Vijayasankar ji, many thanks for validating names of *Justicia adhatoda*. Entry for இரத்தபித்தம் iratta-pittam shows Malabar Nut at http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.13:1:3272.tamillex It does also show it as a name for the disease Hemorrhage. Probably the word is out of vogue as meaning for *Justicia adhatoda*.
On similar lines will remove other said names for *Justicia adhatoda*, since they must have lost their association with the plant in modern times. Accordingly will correct entries for *Barleria prionitis*. Many thanks once again for validating the Tamil names. Regards. Dinesh On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 4:26 AM, Vijayasankar <[email protected]>wrote: > OK Dinesh ji. I'll go through the list. I think it needs some corrections. > For e.g. Justicia adhatoda is popularly known as 'adhatodai' ஆடாதோடை only. > The name "இரத்தபித்தம் iratta-pittam" perhaps refers to a disease ( > Hemorrhage) and not this plant. Similarly the Tamil name 'காட்டுமுருங்கை > kāṭṭu-muruṅkai' refers to Moringa concanensis, which is appropriate. We need > not include this name for J. adhatoda, even if it was mentioned in some old > literature. Doing so will lead to confusion only. The other names given > here for J. adhatoda are also not in current use and must be removed. The > name 'Pavatta' mainly refers to Pavetta indica rather than J. adhatoda. > > Barleria prionitis is better known as ªêñ¢º÷¢÷¤ 'Semmulli', and the name > 'Kutan' must be a prehistoric one. (pl. check the link to ENVIS-FRLHT > doesn't work here, but i can open the site separately) > > I don't think we should include all names used for plants in old Tamil > literature. We can't afford it. For e.g. Plumbago zeylanica has 128 Tamil > names. I am sure Neem has at least 150 names, and so several other plants. > Mr. Panchavarnam (i think he recently joined our group) has done lots of > research on this subject and he has compiled all these information for > several plants with an aim of doing it for all plants (of India i guess). > So, providing only popular names, which are in current usage, will be a good > idea. > > Of course, it is my personal view only. > > > Regards > > Vijayasankar Raman > National Center for Natural Products Research > University of Mississippi > > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Dinesh Valke <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Many thanks Vijayasankar ji for the clarifications. >> >> Here is the list of Tamil names that have got populated in the site. >> https://sites.google.com/site/indiannamesofplants/via-names/tamil >> >> If you find any discrepancies OR would like to comment on any other aspect >> please do so by posting it to our group. >> It will help people gain interest in the site's contents. >> >> Regards. >> Dinesh. >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:42 PM, Vijayasankar >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Thanks Dinesh ji, for the clarification. These are my responses for your >>> queries: >>> >>> 1. Use of two names L. and Linn. is accepted only for Linnaeus (may be >>> due to the long usage of Linn.). So its OK if you use either of these. But >>> nowadays only L. is used. Using Linn. in not a mistake. >>> 2. GRIN doesn't provide all synonyms. There may be too many (remember >>> recent posts by Dr.Pankaj listing large number of synonyms for one taxon) >>> synonyms, and its not necessary to include all. These are included generally >>> only by revisioners. Revd. Hb. to Flora of Ceylon provides detailed note on >>> synonyms. We generally use only popular names and not all synonyms. >>> 3. IPNI just lists all botanical names and doesn't distinguish accepted >>> and synonyms. >>> 4. GBIF takes records from IPNI, so we need to cross check for author >>> citation if we refer this facility. >>> 5. In case of authority for the name Acanthus ilicifolius, both >>> Loureiro(Lour.) and Linnaeus (L.) have used the same name for describing the >>> species. May be Lour. was unaware of L.'s publication. Since L. published it >>> (in 1753) before the publication of Lour. (in 1790), the Principles of >>> Priority Rule of ICBN applies here. The earliest published name is accepted >>> and the latter in this case is a latter homonym which is invalid. >>> >>> Experts in the group may like to throw more light on this. >>> >>> So, while providing authority we generally refer more than one sources, >>> and we go into details if we find discrepancies. After all our wish is to >>> ensure correctness rather than multiplying mistakes made in some websites. >>> >>> BTW, please send me the list of Tamil names for verification. I would >>> love to go through that. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Vijayasankar Raman >>> National Center for Natural Products Research >>> University of Mississippi >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Dinesh Valke >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Vijayasankar ji, >>>> >>>> The intention of the site is to gather the common names of plants in >>>> India and validate them. >>>> The plant is introduced by its Latin name because it is unique and not >>>> shared. >>>> When in case there are instances of a Latin name with more than one >>>> author, their authors' names will follow them for sake of differentiation. >>>> >>>> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> >>>> At NPGS / GRIN ... >>>> http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?1079 >>>> ... put as Acanthus ilicifolius *L*. ... no synonyms put at present. >>>> >>>> Not able to understand the format at IPNI ... >>>> http://www.ipni.org/ipni/idPlantNameSearch.do?id=84648-3 >>>> >>>> GBIF at http://data.gbif.org/species/14807706/ has Acanthus ilicifolius >>>> *Lour*. ... was not able to know where the synonyms are put >>>> >>>> At some other places on WWW >>>> 1) Acanthus ilicifolius *Linn*. Synonyms: Acanthus doloariu Blanco., >>>> Acanthus ebracteatus val., Acanthus volubilis Wall., Dilivaria ilicifolia >>>> Nees. (Juss ) >>>> 2) Acanthus ilicifolius L. Synonym: Acanthus volubilis Wallich. >>>> >>>> >>>> Have stayed far away from gathering data related to botanical name >>>> citations because of differing abbreviations (implying different authors >>>> AND >>>> / OR different syntax). >>>> >>>> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> >>>> The data is not stored in database format. >>>> >>>> In the given circumstances, change in status of botanical name is the >>>> least that can be afforded (time-wise and efforts-wise). >>>> >>>> The site and its contents at present are viewable only to our group ... >>>> as such is matter for discussing / validating the common names ... not to >>>> be >>>> considered as database. >>>> >>>> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> >>>> >>>> Please note this response is copied to ITPMods, and cut from the entire >>>> group. >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards. >>>> Dinesh >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Vijayasankar <[email protected] >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "ITPmods" group. >>>> To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/itpmods?hl=en-GB. >>>> >>> >>> >> >
