Thanks Dinesh ji, for the response. Everything depend on the aim of the site. If it is intended mainly for local users to know more about the plant, then the plant should be introduced by its local / common name. Botanical name becomes secondary and it is an additional information. If it is in the line of eflora, and for international reference, then it should be in taxonomically acceptable form (with full author citation, family names, references, etc.). You know the taxonomic databases to be referred for accepted name and author citation, GRIN, GBIF, IPNI to name a few. There is no authentic plant database which doesn't provide author citation for the botanical names, u know that. And verifying the already prepared list for correctness will not be a problem for any botanist here, incl me.
I understand all the data are stored in a database and viewed in the species page. Therefore making changes in selected fields in the database (it automatically should reflect in the species page) shouldn't be a problem i hope. Pl correct me if i am wrong. Its not that only family names will change, even botanical names and/or their status may change anytime. (wonder how dynamic the taxonomy is !?). So any database needs regular update to stay up-to-date. Regards Vijayasankar Raman National Center for Natural Products Research University of Mississippi On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 5:13 AM, Dinesh Valke <[email protected]>wrote: > Vijayasankar ji ... forgot to respond to your other points. > > About putting family names: had given a thought to it prior to settling at > species level. > Cross-linking to each entlty becomes more and more cumbersome, especially > when a change has to be effected. > Moving a whole lot of genera from one family into another will become more > than a tough job. > > "Names of Plants in India" is concentrated on getting to common names of a > plant (read: particular species) as well as knowing different plants sharing > a name, > Thus names and species are cross-indexed. > > Occurrence, distribution, brief description, importance and uses are not in > the scope of this site. > BUT it would be a great thing to happen if any person(s) keen about any of > the subject(s) would go ahead to make sub-site(s). > Will be glad to give any starting assistance. > > Later, at a macro-level all such information can be collated to form a > detailed page for each species. > > > Regards. > Dinesh > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Dinesh Valke <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Vijayasankar ji, many thanks for the pointer towards author citation ... >> BUT am a little nervous about getting into it (ideally need not, with so >> many friends around me with clear knowledge). >> Yet would rather take someone's help in this regard who will provide me >> with this data for every species that I post here. >> Hopefully some friend(s) will come forward. >> >> Pankaj. many thanks for setting right the thoughts about "current" name >> ... will soon incorporate it into my notes along with stress on synonyms >> (and basionym). >> And thanks too for the ilex name ... will add it. >> >> Regards. >> Dinesh >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 5:28 AM, Vijayasankar >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> It looks good, Dinesh ji. >>> I strongly suggest you to include author citation for all botanical >>> names, incl. accepted names, basionyms, and synonyms. The (author) names >>> should be in abbreviated form following Brummitt & Powell's book "Authors of >>> Plant Names" or the related database. I earlier suggested the same for FOI >>> site as well. >>> >>> pl also include family name for all taxa. >>> >>> at later stage, you may also like to provide the occurrence and >>> distribution, brief description (not a technical one), local uses etc. for >>> the benefit of users :) >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Vijayasankar Raman >>> National Center for Natural Products Research >>> University of Mississippi >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Dr Pankaj Kumar <[email protected] >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> Thats going to be nice and informative. I will have a proper look >>>> after my deadline. >>>> There is no need to write CURRENT before names. >>>> Why? >>>> Because there is no current and previous name, there is just one name >>>> to a plant. When you say basionym then it means it is the name on >>>> which other name is based. >>>> Synonyms could be Synonyms and Basionyms. You may point on that. >>>> You can also say Ilex leaved Acanthus as the name of the plant itself >>>> suggests. Holly is the common name for Ilex (ilex).... >>>> Just a few thought... >>>> Regards >>>> Pankaj >>> >>> >>> >> >
