Yes, I also agree with Dr. Rawat.
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 4:02 PM, D.S Rawat <[email protected]> wrote: > Looks like Primula involucrata. > However, expert advice will decide last. > DSRawat Pantnagar > > > On Friday, June 13, 2014 12:41:49 PM UTC+5:30, Satish Phadke wrote: >> >> One more species with only 2 available pictures. Sorry for not recording >> leaves. >> For ID >> Dr Satish Phadke >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "efloraofindia" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- *Dr. Umeshkumar Tiwari*, Ph.D (Plant Taxonomy) Young Investigator & Post-Doctoral Fellow (PDF-BSI), Centre for Repository of Medicinal Resources, Institute of Trans-Disciplinary Health Sciences and Technology University, 74/2, Jarakabande Kaval, Post: Attur, Via Yelahanka, Bangalore – 560 106; E-Mail: *[email protected] <[email protected]>*; +919591862200 Website: *www.ihstuniversity.org <http://www.ihstuniversity.org>* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "efloraofindia" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
