmhibd.library.cmu.edu/fmi/iwp/cgi?-db=BPH_Online&-loadframes>
>
> **e-journals <http://www.e-journals.org/botany/>
>
> Gallica <http://gallica.bnf.fr/>
>

> Guide to the plant species descriptions published in seed lists from
> Botanic Gardens for the period 1800 -

> 1900<http://www.nationaalherbarium.nl/seedlists/home.htm>
>
> Kurt Stüber's Online Library <http://www.zum.de/stueber/>
>
> Linnaean Dissertations <http://128.2.21.109/fmi/xsl/LinnDiss/home.xsl>
>
> Martius's Flora Brasiliensis <http://florabrasiliensis.cria.org.br/index>
>
> Philological Museum<http://www.philological.bham.ac.uk/bibliography/index.htm>
>

[Samir Mehta]

Thank You Muyur ji for the details though I cannot see your post here
in this thread;
For the benefit of group-members on this thread and all others I am
pasting the reply below:

'Samir ji,

There are few websites, or online libraries for archives of old
journals
and books (for Protologue's) might be you aware with this. Even you
can

search plant name from Tropicos http://www.tropicos.org/ they will

provide
all the details of taxa furthermore you can access the original
protologue
from this site.

Following are few libraries...

Biblioteca Digital <http://bibdigital.rjb.csic.es/ing/index.php>

Biodiversity Heritage Library<http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/
About.aspx>

Botanicus <http://www.botanicus.org/browse>

**BPH <http://fmhibd.library.cmu.edu/fmi/iwp/cgi?-db=BPH_Online&-
loadframes>

**e-journals <http://www.e-journals.org/botany/>

Gallica <http://gallica.bnf.fr/>

Guide to the plant species descriptions published in seed lists from
Botanic Gardens for the period 1800 -
1900<http://www.nationaalherbarium.nl/seedlists/home.htm>

Kurt Stüber's Online Library <http://www.zum.de/stueber/>

Linnaean Dissertations <http://128.2.21.109/fmi/xsl/LinnDiss/home.xsl>

Martius's Flora Brasiliensis <http://florabrasiliensis.cria.org.br/
index>

Philological Museum<http://www.philological.bham.ac.uk/bibliography/
index.htm>

Thank you.......:)

- Show quoted text -

--
Mr. Mayur D. Nandikar,
Research Student,
Department of Botany,
Shivaji University,
Kolhapur.

07507013607 '

On Nov 1, 7:19 pm, Samir Mehta <samirmeht...@gmail.com> wrote:

- Show quoted text -

On Nov 1, 7:19 pm, Samir Mehta <samirmeht...@gmail.com> wrote:

> ...
>
> read more »

[Samir Mehta]

Thank You Mayur ji, appreciate it.
Apologize for missing to reply to this e-mail of yours earlier.

Regards,

Samir