Yes Tapas Ji, I do agree with the views quoted by you. The first and foremost tool in the field for the worker is undoubtedly a lens or experienced eyes.
Thanks On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Tapas Chakrabarty <[email protected]> wrote: > Here is the one line reply from an eminent taxonomist: > > Taxonomy is already difficult and why such attempts to create more > problems? May God help the future botanists especially florists of India. > Whatsoever the developments, a hand lens will continue to serve as the > basic tool for identification. > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 4:13 PM, J.M. Garg <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks, Tapas ji. >> >> On 15 July 2016 at 15:12, Tapas Chakrabarty <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Kindly look at the attachment which I support. >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Pankaj Kumar <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I know about the confidence percentage. But in that case, should I >>>> describe them as new species? And yes the percentage was sometimes above >>>> 95, up to 98% in many cases. How many times do you really get a 100% match? >>>> Two accessions of same species with correct id, same sequence length, but >>>> from India and China, may not show 100% match either. >>>> Secondly, how come a sequence of angiosperm (orchid) matched with a >>>> fungi? To me, even at 50% match is absurd. >>>> I also understand that its a matter of misidentification and that was >>>> my point, that many of the so called barcoding experts ARE NOT WELL TRAINED >>>> TAXONOMISTS!! >>>> Barcoding is a tool which you can learn in 1 month training. Taxonomy >>>> comes from within and takes years of training and understanding. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Rakesh Biswas <[email protected] >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> Just reflecting on this statement, >>>>> >>>>> PK: "How much can we rely on DNA sequences is a matter of judgement. >>>>> I have been working on it, and sorry to say but I have felt many times >>>>> that >>>>> i cant rely on it. I sequenced my known and well identified plants and >>>>> many >>>>> of the sequences matched with sequences of totally different and absurd >>>>> species. Forget about species, some of my orchid sequences matched with >>>>> sequences of FUNGI..... NOT A JOKE." >>>>> >>>>> RB: I guess the percentage match is important? Human genome too >>>>> matches with fungi to the tune of 25% and matches 98% with Chimpazees >>>>> https://www.koshland-science-museum.org/sites/all/exhibits/ >>>>> exhibitdna/intro03.jsp >>>>> >>>>> Although we humans match our DNA 100% with each other what makes us >>>>> different then (or for that matter makes every sea squirt different >>>>> from every other sea-squirt)? >>>>> >>>>> Well there are very small differences in spite of the 100% match. >>>>> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC534664/ >>>>> >>>>> best, >>>>> >>>>> rb >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 6:56 AM, Dr Pankaj Kumar < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> There are few things to understand about describing a new species >>>>>> based on DNA data. >>>>>> HOW DO THEY DO IT? >>>>>> They sequence the DNA and try to match with existing sequences of >>>>>> related species in GENBANK or BOLD or any other sources not known to me. >>>>>> The sequence dont match and hence they describe the new species. >>>>>> WHY SEQUENCES DON'T USUALLY MATCH? >>>>>> Because all species on earth have not been sequenced. How many >>>>>> species from India have been sequenced? may be 10%...... so other 90% of >>>>>> the species will not match with any existing DNA sequences. >>>>>> DNA IS A TOOL AND TAXONOMY CAN BE CALLED SCIENCE OR OPINION BASED >>>>>> SCIENCE. >>>>>> DNA is a tool that can help in improvising your taxonomic skills, but >>>>>> just DNA is nothing, but a sequence. >>>>>> FUNGI >>>>>> Fungi are a bit different as most of the times you may not be able to >>>>>> see their fruiting body and hence not easy to describe unless you see it. >>>>>> Hence people use DNA data to describe new species among this group. >>>>>> MORPHOLOGY OVER DNA OR DNA OVER MORPHOLOGY? >>>>>> At many instances you may not be able to differentiate species based >>>>>> on morphology so easily because changes in DNA may bring changes in >>>>>> phenology that may not be undetectable by eye. >>>>>> DNA SCIENCE IS STILL DEVELOPING. >>>>>> DNA science is still evolving and we have not yet understood the full >>>>>> utility of it. Hence it can just be considered as utility. Why? because >>>>>> in >>>>>> every 4-5 years scientists come out with different sequences to use for >>>>>> differentiation. So far there is no universal marker for all species, not >>>>>> even for just all plants. May be in future we will have such sequences. >>>>>> RELIABILITY ON DNA SEQUENCES >>>>>> How much can we rely on DNA sequences is a matter of judgement. I >>>>>> have been working on it, and sorry to say but I have felt many times >>>>>> that i >>>>>> cant rely on it. I sequenced my known and well identified plants and many >>>>>> of the sequences matched with sequences of totally different and absurd >>>>>> species. Forget about species, some of my orchid sequences matched with >>>>>> sequences of FUNGI..... NOT A JOKE. >>>>>> >>>>>> On a friendly note, i just got a manuscript for review from Molecular >>>>>> Ecology where scientists (GOOD TAXONOMISTS) have sequenced all the >>>>>> tuberous >>>>>> orchids of the region (multiple sequences of same species) so that it >>>>>> will >>>>>> aid in identification of orchid tubers in trade. This is one such first >>>>>> study which is surely going to have a great impact for future. So now, if >>>>>> someone is describing a new species and especially of the same subfamily >>>>>> of >>>>>> orchids, then these sequences will be of great help. >>>>>> >>>>>> Few years back few of our own members published an article in Nature. >>>>>> Title was very good but the content shocked me. >>>>>> "India needs more plant taxonomists" >>>>>> India, with its wide range of geographical and climatic conditions, >>>>>> has a rich and varied flora of some 45,000 species — almost 7% of the >>>>>> world’s flowering plants. But their documentation is seriously >>>>>> compromised >>>>>> by the country’s dearth of plant taxonomists. Although DNA sequence data >>>>>> and barcoding are well on the way to being accepted as the global >>>>>> standard >>>>>> for species identification, India’s plant taxonomists are struggling to >>>>>> keep up. A lack of proper training and infrastructure hampers >>>>>> molecular-systematics studies, so the evolutionary lineages of most of >>>>>> the >>>>>> country’s plants remain poorly understood. India’s many outstanding >>>>>> botanists, familiar with regional flora, must help plant taxonomists to >>>>>> advance molecular-systematics studies and improve the evolutionary >>>>>> understanding of the country’s rich biodiversity. >>>>>> >>>>>> But their documentation is seriously compromised by the country’s >>>>>> dearth of plant taxonomists. - ONE OF THE AUTHOR HAS WORKED WITH BSI. >>>>>> DNA sequence data and barcoding are well on the way to being accepted >>>>>> as the global standard for species identification, India’s plant >>>>>> taxonomists are struggling to keep up. NO, DNA SEQUENCING AND BARCODING >>>>>> IS >>>>>> A TOOL AND CAN AID IN SPECIES IDENTIFICATION BUT CAN'T SOLELY DO SPECIES >>>>>> IDENTIFICATION. ALL THE NEW SPECIES I HAVE DESCRIBED SO FAR, I HAVE NEVER >>>>>> USED DNA DATA, EXCEPT FOR MY NEXT SPECIES WHICH WILL BE PUBLISHED SOON. >>>>>> BUT >>>>>> YOU WILL SEE IN IT, ABOUT HOW AND WHY MY OPINION DOESNT MATCH WITH THE >>>>>> EXISTING DNA DATA. >>>>>> India’s many outstanding botanists, familiar with regional flora, >>>>>> must help plant taxonomists to advance molecular-systematics studies and >>>>>> improve the evolutionary understanding of the country’s rich >>>>>> biodiversity. >>>>>> - IT GIVES A FEELING THAT THE AUTHORS THOUGHT THAT ONLY THOSE ARE >>>>>> TAXONOMISTS WHO KNOW MOLECULAR SYSTEMATICS AND REST ARE BOTANISTS, WHICH >>>>>> IS >>>>>> WRONG. INFACT WHEN I HAD A CHAT WITH MY FRIEND WHO IS ONE OF THE AUTHORS, >>>>>> HE SAID HE DIDNT MEAN THAT!! >>>>>> >>>>>> I attended the International Barcoding of life conference two years >>>>>> back where those barcoding Canadians recommended that we dont even have >>>>>> to >>>>>> name new species, just give them codes, because we dont have trained >>>>>> taxonomists. I would say WE DO HAVE TRAINED TAXONOMISTS, YOU NEED TO GIVE >>>>>> THEM A CHANCE. YOU DONT FUND THEM, YOU DONT SPONSOR THEM, YOU DONT >>>>>> PROVIDE >>>>>> JOB TO THEM, THEN YOU MAKE A HUE AND CRY THAT THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH >>>>>> TAXONOMISTS??? WHEN THERE WAS JOB CUT AT KEW, MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO LOST >>>>>> THEIR JOBS WERE ACTUALLY TAXONOMISTS. >>>>>> >>>>>> India already has lot of plant taxonomists who go unrecognised and >>>>>> are jobless and many of them left the country because taxonomists lack >>>>>> the >>>>>> recognition. New generation of students find taxonomy to be a mediocre >>>>>> subject and hesitate to undertake such studies. DNA barcoding will >>>>>> certainly help in better understanding of species, but DNA barcoding is >>>>>> not >>>>>> the standard to describe a new species. >>>>>> >>>>>> India is one of the very very few countries in the world where they >>>>>> have an organisation called BSI who hire ONLY taxonomists. We should be >>>>>> proud of it and we should make it stronger. >>>>>> >>>>>> These are my personal views. The authors of the nature article are my >>>>>> good friends, and I know both of you will be offended, so I say sorry in >>>>>> advance...... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Friday, 15 July 2016 01:08:10 UTC+8, tchakrab wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Respected/Dear All, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am sharing herewith an article which appeared in Taxon in 2014 on >>>>>>> the above subject. I request you all to kindly comment and give your >>>>>>> valuable opinion and suggestions which will enrich our knowledge. >>>>>>> With kind 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 https://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix. >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ************************************************************ >>>> ********************************************************** >>>> *Pankaj Kumar*, Ph.D. >>>> *IUCN-SSC Orchid Specialist Group Asia* >>>> >>>> *Office*: >>>> >>>> Conservation Officer >>>> >>>> Orchid Conservation Section >>>> >>>> Flora Conservation Department >>>> >>>> Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden (KFBG) Corporation >>>> Lam Kam Road, Tai Po, New Territories, Hong Kong. >>>> >>>> *Residence*: >>>> House no. 39, 2nd Floor, Shui Wo Tsuen >>>> Lam Tsuen, Tai Po, New Territories, Hong Kong. >>>> *email*: [email protected]; [email protected] >>>> *Phone*: +852 2483 7128 (office - 8:30am to 5:00pm); +852 9436 6251 >>>> (mobile); *Fax*: +852 2483 7194 >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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 https://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 email to [email protected]. >>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> With regards, >> J.M.Garg >> >> 'Creating awareness of Indian Flora & Fauna' >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jmgarg1> >> >> Winner of Wipro-NFS Sparrow Awards 2014 for efloraofindia >> <https://sites.google.com/site/efloraofindia/award-for-efloraofindia>. >> >> For identification, learning, discussion & documentation of Indian Flora, >> please visit/ join our Efloraofindia Google e-group >> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/indiantreepix> (largest in the >> world- around 2700 members & 2,40,000 messages on 31.3.16) or Efloraofindia >> website <https://sites.google.com/site/efloraofindia/> (with a species >> database of more than 11,000 species & 2,20,000 images). >> >> The whole world uses my Image Resource >> <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:J.M.Garg> of more than a >> thousand species & eight thousand images of Birds, Butterflies, Plants etc. >> (arranged alphabetically & place-wise). You can also use them for free as >> per Creative Commons license attached with each image. >> >> Also author of 'A Photoguide to the Birds of Kolkata & Common Birds of >> India'. >> > > -- Regards, Dr. Nidhan Singh Assistant Professor Department of Botany I.B. (PG) College Panipat-132103 Haryana Ph.: 09416371227 -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
