one more ground orchid for id from Amboli

38 views
Skip to first unread message

shubhada nikharge

unread,
Aug 18, 2010, 1:57:12 AM8/18/10
to indian tree pix
Hi friends,
one more orchid for id. again from Amboli, Western ghats of Maharashtra.
I do not have better pics than these and cud not take close ups too. 
Cheers,
Shubhada



"I am only one; but still I am one. I cannot do everything, but still I can do something; I will not refuse to do the something I can do."


Ground orchid 2010_0805_Amboli_0269 e.jpg
Ground orchid 2010_0805_Amboli_0278 e.jpg
Ground orchid 2010_0805_Amboli_0270 e.jpg

Pankaj Kumar

unread,
Aug 18, 2010, 2:12:24 AM8/18/10
to shubhada nikharge, indian tree pix
This should be
Crepidium resupinatum (G.Forst.) Szlach., Fragm. Florist. Geobot.,
Suppl. 3: 131 (1995).

Syn:
Epidendrum resupinatum G.Forst., Fl. Ins. Austr.: 61 (1786).
Malaxis resupinata (G.Forst.) Kuntze, Revis. Gen. Pl. 2: 673 (1891).
Microstylis resupinata (G.Forst.) Drake, Ill. Fl. Ins. Pacif.: 305 (1892).
Seidenfia rheedei (Sw.) Szlach., Fragm. Florist. Geobot., Suppl. 3: 122 (1995).

Regards
Pankaj

shrikant ingalhalikar

unread,
Aug 18, 2010, 4:03:17 AM8/18/10
to efloraofindia
Pankaj ji I have been calling this as M. rheedii Swartz. Pls update me
if M. resupinata has a distribution in Maharashtra. Regards, Shrikant
> > do something; I will not refuse to do the something I can do."- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Pankaj Kumar

unread,
Aug 18, 2010, 4:41:27 AM8/18/10
to shrikant ingalhalikar, efloraofindia
Dear Shrikant Sir

Sorry I forgot to add,

Malaxis rheedei Sw., Kongl. Vetensk. Acad. Nya Handl. 21: 235 (1800).

is also a the synonym of this plant. It is also found in dark purple
colour in the wild.

Regards
Pankaj

tanay bose

unread,
Aug 18, 2010, 10:30:05 AM8/18/10
to Pankaj Kumar, shrikant ingalhalikar, efloraofindia
Another orchid !! I knew this one but was not aware of the new name !!
tanay

--
Tanay Bose
Research Assistant & Teaching Assistant
Department of Botany
University of British Columbia
3529-6270 University Blvd.
Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1Z4 (Canada)
Phone: 778-323-4036

Neil Soares

unread,
Aug 18, 2010, 10:11:55 PM8/18/10
to efloraofindia, shrikant ingalhalikar
Hi,
   My photographs of Malaxis versicolor [Malaxis rheedii] now called Corymborkis versicolor. The first two were taken at Matheran. Have propagated it at Shahapur, but unfortunately it has not flowered yet.
                             With regards,
                               Neil Soares.

--- On Wed, 8/18/10, shrikant ingalhalikar <le...@rediffmail.com> wrote:
Corymborkis versicolor 1.jpg
Corymborkis versicolor 2.jpg
Corymborkis versicolor 3.jpg

tanay bose

unread,
Aug 18, 2010, 11:09:21 PM8/18/10
to Neil Soares, efloraofindia, shrikant ingalhalikar
Does this orchid always tend to grow over open rock surfaces?
tanay

Neil Soares

unread,
Aug 19, 2010, 12:13:29 AM8/19/10
to tanay bose, efloraofindia, shrikant ingalhalikar
Negative Tanay. Have also seen it growing in mulch, that's where I collected it from.
                          Regards,
                           Neil.

--- On Thu, 8/19/10, tanay bose <tanay...@gmail.com> wrote:

tanay bose

unread,
Aug 19, 2010, 12:19:04 AM8/19/10
to Neil Soares, efloraofindia, shrikant ingalhalikar
Thanks for the updation Neil Ji
tanay

Pankaj Kumar

unread,
Aug 19, 2010, 2:07:37 AM8/19/10
to tanay bose, Neil Soares, efloraofindia, shrikant ingalhalikar
Dear Neil Sir,

Just wanted to ask...do you mean to say that the Shubhada's plant is
not Crepidium resupinatum? but Corymborkis versicolor?
Or you are talking about your plant. Please do post a closeup picture
of the flowers if possible.

Unfortunately, I dont know of any species which is called Corymborkis
versicolor. Corymborkis belongs to subfamily Tropidioideae whereas the
Malaxis group belongs to Epidendroideae. They are totally different.

Secondly, Malaxis versicolor and Malaxis rheedii are two different
plants according to my knowledge and IPNI and Kew.

I may be wrong though.

Regards
Pankaj

Neil Soares

unread,
Aug 19, 2010, 3:23:40 AM8/19/10
to tanay bose, Pankaj Kumar, efloraofindia, shrikant ingalhalikar
Hi Dr. Kumar,
   Have quoted from Dr. Almeida's 'Flora of Maharashtra' Vol 5-A. My plant was identified by Dr.Almeida [on a visit to my farm in August 2007] as Malaxis versicolor, though he has now changed the name to Corymborkis versicolor in his latest Vol 5 which was released in Jan 2009.
  Unfortunately the plants at my farm have not flowered yet, and I do not have a close-up of the Matheran flowers.
 
   Acccording to Dr.Almeida's Vol 5 there are 5 species of Corymborkis:
   1.C.acuminata.
   2.C.densiflora
   3.C.intermedia
   4.C.latifolia
& 5.C.versicolor [syn. Malaxis versicolor, syn. Malaxis rheedi, syn. Microstylis rheedi, syn. Microstylis versicolor].
  Am not sure which species Shubhada's plant is.
 
                                      With regards,
                                        Neil Soares.

--- On Thu, 8/19/10, Pankaj Kumar <sahani...@gmail.com> wrote:

Pankaj Kumar

unread,
Aug 19, 2010, 3:29:31 AM8/19/10
to Neil Soares, efloraofindia, shrikant ingalhalikar
That is not possible. I would really like to have a look at that. SOME ONE PLEASE SEND ME ORCHIDACEAE FROM FLORA OF MAHARASTRA......
Pankaj

dinesh kumar agrawala

unread,
Aug 19, 2010, 4:39:46 AM8/19/10
to sahani...@gmail.com, tanay...@gmail.com, drneil...@yahoo.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
I agree with Dr. Pankaj that Malaxis rheedii and M. versicolor are two different plants based on Microstylis rheedii amd Microstylis versicolor respectively. The generic concept as to which genus these species will belong is a never ending debate which can only be solved with the help of phylogenetic and experimental taxonomy. It does not matter in which genus it is being treated but the identity at species level does really matters. It is true that the two species are different and treated under Seidenfia by Sath. Kumar and Manilal, Orchids of Kerala in Orchid Memories: a tribute to G. Seidenfaden published in 2004. Regarding the species level difference, there are some publications specific to this two species but unable to recall right now. Sorry for that.
Dinesh

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:50:16 +0530 wrote
Dinesh Kumar Agrawala
Research Officer (Botany)
Central Council for Research in Ayurveda and Siddha
Jawaharlal Nehru Bhartiya Chikitsa Avum Homeopathy Anusandhan Bhawan
61-65, Institutional Area
Opposite D-Block, Janakpuri
New Delhi - 110 058
Mobile: +91 9560570745
SAVE PLANTS AND SAVE LIFE

Gurcharan Singh

unread,
Aug 19, 2010, 5:08:15 AM8/19/10
to dinesh kumar agrawala, sahani...@gmail.com, tanay...@gmail.com, drneil...@yahoo.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
Dear Members
It is true that name Corymborkis versicolor has not been incorporated in IPNI, but we should respect Neil ji's word, and not reject it outright.May be the book has not reached the compilers of these databases. Dr. Almeida is a accomplished taxonomist with great contribution to the knowledge of Flora of Maharashtra. Till some one from the area is able to get hold of this volume, we should avoid commenting to the contrary. Perhaps Neil ji can help in procuring this important page of the book, or possibly Rashida ji who knows the Flora of Maharashtra so well.

As far as whether the two species are distinct or synonymous is a matter of taxonomic judgement. There are thousands of species which have been merged or split by different authors. Only yesterday there was a plant uploaded by me from Kashmir with dense inflorescence and much narrower leaves (which Flora of Pakistan treated as Phytolacca latbenia Walter) and one uploaded by Nalini ji from Germany with much lax inflorescence and broader almost ovate leaves 20-30 cm broad. Most recent publications treat both as P. acinosa. 
Let us wait about the two species of Malaxis also till the said volume of Dr. Almeida is available to any member.

 



-- 
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/ 

Neil Soares

unread,
Aug 19, 2010, 6:39:33 AM8/19/10
to dinesh kumar agrawala, Gurcharan Singh, sahani...@gmail.com, tanay...@gmail.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
Hi Prof. Singh,
    I own all the voumes of 'Flora of Maharashtra' but haven't had time, neither do I have any material to work on.
                   Regards,
                     Neil Soares.
 

--- On Thu, 8/19/10, Gurcharan Singh <sing...@gmail.com> wrote:

Gurcharan Singh

unread,
Aug 19, 2010, 7:04:34 AM8/19/10
to Neil Soares, dinesh kumar agrawala, sahani...@gmail.com, tanay...@gmail.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
Neil ji
It may solve the issue if you could have the paragraph on nomenclature (with authority) of this species forwarded on the group.


-- 
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/ 

Pankaj Kumar

unread,
Aug 19, 2010, 8:19:24 AM8/19/10
to Gurcharan Singh, Neil Soares, dinesh kumar agrawala, tanay...@gmail.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
I have met Dr. Almeida personally and I respect him undoubtedly and I also know some of his students very well. My intention of saying was just to see what he has done with Malaxis in his book. My personal view says, they can never be placed in Corymborkis.....it is totally out of my head!! He may have made a new combination...

Neither do I doubt credibility of Dr. Neil. What he said was based on a proper reference, so has is justified himself.

Sameer Surve, Swapna, Aparna, Page, if you are reading this, then get me xerox of orchidaceae. I would really like to see. The book is not available in Dehradun.

Regards
Pankaj

Rashida Atthar

unread,
Aug 19, 2010, 10:11:10 AM8/19/10
to Pankaj Kumar, Gurcharan Singh, Neil Soares, dinesh kumar agrawala, tanay...@gmail.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
Dr. Gurcharan ji, Here are the details as requested by you sir for the species under discussion from Flora of Mah, Vol V - A pg 28, 29
Corymborkis Thouars
  
1. Small pseudobulbs present- C. densiflora

1. Pseudobulbs not present- C. versicolor 

Five new combinations have been described- C. acuminata (D. Don) Almeida (comb. nov.).

C. intermedia (A. Rich.) Almeida (comb. nov.)

C. latifolia (J.E.Sm.) Almeida (comb. nov)

C. versicolor (Lind.) Almeida (comb. nov.).

Two explanations of particular interest to the discussion, one on pg 29 under the description of c. acuminata is as follows:  "Generic name Malaxis Sw. is not applicable to the generic concept and circumscription of these species. Why it is not a appropriate generic name for our plants, is explained under C. versicolor. Other generic name used for the taxa under this group is Microstylis Nutt. (nom.cons.). This generic name also applies to the  New World series, which is typified by Microstylis ophioglossoides Willd., and Willdenow might be correct considering it a close ally of Geodorum Jackson. (1810). Lindley (1827) published a new generic name under Dienia congesta Lindl. based on Malaxis latifolia J.E. Sm. However, the  earliest  available generic name for this generic concept happens to be Corymborchis Du Petit Thuars. applied to Himalayan species going under Malaxis and Microstylis (Sensu lato). I propose to restore this generic name for our Indian orchids ".

Another important explanation at the end of the description of C. versicolor is as follows: pg 30 : "The Malaxis rheedii Sw. was revived by Nair & Ansari (1981) . However, Swartz in original publication (1778) has cited Epidendrum resupinatum G. Forst.,    reducing his new name to illegitimate status . Seidenfaden (Bot. Tidsskr. 73: 97, 1978) excluded Forster's synonym and lectotypified  Swartz's  name on Rheede's figure. This practice is against the rules of the ICBN. Any name including  the indication of type of different  species or even the inclusion of the name of different species renders the new name illegitimate, irrespective  of its own type. Similarly, Swartz's generic name also must be typified by Epidendrum resupinatum Forst. Secondly , Seidenfaden was wrong in selecting Rheede's figure as type. because Swartz had proposed the name for Occidental plant which he has applied to Oriental species".    

I hope the above resolves the confusion. Sir just a few days back Dr. Almeida had mentioned to me that it can take any number of years for the Kew index and other data indexes to update the new combinations.

I am also attaching scanned image of a line drawing and a picture of C. versicolor from the flora. 

regards,
Rashida.    
line drawing.jpg
Corymborchis versicolor.jpg

Gurcharan Singh

unread,
Aug 19, 2010, 10:53:52 AM8/19/10
to Rashida Atthar, Pankaj Kumar, Neil Soares, dinesh kumar agrawala, tanay...@gmail.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
Thanks Rashida ji
That should settle the issue. Any other thing as I wrote earlier is the matter of Taxonomic judgement.



-- 
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/ 

Pankaj Kumar

unread,
Aug 19, 2010, 1:28:50 PM8/19/10
to Gurcharan Singh, Rashida Atthar, Neil Soares, dinesh kumar agrawala, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
I just got my hands on the Orchidaceae of Flora of Maharastra, I must say, that I was disappointed...I hope to see same reaction from Dinesh.....
Pankaj

dinesh kumar agrawala

unread,
Aug 20, 2010, 12:17:01 AM8/20/10
to sahani...@gmail.com, sing...@gmail.com, atthar....@gmail.com, drneil...@yahoo.com, dk_...@rediffmail.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
Dear Pankaj
I am still waiting to see the Orchidaceae part of Dr. Almeida's book for giving any type of reaction or comment. But as pointed by you it seems undigestible to transfer of any species of Malaxis to Corymborkis as they are far more distant phylogenetically as well as naturally (Dressler, 1993; Szlachtko, 1995; Pridgeon et al, 2005). I dont know under which circumstances Dr Almeida has effected this combination but as per my experience is concerned many of nom nov. or comb. nov. proposed by him are not accepted subsequently. He is an acomplished taxonomist I agree but reputation should not be the only criteria while accepting or not accepting somebody's observations. I apologige if I have hurt anyone in this group.
Regards
Dinesh

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 22:58:11 +0530 wrote

>I just got my hands on the Orchidaceae of Flora of Maharastra, I must say, that I was disappointed...I hope to see same reaction from Dinesh.....Pankaj



Pankaj Kumar

unread,
Aug 20, 2010, 12:36:42 AM8/20/10
to dinesh kumar agrawala, sing...@gmail.com, atthar....@gmail.com, drneil...@yahoo.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
Dear Dinesh, 
What I see is the bigger problem, when the fresh researchers and blind followers will use that reference and then get confused and create more confusion for future generation. The issues are not just limited to Corymborkis or Corymbochis but many other plants in Orchidaceae in that treatise. My file is around 60mb size, cant attach on the mail. Will try to reduce it and mail or you may send me your postal address I will post a cd.
Just to remind the rest that BLAT or Blatter's Herbarium is supposed to be one of the most costly herbarium in the world if you wish to consult it. And then having publication from such herbarium doesnt look good.
Sorry for saying all this.
But the reference does have some interesting and appreciable things in it.
Regards
Pankaj

dinesh kumar agrawala

unread,
Aug 20, 2010, 1:01:26 AM8/20/10
to sing...@gmail.com, atthar....@gmail.com, sahani...@gmail.com, drneil...@yahoo.com, dk_...@rediffmail.com, tanay...@gmail.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
Dear All
I dont agree with the transfer of species under Malaxis to Corymborchis. Following points I want to raise here
1. Generic concept or circumscription of a genus is same for the species of that genus throughout the world. There is defined generic limit for both Malaxis and Corymborkis and if the species are not fitting in Malaxis they will not be fitting in Corymborkis as well.
2. There are other recent developments in the nomenclature of this group and species of Malaxis have been transferred to Dienia, Crepidium, Seidenfia etc. and these transfers are well within the limit of ICBN code. Dr. Almeida has not discussed about these genera.
These statements are premature as I have not seen the Fl. Maharashtra physically and these comments are based on whatever Rashida Ji have sent.
Regards
Dinesh

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 20:23:13 +0530 wrote
>Thanks Rashida jiThat should settle the issue. Any other thing as I wrote earlier is the matter of Taxonomic judgement.


-- 
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 Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Rashida Atthar wrote:

Dr. Gurcharan ji, Here are the details as requested by you sir for the species under discussion from Flora of Mah, Vol V - A pg 28, 29Corymborkis Thouars


  1. Small pseudobulbs present- C. densiflora
1. Pseudobulbs not present- C. versicolor 
Five new combinations have been described- C. acuminata (D. Don) Almeida (comb. nov.).


C. intermedia (A. Rich.) Almeida (comb. nov.)
C. latifolia (J.E.Sm.) Almeida (comb. nov)
C. versicolor (Lind.) Almeida (comb. nov.).


Two explanations of particular interest to the discussion, one on pg 29 under the description of c. acuminata is as follows:  "Generic name Malaxis Sw. is not applicable to the generic concept and circumscription of these species. Why it is not a appropriate generic name for our plants, is explained under C. versicolor. Other generic name used for the taxa under this group is Microstylis Nutt. (nom.cons.). This generic name also applies to the  New World series, which is typified by Microstylis ophioglossoides Willd., and Willdenow might be correct considering it a close ally of Geodorum Jackson. (1810). Lindley (1827) published a new generic name under Dienia congesta Lindl. based on Malaxis latifolia J.E. Sm. However, the  earliest  available generic name for this generic concept happens to be Corymborchis Du Petit Thuars. applied to Himalayan species going under Malaxis and Microstylis (Sensu lato). I propose to restore this generic name for our Indian orchids ".


Another important explanation at the end of the description of C. versicolor is as follows: pg 30 : "The Malaxis rheedii Sw. was revived by Nair & Ansari (1981) . However, Swartz in original publication (1778) has cited Epidendrum resupinatum G. Forst.,    reducing his new name to illegitimate status . Seidenfaden (Bot. Tidsskr. 73: 97, 1978) excluded Forster's synonym and lectotypified  Swartz's  name on Rheede's figure. This practice is against the rules of the ICBN. Any name including  the indication of type of different  species or even the inclusion of the name of different species renders the new name illegitimate, irrespective  of its own type. Similarly, Swartz's generic name also must be typified by Epidendrum resupinatum Forst. Secondly , Seidenfaden was wrong in selecting Rheede's figure as type. because Swartz had proposed the name for Occidental plant which he has applied to Oriental species".    


I hope the above resolves the confusion. Sir just a few days back Dr. Almeida had mentioned to me that it can take any number of years for the Kew index and other data indexes to update the new combinations.


I am also attaching scanned image of a line drawing and a picture of C. versicolor from the flora. 
regards,Rashida.    

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Pankaj Kumar wrote:

I have met Dr. Almeida personally and I respect him undoubtedly and I also know some of his students very well. My intention of saying was just to see what he has done with Malaxis in his book. My personal view says, they can never be placed in Corymborkis.....it is totally out of my head!! He may have made a new combination...



Neither do I doubt credibility of Dr. Neil. What he said was based on a proper reference, so has is justified himself.

Sameer Surve, Swapna, Aparna, Page, if you are reading this, then get me xerox of orchidaceae. I would really like to see. The book is not available in Dehradun.



RegardsPankaj




On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Gurcharan Singh wrote:



Neil jiIt may solve the issue if you could have the paragraph on nomenclature (with authority) of this species forwarded on the group.





-- 
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 Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Neil Soares wrote:




Hi Prof. Singh,
    I own all the voumes of 'Flora of Maharashtra' but haven't had time, neither do I have any material to work on.
                   Regards,
                     Neil Soares.
 

--- On Thu, 8/19/10, Gurcharan Singh wrote:



From: Gurcharan Singh
Subject: Re: Re: [efloraofindia:44808] Re: one more ground orchid for id from Amboli




To: "dinesh kumar agrawala"

Gurcharan Singh

unread,
Aug 20, 2010, 1:09:43 AM8/20/10
to Pankaj Kumar, dinesh kumar agrawala, atthar....@gmail.com, drneil...@yahoo.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
Dear Dinesh ji
There is no question of hurting anyone. This group is meant for frank discussion, as long as we don't cross certain "Lakshman Rekha". Let us be bold enough to face a simple fact. Dr. Almeida's publication is the most recent publication on this species complex, unless it is refuted or rejected in some book or journal, it is going to stay. Many students and researchers will follow it as the most recent nomenclature, till some established database or publication gives us a different option..


-- 
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/ 

dinesh kumar agrawala

unread,
Aug 20, 2010, 1:24:44 AM8/20/10
to sing...@gmail.com, sahani...@gmail.com, dk_...@rediffmail.com, atthar....@gmail.com, drneil...@yahoo.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
Respected Prof. Singhji
It depends upon the students or researchers and their intensity of research. I felt it is not always necessary to follow the latest nomenclature as the correct one. Particularly in the case like this, where the view of the author is not reviewed by any subject expert or nomenclatural expert. This is a book and the author is free to write anything in his own book published by own publisher.
Regards
Dinesh

On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 10:39:00 +0530 wrote
>Dear Dinesh jiThere is no question of hurting anyone. This group is meant for frank discussion, as long as we don't cross certain "Lakshman Rekha". Let us be bold enough to face a simple fact. Dr. Almeida's publication is the most recent publication on this species complex, unless it is refuted or rejected in some book or journal, it is going to stay. Many students and researchers will follow it as the most recent nomenclature, till some established database or publication gives us a different option..



-- 
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 Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Pankaj Kumar wrote:

Dear Dinesh, What I see is the bigger problem, when the fresh researchers and blind followers will use that reference and then get confused and create more confusion for future generation. The issues are not just limited to Corymborkis or Corymbochis but many other plants in Orchidaceae in that treatise. My file is around 60mb size, cant attach on the mail. Will try to reduce it and mail or you may send me your postal address I will post a cd.

Just to remind the rest that BLAT or Blatter's Herbarium is supposed to be one of the most costly herbarium in the world if you wish to consult it. And then having publication from such herbarium doesnt look good.

Sorry for saying all this.But the reference does have some interesting and appreciable things in it.RegardsPankaj

Pankaj Oudhia

unread,
Aug 20, 2010, 1:42:02 AM8/20/10
to efloraofindia
I have Flora of Madhya Pradesh (All volumes) published by BSI. It is full of errors. I am not Botanist by education but when I go to field I find this flora useless most commonly. It seems that authors have simply copied the information gathered by early workers. They are not aware of ground realities. At first I decided to write in detail about it and inform the authorities but later I decided to label new species in the name of Traditional Healers and natives.

Errors are common in Floras when written by First Class taxonomists (Dr.Sahani's classification). Have you ever heard of flora prepared by Third Class Taxonomists? No one publishes their work. Am I wrong?

regards

Pankaj Oudhia 

Vijayasankar

unread,
Aug 20, 2010, 1:42:28 AM8/20/10
to dinesh kumar agrawala, sing...@gmail.com, sahani...@gmail.com, atthar....@gmail.com, drneil...@yahoo.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
Dear Dinesh Kumar ji,
 
I think there is no restriction to follow any particular treatment. Whatever treatment you feel (here you means not You) more comfortable, you can very well follow that treatment unless otherwise it is considered or proved 'wrong' in some sense. Difference of opinion is not an uncommon thing in taxonomy. There are several examples. We have different systems of classifications, Cronquest, Takhtajan, APG I, II, III etc etc. But many of us still feel comfortable and following that of Bentham & Hooker's inspite of knowing its demerits. Similarly Cassia is divided into three genera (Cassia, Senna, Chamaecrista), but some recent floras/efloras still consider them as One. That's why taxonomy is still very dynamic!
 
You have all the right to write your (well analyzed) opinion about a particular treatment in suitable journal, so that others also may follow your's.
 
Please take this in a lightest sense.
 
With regards

Vijayasankar


Vijayasankar

unread,
Aug 20, 2010, 1:59:34 AM8/20/10
to Pankaj Oudhia, efloraofindia
You are right Pankaj ji,
 
But writing a 100% perfect Flora seems to be nearly impossible with the current situation of time constraint, work load, facility, work priority, etc. I revised my thesis (flora of a district, with nearly 1400 taxa) seven times before sending it for printing, thinking that mine will be one of the perfect floras with less or no mistakes. The printing of manusctipt is done. But when i was preparing index, i found few more errors that forced me to add a half a page errata.
 
With regards

Vijayasankar


dinesh kumar agrawala

unread,
Aug 20, 2010, 2:01:46 AM8/20/10
to vijay.b...@gmail.com, sing...@gmail.com, sahani...@gmail.com, atthar....@gmail.com, drneil...@yahoo.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
As soon as I will recieve a copy of Fl. Maharashtra I will start working on this and hopefully in the near future it will get published with proper justification. Till that I am not telling anybody to follow or not to follow a particular publication. The debate started with the justification of Seidenfia or Corymborkis for Malaxis rheedii and Malaxis versicolor. But unconclusively it was distracted in different way. As I have told earlier, it does not matter the species is treated in Seidenfia or Malaxis or Corymborkis but the identity of it matters. The question here was to identify the posted photograph which was identified as Malaxis rheedii or versicolor and then arised the Seidenfia and Corymborkis matter.
Regards
Dinesh

On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 11:12:46 +0530 wrote

>Dear Dinesh Kumar ji,
 
I think there is no restriction to follow any particular treatment. Whatever treatment you feel (here you means not You) more comfortable, you can very well follow that treatment unless otherwise it is considered or proved 'wrong' in some sense. Difference of opinion is not an uncommon thing in taxonomy. There are several examples. We have different systems of classifications, Cronquest, Takhtajan, APG I, II, III etc etc. But many of us still feel comfortable and following that of Bentham & Hooker's inspite of knowing its demerits. Similarly Cassia is divided into three genera (Cassia, Senna, Chamaecrista), but some recent floras/efloras still consider them as One. That's why taxonomy is still very dynamic!


 
You have all the right to write your (well analyzed) opinion about a particular treatment in suitable journal, so that others also may follow your's.
 
Please take this in a lightest sense.
 
With regards

Vijayasankar



Gurcharan Singh

unread,
Aug 20, 2010, 2:08:55 AM8/20/10
to dinesh kumar agrawala, vijay.b...@gmail.com, sahani...@gmail.com, atthar....@gmail.com, drneil...@yahoo.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
Just to add "A Revised Handbook to the Flora of Ceylone" Vol. II, 1981 also regards Malaxis rheedii Heyne as synonym of M. versicolor (Lindl.) Abeywick (on page 45).



-- 
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/ 

Pankaj Kumar

unread,
Aug 20, 2010, 4:55:46 AM8/20/10
to Gurcharan Singh, dinesh kumar agrawala, vijay.b...@gmail.com, atthar....@gmail.com, drneil...@yahoo.com, indian...@googlegroups.com, le...@rediffmail.com
FIRSTLY, the name rheedii is wrong, according to latin it should be
'rheedei', because is the name of the person ends with a vowel then
just single 'i' is to be added. This is according to ICBN as well as
LATIN grammar.

SECONDLY, there are three such names and all three of which are invalid:

Malaxis rheedei Blume, Bijdr.: 389 (1825), nom. illeg.
now called as: Liparis rheedei Lindl., Gen. Sp. Orchid. Pl.: 26 (1830).

Malaxis rheedei (Blume) B.Heyne ex Wall., Numer. List: 1939 (1829), nom. illeg.
now called as: Crepidium rheedei Blume, Bijdr.: 387 (1825).

Malaxis rheedei Sw., Kongl. Vetensk. Acad. Nya Handl. 21: 235 (1800),
nom. illeg.
now called as: Crepidium resupinatum (G.Forst.) Szlach., Fragm.


Florist. Geobot., Suppl. 3: 131 (1995).

THIRDLY, Malaxis versicolor (Lindl.) Abeyw., Ceylon J. Sci., Biol.
Sci. 2: 247 (1959) is an accepted name and
Seidenfia versicolor (Lindl.) M.R.Almeida, J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc.
101: 147 (2004) is synonym of above.

So what we are seeing here are four different taxa which we are
thinking of same.

FOURTHLY, attaching one article (Cameron et al. 1999, American Journal
of Botany) on phylogenetics of Orchidaceae, Please check page no. 216
and 217 for the phylogenetic tree and it is evident where Malaxis and
Corymborkis falls (Corymborchis is a synonym).

Regards
Pankaj

PHYLO GEN ANALYSIS OF ORCHI FROM RBCL.pdf
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages