---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "C CHADWELL" <[email protected]> Date: 22 Oct 2016 7:53 pm Subject: Re: [efloraofindia:254434] Re: Clematis Buchananiana ABJAN01/09 To: "Ashwini Bhatia" <[email protected]> Cc: "J.M. Garg" <[email protected]>, "Saroj Kasaju" <[email protected]>
Dear Ashwini I am afraid I must observe that I do not rate Collet's 'Flora Simlensis' particularly highly. Distinguished soldier he may well have been but not a professional botanist. There are understandably glowing words about him "In Memoriam" at the start of the book but one needs to be cautious about using the book - it has a useful preliminary purpose but no more. It is a very simplified 'Flora', so has strict limitations. As for 'Flowers of the Himalaya' this is an excellent book with few mistakes but it is not a flora. It also has its limitations - it is a preliminary guide to a fraction of the total flora of the Himalaya. *So one cannot use the information contained in either as definitive.* I have not seen 'Flora of Chamba' or 'Flora of Kulu' but would not necessarily count them as authoritative - the same applies to 'Flora of Lahaul-Spiti'. *One must always be mindful that the flora of the Himalaya has not been well-studied**! * *We are still learning about the British flora (which is smaller) and we have* *had thousands of people looking at it intensively over hundreds of years....* I realise how difficult it is for those who have no other reference works. Presumably there is no way you can access your nearest herbarium to get staff to assist in any way? Unless I can personally check voucher specimens, then I cannot rely upon the contents of these floras - and must say that I am sure I would have doubts about many entries in them.... I did have at one time a pressed specimen of what I am confident is *C.buchananiana* which was growing near Naini Tal. A pity I cannot send an image of this to you. IF I am in a position to continue to contribute to this google group, I shall be questioning a lot more identifications over many families and numerous genera.... In the mean-time, I refer you to: http://www.iiim.res.in/herbarium/ranunculaceae/clematis_buchananiana.htm - this specimen is in very poor condition with the resolution low so one cannot inspect closely but is probably correctly identified - it seems the remarks typed out are copied from a description in a flora (on the basis of the identification they claim) rather than from field notes or taken from the specimen itself. http://www.iiim.res.in/herbarium/ranunculaceae/clematis_connata.htm - one cannot see much of a disc at the node here either - though may have been more pronounced lower down the plant. http://www.flowersofindia.net/catalog/slides/Lemon%20Clematis.html - this has been misidentified, it is *C.connata* - the 'connate' part can be seen. There are not many reliable images of *C.buchananiana* linked to 'The Plant List' but those from Bhutan show the features of the species well. See: http://biodiversity.bt/observation/show/6918 According to 'Flora of Bhutan' Vol 1 Part 2 (1984) *C.buchananiana* is usually brownish pubescent throughout - petioles *sometimes* broadened and thickened at base and *narrowly* connate... They remark it is a variable species with two varieties having been reported from Bhutan one with more glabrous leaves. They say that forms with pinnate leaves resemble *C.connate* but lack the broadly-winged petiole bases. The specimen collected in Kumaon by Blinkworth in the Kew herbarium shows general features well. See: http://apps.kew.org/herbcat/ getImage.do?imageBarcode=K001039669 -* I am sure you would agree that your specimen does* *not match this.* *There will often be specimens of a plant which seem somewhat intermediate between two species or at least* *approach another species. Such variation always presents challenges. It is worth me repeating my observation* *that "neatly pigeon-holing" plants into species A or Species B is not always straightforward.* Best Wishes, Chris Chadwell 81 Parlaunt Road SLOUGH SL3 8BE UK www.shpa.org.uk ------------------------------ *From:* Ashwini Bhatia <[email protected]> *To:* C CHADWELL <[email protected]> *Cc:* J.M. Garg <[email protected]>; Saroj Kasaju <[email protected]> *Sent:* Saturday, 22 October 2016, 4:48 *Subject:* Re: [efloraofindia:254434] Re: Clematis Buchananiana ABJAN01/09 Dear Chris, I have also followed your detailed comments on this. For long I had thought species here to be *C. connata* but following ID keys by Col. Collett and Polunin & Stainton, I convinced myself that the flowers here are *C. buchananiana*. I am listing my reasons; Collett; Stems faintly grooved, flowers not ribbed……*C. connata* Stems grooved, *flowers ribbed*……*C. buchananiana* Stainton & Polunin; Leaf-stalks fused together at the node often into a large flat disc, petals not ribbed, achenes silky-haired……*C. connata* Leaf-bases more or less united round stem,* flowers sweet-scented, petals ribbed,* achenes woolly-haired…..*C. buchananiana* The flowers on our plants are definitely sweet-scented and ribbed. That should place our plants under *C. buchananiana*. However, the leaf-stalks are jointed mostly into a small flat disc (on the many plants I have photographed I did not find a ‘large’ disc forming). To my untrained eyes achenes don’t appear to have silky hair, more woolly-haired. Flora of Chamba and Flora of Kullu list both species to be common in their respective areas. These are my reasons to conclude the ID but I am willing to learn. Please advise. Thanks and regards, Ashwini On 22 Oct 2016, at 08:55, J.M. Garg <[email protected]> wrote: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Date: 22 Oct 2016 7:11 am Subject: [efloraofindia:254434] Re: Clematis Buchananiana ABJAN01/09 To: "efloraofindia" <[email protected]> Cc: > Yes, this plant comes within* Clematis connata* (there is a 'connate' base, though not as pronounced as in some variants). Definitely not *> C.buchananiana*. > > Please can someone send in some fresh images of this species or look amongst their past photos to see if they have the real thing. > > On Saturday, January 16, 2016 at 2:41:27 PM UTC, ashwini wrote: >> >> This climber with fragrant cream colour flowers is quite common here. I found one still in flower today and brought it home to have a closer look. I have always assumed it to be* C. connata* but after studying my sample today think it to be* C. buchananiana*. The flowers are ribbed and so are the stalks. Flowers, filaments and stalks are hairy. Please advise. >> >> Clematis buchananiana—Fragrant Chinese Clematis >> Near Dal Lake, Dharamshala Cantt. HP >> 1800m >> 17 January 2016. >> >> Thanks. >> Ashwini >> >> > -- > 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 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.
