Thanks Alok Ji great information Can u share that paper of Hill and Jonson pls
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 7:11 PM, Satish Phadke <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Alok ji > Thanks for that interesting information. > So my guess was correct like any lay man. > Satish > > > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Pinki <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Dear Satish Ji >> >> Here some info...... >> >> Long ago in simpler times there was s alarge genus of about 700 >> species called Eucalyptus and a very small genus (with 7 species) >> called Angophora and together they were called gum trees by >> Australians because they looked very similar. The reason they were >> different is that they differed in two characters- unlike all the >> Eucalyptus species (whose flower buds are initially covered by a >> little cap), the buds of Angophora are naked and uncapped. That’s >> pretty fundamental esp if you remember that the name ‘eu-calyptus’ >> means ‘well-covered’ pointedly refer to the bud caps. What’s more, >> unlike Eucalyptus, the flowers of Angophora have petals, tiny little >> ones, but petals nevertheless- and it wasn’t easy to avoid these >> differences. >> This was the situation till 1995, when 2 australian botanists called >> Hill and Johnson published a paper formally recognizing a new genus >> called Corymbia, comprising 113 species that had been scooped out from >> genus Eucalyptus. The genus Eucalyptus had been subdivided into 7to 12 >> sub-generic groups to manage its sprawling empire of almost 700 >> species and Corymbia was one of them. Hill and Johnson’s paper argued >> that all the species in the sub-group Corymbia differed enough from >> the rest of the species in Eucalyptus genus to merit becoming a genus >> on their own. >> Many scientists resisted the change and continued to use the old name >> for Corymbia implicitly disagreeing from Hill and Johnson’s >> proposition. At the same time, studies in DNA sequencing were >> beginning to show that the Corymbia were in fact more closely related >> to Angophora than to Eucalyptus. >> Yet resistance to the name change continued. One of the fear was that >> by the same logic, taxonomists might seek to promote all the separate >> subgenera of Eucalyptus into new genera. What probably rankled most of >> all was that – unlike the separation of Eucalyptus from Angophora, >> which was based on easily visible differences – the differences >> between Eucalyptus and Corymbia are at a subtle level, not easily >> recognized. There are no obvious characters of bark bud or foliage to >> mark the separation. >> Acceptance of the new genus will be a long, slow process but for the >> moment, whatever genus one uses – Eucalytus citriodora or Corymbia >> cotriodora – the only tree that will be in reference is the lemon >> scented gum. >> >> >> Alok >> >> On Jul 18, 11:00 pm, Satish Phadke <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Looks like a Eucalyptus species..... >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Balkar Arya <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > Dear All >> > >> > > Corymbia citriodora from IARI regional Station Karnal >> > > very large trees about 50 years old as told by the persons working >> there >> > > leaves scented with lemonoid fragrance >> > > -- >> > > Regards >> > >> > > Dr Balkar Singh >> > > Head, Deptt. of Botany and Biotechnology >> > > Arya P G College, Panipat >> > > Haryana-132103 >> > > 09416262964 >> > > -- Regards Dr Balkar Singh Head, Deptt. of Botany and Biotechnology Arya P G College, Panipat Haryana-132103 09416262964
