Dear Anurag Ji, I can clearly see the fruits of this species, those fruits can't be called smooth and Roxburgh was correct. I said Roxburgh would know his species better than any other source.
I copy here a few words from "Revision of the Genus *Aponogeton* / H. W. E. VAN BRUGGEN" :- - ovules 4-8; tepals white, pink, or violet ... fruit with very long (1mm) terminal beak = *natans* - ovules 2 (seldom1); ................... fruit smooth = *crispus* - do ............................... fruit mostly with irregular excrescences, seldom smooth.... = *echinatus* The differences between the 2nd and 3rd above lie in tuber, leaf, inflorescence, tepal, filament, fruit and plumule. So, you can boldly go ahead with the ID *A. echinatus* Roxb. with your species, no matter eFI admit or not. Thank you Regards surajit koley On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 7:45 PM, surajit koley < [email protected]> wrote: > So where do we stand Sir? > > Roxburgh's *A. echinatus*(*m*) is dubius/uncofirmed, meaning Roxburgh may > not be correct at all! Thereby Wight and Prain are also wrong! > > TPL thinks *A. echinatus* Roxb. is synonymous with, that too with three > stars, with *A. crispus* Thunb. > > You, based on inflorescence colour and Garg Sir, based on leaf, think the > species submitted by Anurag Ji is *A. natans* (L.) Engl. & K. Krause. > > So be it..... thank you very much. > > Regards > > surajit > > > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Gurcharan Singh <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Surajit ji >> Current accpted name of A. echinatum Roxb. is A. crispus and not A. >> natans. Please note that Engler's revision puts it under unconfirmed/dubius >> species. Even FBI mentions mix up in Roxburgh's plates. >> >> >> >> >> 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://www.gurcharanfamily.com/ >> http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45/ >> >> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 6:54 PM, surajit koley < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Sir for taking care. Anurag Ji's point is that fruits here are >>> echinate, so it should be *A. echinatum* Roxb. Now, if the current >>> accepted name of *A. echinatum* Roxb. is *A. natans* then it is the >>> same. >>> >>> The problem is old lit consider all three different taxa. >>> >>> Another problem is nowhere I could find that *A. natans* can have >>> echinate fruit/capsule. >>> >>> Here is a paper from Pakistan >>> http://www.pakbs.org/pjbot/PDFs/40(1)/PJB40(1)001.pdf >>> >>> And here is the protologue - >>> http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/16802027#page/16/mode/1up >>> >>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Gurcharan Singh <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> While doing ecology practicals nearly 48 years back in Kashmir, and >>>> luckily I still remember, we had a few clear cut species of Potamogeton: P. >>>> pectinatus with finely dissected leaves, P. lucens with semitransparent >>>> leaves, P. natans with thick flat shining floating leaves and P. crispus >>>> with wavy (crisped) leaves. We did not know about Aponogeton as it is a >>>> basically an ornamental plant of warmer climates, mostly used in aquarium. >>>> Yet it has two similar species (which differ besides technical characters, >>>> by the absence of above mud stems clearly seen in Potamogeton). with >>>> similar names Aponogeton natans (with broad flat leaves) and A. crispus >>>> Thunb (syn: A. echinatus Roxb.). To me both Potamogeton crispus and >>>> Aponogeton crispus are out of contension. Whereas presence or absence of >>>> above mud stems is important for diagnosis, but the colour of inflorescence >>>> easily places it as Aponogeton natans. I hope I am not wrong. >>>> >>>> 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://www.gurcharanfamily.com/ >>>> http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45/ >>>> >>>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 1:21 PM, surajitkoley < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Perhaps Roxburgh would know (his) species better than any other >>>>> sources. Attached here entries from FBI, FI, BP, BoBO. >>>>> Two kew heb - >>>>> >>>>> 1. http://apps.kew.org/herbcat/getImage.do?imageBarcode=K000950197 >>>>> 2. http://apps.kew.org/herbcat/getImage.do?imageBarcode=K000950202 >>>>> >>>>> Thank you >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday, 2 May 2015 16:21:52 UTC+5:30, Anurag Sharma wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Family: Aponogetonaceae >>>>>> Date: 29th April 2015 >>>>>> Place: Tumkur-Hassan district, Karnataka >>>>>> Habit: Herb >>>>>> Habitat: Aquatic/Pond >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > -- 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.
