thank you Dr Rawat that explains the frequent name changes i have seen botanists at some renowned bot gs some of whom did only do just that spend their office time in tracking the order of discoveries drove me bonkers, they could have gone on to learn the newer fields of study and analysis... but it looked like inertia at worst or obsession at best or fear of newer avenues to do investigation with.. such as molecular biology
ah, se la vie usha di On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 5:08 PM, D.S Rawat <[email protected]> wrote: > Usha Di > It is restoration of correct name rather than intentional name changing. > This plant was first described by Royle in 1836. Later Blatter and Mc Cann > also described the same plant (obviously collected from Maharashtra) in > 1931 without knowing that it is already described. > ICN (International Code of Nomenclature for Algae, Fungi and Plants) > simply says that earliest legitimate name will only be the correct name so > that due credit is given to the author describing the species first. > The case remained unnoticed but now sorted out; credit now to Royle who > introduced this plant to science first.. > The epithet "nana" indicate small nature of plant. > Botanists (particularly Taxonomists) have a large set of rules (ICN) for > naming plants and they follow it. Some of them keep searching history of > names and correcting them throughout their research career. > Regards. > DSRawat Pantnagar > > > > > Dr D.S.Rawat > Department of Biological Sciences, G.B. Pant University of Agriculture & > Technology Pantnagar-263 145 Uttarakhand, INDIA > > > On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Ushadi Micromini < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Dr Rawt >> >> I knew it as a *Euphorbia panchganiensis* >> >> so i had googled it middle of the nite >> and was surprised to see name nana >> >> what makes people change an obviously indian origin name to a >> nondescript name like nana >> >> this is what i dont understand >> >> >> >> usha di >> >> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 1:08 PM, D.S Rawat <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks to the people conserving it. >>> The earlier name was *Euphorbia panchganiensis* Blatt. & Mc Cann >>> synonymysed with it now. >>> Mentioned in Red Data Book of Indian Plants Vol-3:122-123 as rare. >>> Earlier known from Maharashtra as *E.panchganiensis* but now known from >>> Western Himalaya too. >>> Thanks for showing this rare species Sir! >>> I never saw it in Uttarakhand during last two and a half decade. >>> >>> DSRawat Pantnagar >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, May 5, 2015 at 10:14:29 PM UTC+5:30, tchakrab wrote: >>>> >>>> Ex situ conservation at Botanical Survey of India, Pune. >>>> Regards, >>>> Tapas. >>>> >>> -- >>> 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. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Usha di >> =========== >> > > -- Usha di =========== -- 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 an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
