Hi, Singh ji, Quoting you as below:
"Consider these names in our databases Indigofera astragalina Syn: I. hirsuta ........................ The Plant names without author names are sometimes used in general purpose books and text books, not in taxonomic treatments or databases. Whenever these are used without author names, it is understood that there is only one species by that name, or the validly published one. If we apply this logic our names would be wriiten as under: Indigofera astragalina DC., 1825 Syn: I. hirsuta Linn., 1753 ........................... In all these cases the synonym is of earlier date, and should be used as correct name and not as synonym. We are using them as synonyms because they were named as accepted names in Hooker's Flora of British India, and other Indian Floras, but the indian material was subsequently found to be different species. The citations would be meaningful if properly cited as under: Indigofera astragalina DC., 1825 Syn: I. hirsuta Baker (non Linn., 1753) ................................" Why do we write Syn: I. hirsuta *Baker (non Linn.,1753*)? Will you clarify how does *Baker (non Linn.,1753*) come up & what does it signify? -- With regards, J.M.Garg ([email protected]) 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 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "indiantreepix" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.co.in/group/indiantreepix?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
