Thank you very much Mr. Garg. I started on an email on *P. pectinata* a couple of weeks ago but while writing it had doubts again. I am still working on it and hoping to understand it soon.
Regards, Ashwini On Wed, 2 Oct, 2019, 10:38 AM J.M. Garg, <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks, Ashwini ji, I agree with your id as P. hookeriana > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: mcleodwild <[email protected]> > Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 13:26 > Subject: [efloraofindia:330408] Re: Yet another discussion on Pedicularis! > ABAUG2017/12 > To: efloraofindia <[email protected]> > > > I have again been looking at this species. Going through Yamazaki (*A > Revision of the Genus Pedicularis in Nepal > <http://umdb.um.u-tokyo.ac.jp/DKankoub/Bulletin/no31/no31012.html>*, > 1988), Pennel (*The Scrophulariaceae of the Western Himalayas*, 1944) and > Arti Garg (*Critical Taxonomic Appraisal of Some Taxa of Pedicularis from > Indian Himalayas Belonging to Section Siphonanthae > <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290798065_Critical_Taxonomic_Appraisal_of_Some_Taxa_of_Pedicularis_from_Indian_Himalayas_Belonging_to_Section_Siphonanthae>* > , > 2009) I have reached the conclusion that the plant here is *Pedicularis > hookeriana*. > > Here is why: > 1. The corolla-tube is roughly three times the length of the calyx ( > *Pennell*: 'distinguished from *P. siphonantha *Don by the corolla-tube > being hardly three, instead of four times the length of the calyx'). I am > attaching a new photo to show that. > 2. Lower leaves long with more than 6 lobes (*Yamazaki*: leaves 1.5-7cm > for *hookeriana* vs. 1-4cm for *P. siphonantha*; *Pennell*: Pinnae of > leaf blades 6-12 pairs). The earlier photo of me holding a basal leaf shows > the size and number of pinnae corresponding clearly to *hookeriana*) > 3. Toothed galea (*Pennell*: 'anterior lobe acutely triangular-toothed on > the anterior margins). See the attached photo. > > Also the filaments are hairy on one pair of stamens on the upper parts > only (*Arti Garg*: 'anterior pair hairy, hairs confined to upper half, > posterior pair glabrous'). > > Apart from this, the size of the lower lip (with three lobes), presence of > hair on the tube, lower lip and on the galea (upper lip) all point to *P. > hookeriana*. The geographical distribution is also correct with the > altitude (our plants are found around 3100m and slightly above). > > Some studies have shown that both *P. hookeriana* and *P. punctata* > belong to the *P. siphonantha clade* and experts may not consider these > two as separate species in the future. But till then I am filing this under > *P. > hookeriana*. > > My earlier email under Pedicularis sp. ABSEP2016/21 > <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer#!searchin/indiantreepix/Pedicularis$20sp.$20ABSEP2016$2F21%7Csort:date/indiantreepix/K74yH8VLpiA/0W0SbkHUCwAJ> > is > also the same. > > Thanks. > Ashwini > > > On Monday, 7 August 2017 10:18:27 UTC+5:30, ashwini wrote: >> >> The long-tube pedicularis species, which is very common here above 3000m, >> has confused me. I have followed the excellent discussion between Dr Singh, >> Tabish ji and other senior members and have at times concluded that the >> plants here are *P. siphonantha* but another doubt nags me and I start >> looking at the characteristics again. >> >> Looking at the sketch uploaded by Tabish ji here >> <https://08511630493324166816.googlegroups.com/attach/e36d7a85e0216671/Pedicularis.jpg?part=0.1&view=1&vt=ANaJVrEtAptdaht5u2Pj-lcsDLZouMjVcxlJXpSBVs1GmC-hjQBpsFN3snYDVjCrDzlVfJDAcNq5AQ68UVg36SH3zpKVYbfLC8ls6wH-4nBhb2NUrJKOn0g>, >> I would say that flowers of our plants are closer to *P. punctata* than *P. >> siphonantha* (tube length and its ratio with the calyx). I have included >> a photo of our flower (without calyx) on a ruler for comparison below. >> Accounting for the absence of calyx in the photograph, the tube length >> matches with figure A and so does the shape of the galea. >> >> However, the lower lip on our flower is narrow (about 7-8mm) while *P. >> punctata* should have a broader, 15mm, lower lip. >> >> The number of lobes on the lower leaves is higher than 6 (see photo). The >> petiole is long and not winged. This would suggest *not* *P. punctata* >> again. >> >> Dr Singh had suggested *P. hookeriana* which was described briefly by >> Kletter and Kriechbaum here >> <https://books.google.co.in/books?id=ODrIXj-48RsC&pg=PA171&lpg=PA171&dq=pedicularis+hookeriana&source=bl&ots=gUvRh-j7Jt&sig=vv_ReidCDSUxF3FLKEUVghwAg9g&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjZ5tP1nsTVAhUEuI8KHRLiB5UQ6AEITzAN#v=onepage&q=pedicularis%20hookeriana&f=false> >> in their 2001 discussion of *P. punctata *but it was concluded that >> since the drawing in the 2009 paper shows shorter tube length, *P. >> hookeriana* was not a possibility. But the tube length of *P. >> siphonantha* in the drawing does not match our sample either. >> >> Most of the images of *P. siphonantha* available online show a higher >> ratio of tube-length to calyx than our flowers here. >> >> Our plant is gregarious at 3200m with many clumps of flowers. I have >> tried to include photos to show that. >> >> I would request my seniors to look at this species again and advise. I am >> at a loss as to which source takes precedence. I apologise for requesting >> to open this discussion yet again and hope that you will find merit in >> doing so. >> >> Thanks and regards, >> 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 view this discussion on the web, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/indiantreepix/e87d2d4f-b0e9-46a1-9c0a-bb161ab04cfc%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/indiantreepix/e87d2d4f-b0e9-46a1-9c0a-bb161ab04cfc%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > > -- > 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- more than 3,000 members & 3,00,000 messages on 23.8.18) or > Efloraofindia > website <https://sites.google.com/site/efloraofindia/> (with a species > database of more than 13,000 species & 3,00,000 images of which more than > 1,70,000 images are directly displayed). > > 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'. > -- 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 view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/indiantreepix/CAAKUM9CO4o%3DVPObJbNfyVarc32fz4k%3DmW5qkHBUm8uTKVC6S%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com.
