There is one more option as discussed in details of Alok ji's plant from
Himachal: Mazus goodeniifolius ?
On 11 October 2016 at 08:13, Ashwini Bhatia <ashw...@ashwinibhatia.com>
> Thanks Chris. I agree, this needs further consideration.
> On 10 Oct 2016, at 18:22, C CHADWELL <chrischadwell...@btinternet.com>
> The additional observations and photos are helpful.
> I think this illustrates that this genus needs further study/checking.
> Best Wishes,
> Chris Chadwell
> 81 Parlaunt Road
> SL3 8BE
> *From:* Ashwini Bhatia <ashw...@ashwinibhatia.com>
> *To:* chrischadwell...@btinternet.com
> *Cc:* efloraofindia <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Anil Thakur <
> *Sent:* Friday, 7 October 2016, 11:21
> *Subject:* Re: Mazus surculosus ?
> Dear Chris and Dr Thakur,
> Thank you both very much for your advice. My apologies for a late reply! I
> wanted to revisit the plant and collect more evidence before writing. I
> found the plant this morning and here are some observations with
> 1. Calyx lobes (8-9mm) are longer than the peduncle (5mm)
> 2. Calyx lobe edges are not toothed
> 3. The stem bearing flowers is hairy and runner-like
> 4. Flowers edge out the calyx slightly in corolla length.
> Please advise.
> On 7 Oct 2016, at 01:00, chrischadwell...@btinternet.com wrote:
> Thanks Dr Thakur for drawing this to my/our attention. Mostly a question
> of me too rapidly assuming a likely identification without checking
> properly - especially with plants from what are 'low' elevations for me.
> As soon as it gets to 2000m or less, my familiarity and knowledge rapidly
> decreases! I know little of the Mazus genus,
> largely limited to a casual look at specimens growing around Manali some
> 30 years ago.... I now see that Stewart gave *Mazus delavayii* as a
> synonym for *M.japonicus* (also *M.rugosus*). He found this common,
> ascending to 2100m in rice fields and pond borders in N.Pakistan and
> *A common mistake I have observed is for people to assume that 'Flowers of
> the Himalaya' is a FULL flora. It is merely a guide to a fraction of the
> total flora (often not much more than 1/10th described or illustrated),
> concentrating on the commonest and showiest species. Too many users of
> this book automatically "match" at a quick glance what they see or
> photograph in the Himalaya with the single photo in that book. Often the
> image does not show important characteristics which distinguish it from
> similar species. This leads to numerous misidentifications. Many do not
> bother to check the geographic distribution, altitudinal range or typical
> habit for each species to see if the identification makes sense or should
> be double or triple-checked!*
> I am not a taxonomist but would think that characteristics of calyces are
> stronger than the presence or not of runners. * I am curious where the
> key to Mazus species in H.P. comes from?*
> I note from images taken in H.P. that some examples have much smaller
> calyces in relation to the flowers - though these seem also to have the
> calyx +/- cut to half way as well. *So are these within Mazus
> surculosus or M. pumilus var. delavayii**?*
> See: http://www.flowersofindia.net/catalog/slides/Suckering%20Mazus.html
> (I would not described the calyx as 'toothed') and
> khajjiar-sanctuary/wildflowers-in-june/ (I would say the calyx here is
> definitely not just toothed and approaches the being lobed half way down).
> As for the line drawing in FOC for *M.surculosus*, this shows small
> calyces which could be described as having toothed lobes), see:
> http://www.efloras.org/object_page.aspx?object_id=3540&flora_id=2 and
> then there are the line drawings for *M.pumilus* see:
> http://www.efloras.org/object_page.aspx?object_id=4701&flora_id=2 (I
> would say that the images taken by Ashwini certainly have a prominent
> calyx, small flowers in relation to the calyx and *do not* fit number 3
> i.e. var. *delavayii)* *Strange and remiss of the authors to include
> flowers in the line drawings of M.surculosus and not for M.pumilus which
> makes it difficult to judge flower/calyx size.*
> *I remain somewhat uncertain/confused. One problem in interpreting FOI is
> that the authors, no matter how botanically able, may only have seen
> specimens from Chinese territory. The variation of species in NW may well
> be different/not able, so one has to be cautious here.*
> *Anyhow, I have started to inspect Mazus more closely. The fine photos of
> Ashwini (which show close-up the characteristics of the calyx) and others
> plus line drawings in FOC are much more useful than low resolution images
> of herbarium specimens. As always, "a picture paints a thousand words".
> Putting into words plant variation is often difficult. Keys should always
> be viewed with caution and not accepted without question.*
> The currently accepted name is noted - along with various nomenclatural
> changes over time. Of course not all changes/revisions are accepted.
> *I* *approach plant identification as detective work. This is another
> example and further evidence that we cannot rely solely upon Hooker's
> 'Flora of British India', which is well out-of-date (though he and other
> contributors did a remarkable job for the time). Every checklist and flora
> (no matter how reliable they are) become*
> *out-of-date as soon as they are published!*
> On Wednesday, 5 October 2016 13:37:50 UTC+1, JM Garg wrote:
> Forwarding again for Id confirmation or otherwise please.
> Some earlier relevant feedback:
> The genus Mazus is no longer in the Scrophulariaceae family but Phymaceae
> which includes
> The Kew Herbarium image: http://apps.kew.org/herbcat/
> getImage.do?imageBarcode= K001117588
> Photos: https://www.google.co.uk/ search?q=%22Mazus+surculosus%
> There are two species of Mazus to consider. In 'Flora Simlensis' there is
> also *M.rugosus* -
> which Stewart and 'The Plant List' has this as *M.japonicus*.
> Flora Simlensis has *M.japonicus* as the common species at Shimla - he
> it by the lack of runners and calyx lobed half-way down cf. shortly
> toothed in *M.surculosus*.
> For *M.japonicus* see:
> https://www.google.co.uk/ search?q=%22Mazus+japonicus%
> *Your images show runners. I don't think that Flora Simlensis calyx
> characteristic holds true,*
> *so M.surculosus does seem the most likely.*
> I have visited Manali several times. In the mid-1980s I led botanical
> tours to Lahoul, with Manali as the
> base, recording *Mazus surculosus* in the Deodar forest there but did not
> consider other species at the time.
> Best Wishes,
> Chris Chadwell
> Pl. also check comparative images & keys at Mazus
> *Mazus* *japonicus* (Thunb.) Kuntze is now a synonym
> <http://www.theplantlist.org/1.1/about/#synonym> of *Mazus pumilus *(Burm.f.)
> Steenis <http://www.theplantlist.org/tpl1.1/record/kew-2507398>
> This specimen appears to be quite interesting.- from me
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *Ashwini Bhatia* <ash...@ashwinibhatia.com>
> Date: 25 September 2016 at 14:50
> Subject: Re: [efloraofindia:252074] Mazus surculosus ABJUL01/12
> To: efloraofindia <indian...@googlegroups. com>
> Cc: Ushadi Micromini <micromi...@gmail.com>
> Found a white *Mazus* on my walk today. Is it normal? To me it looks like *M.
> surculosus* only but I could be wrong. Please advise.
> 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 indiantreepix+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
'Creating awareness of Indian Flora & Fauna'
Winner of Wipro-NFS Sparrow Awards 2014 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
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.