Commelina benghalensis?

25 views
Skip to first unread message

J.M. Garg

unread,
Aug 8, 2009, 5:31:55 AM8/8/09
to indiantreepix
Alongside the lake over stony & grassy area on 2/8/09 in Pocharam, Distt. Medak, AP.
--
With regards,
J.M.Garg
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

Commelina benghalensis is it I2 IMG_0457.jpg
Commelina benghalensis is it I IMG_0460.jpg
Commelina benghalensis is it I IMG_0459.jpg

Dinesh Valke

unread,
Aug 8, 2009, 9:28:21 AM8/8/09
to J.M. Garg, indiantreepix
... the sight looks different ... I think not C. benghalensis.
C. benghalensis, I see very broad leaves, as broad as long, and wavy margin ...
Friends, please comment.
Regards.
1426602137_aa192895e3_b.jpg

Dinesh Valke

unread,
Aug 8, 2009, 10:20:06 AM8/8/09
to J.M. Garg, indiantreepix
Garg ji, your posted plant is C. benghalensis as clarified in another thread by Gurcharan ji.

J.M. Garg

unread,
Aug 11, 2009, 11:08:16 AM8/11/09
to Dinesh Valke, indiantreepix, Gurcharan Singh-sify, mayur nandikar
Further feedback from Mayur Nandikar ji<mnan...@gmail.com>:
"Garg ji
Its seems to be Commelina diffusa"

2009/8/8 Dinesh Valke <dinesh...@gmail.com>

J.M. Garg

unread,
Aug 11, 2009, 10:53:43 PM8/11/09
to Dinesh Valke, indiantreepix, Gurcharan Singh-sify, mayur nandikar, Pankaj Oudhia
For so much of confusion in identifying Commelina species, the link provided by Pankaj Oudha ji as below may be useful:
" Botanical differences among the major Commelina species.
2009/8/11 J.M. Garg <jmg...@gmail.com>

J.M. Garg

unread,
Aug 24, 2009, 11:12:48 PM8/24/09
to Dinesh Valke, indiantreepix, Gurcharan Singh-sify, mayur nandikar, Shrikant Ingalhalikar
There is further feedback from Tabish ji:
"Dear Mr. Garg,
 This definitely does not look like Commelina diffusa - see this link
for example:
http://www.missouriplants.com/Bluealt/Commelina_diffusa_page.html
 It appears to me that Further Flowers of Sahyadri, page 388, also has
a mistake - the flower shown for Commelina diffusa may be of some
other species.
 Your images look like those of Commelina benghalensis, although I am
not too sure yet on this.
   Best wishes
   - Tabish"
 
 

2009/8/11 J.M. Garg <jmg...@gmail.com>
2009/8/8 Dinesh Valke <dinesh...@gmail.com>

--
With regards,
J.M.Garg (jmg...@gmail.com)

Pardeshi S.

unread,
Aug 25, 2009, 2:39:19 AM8/25/09
to indiantreepix
Hello all
the first three pic are of Commelina maculata

regards
Satish Pardeshi


J.M. Garg wrote:
> There is further feedback from Tabish ji:
> "Dear Mr. Garg,
> This definitely does not look like Commelina diffusa - see this link
> for example:
> http://www.missouriplants.com/Bluealt/Commelina_diffusa_page.html
> It appears to me that Further Flowers of Sahyadri, page 388, also has
> a mistake - the flower shown for Commelina diffusa may be of some
> other species.
> Your images look like those of Commelina benghalensis, although I am
> not too sure yet on this.
> Best wishes
> - Tabish"
>
>
>
> 2009/8/11 J.M. Garg <jmg...@gmail.com>
>
> > Further feedback from Mayur Nandikar ji<mnan...@gmail.com>:
> > "Garg ji
> > Its seems to be *Commelina diffusa*"
> >
> > 2009/8/8 Dinesh Valke <dinesh...@gmail.com>
> >
> > Garg ji, your posted plant is *C. benghalensis* as clarified in another

J.M. Garg

unread,
Aug 25, 2009, 3:58:10 AM8/25/09
to Pardeshi S., indiantreepix, mayur nandikar, Dinesh Valke, Gurcharan Singh-sify, Tabish
Thanks, Pardeshi ji.
From the links for Commelina maculata as below, it certainly looks closer to it:
2009/8/25 Pardeshi S. <satishp...@gmail.com>

Gurcharan Singh

unread,
Aug 25, 2009, 7:34:53 AM8/25/09
to J.M. Garg, Pardeshi S., indiantreepix, mayur nandikar, Dinesh Valke, Tabish
 
I think the thread on Commelina benghalensis is getting complicated.I suggest that if any member wants to upload his own photograph on the subject, let him/her change the subject line. We have atleast four different sets of photographs on the same subject line by J M Garg (8/8: 15497), Dinesh Valke (15508). and Shubhada Nikharge (15509; 15510) 
Another  reason for this is the complex taxonomy of the genus, largely based on number of ovules in each ovary cell, number of seeds in capsule, number of capsule valves all of which are not visible in photographs. We can mainly rely on presence of petiole, shape and size of leaf, shape and size of spathe, connation of proximal part of spathe (unfortunately not again deciphered in photos), length of peduncle and pedicel. I am trying to find correlations for Delhi species of the genus, and will report my findings soon.
 
2009/8/25 Pardeshi S. <satishp...@gmail.com>
clear=all>
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages