Dear Dr. Sngh...
I think you are right.. futile to react... but it needs to get on the
permanent record about How useful the plant list is and so that our members
all refer to it or at least not object to it...
I think its a wonderful resource...
Re: futile to react.... even in my medical college class we had some
students who got degrees but did not get any learning... in Gujarati its
called 'Bhanya pana ganya nahi... ie got certificates but did not learn to
deal in life... or some such thing...
se la vi...
I realize how difficult the taxonomy task is... before the human
tumors/cancers well well defined and classified in the 50s and 60s ... it
must have been a very difficult job for the doctors who were treating
them...
Also, the need to standardize plant names was driven home when I started
studying herbal medicine and then Ayurvedic medicine where there are sooo
many vernacular names and sooo many conflicting names that its not funny...
cheers is right....
Goodnite..
Usha di
=======
On , Gurcharan Singh <[email protected]> wrote:
UshadiFor people like us who were struggling hard to prepare lists of
accepted names for decades now, the importance of GRIN, The Plant List
and Sorting Plant Names is so dear. After the two volumes of Index
Kewensis 1893 or so in which there were lists of accepted names and
synonyms, we used to always hunt for accepted names as subsequent
supplements every 5 years no distinction of of accepted names were
available and we used to rely on regular upldates by Raizada, Rao, and
some me for knowing recent name changes. It was only after nearly 100
years that we had GRIN as source of finding correct names (of mainly
American Plants) and now that the Plant List is available (2010 onwards),
listing all published names and recent accepted names, what more does the
Botanical community want. Only those who have been doing hardcore
research know the importance of such publications, and that too online.
Agreed there are some issues with unresolved names, duplicity of names,
but these constitute not more than 5-10 percent of names. I have been
writting to the Managers of the List about errors and hope these would be
solved soon, but to just reject the database, is something no serious
researcher can think of.
All of us can have our opinions on some things, but in the matter of
names in our database, we can only rely on what is the latest by
consensus.
After reading this concluding statement, I think it is futile to react.
"no problem sirji... i do not have any problem you calling it Hibiscus
vitifolia...
but i willl follow what i feel is correct.."
We will continue to do whatever is good for the welfare of the group.
Cheers Usha di
.
--
Dr. Gurcharan Singh
Retired Associate Professor
SGTB Khalsa College, University of Delhi, Delhi-110007
Res: 932 Anand Kunj, Vikas Puri, New Delhi-110018.
Phone: 011-25518297 Mob: 9810359089
http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45/
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 8:42 PM, Ushadi micromini
[email protected]> wrote:
NO NO NO,
we will not stop this thread...
the issues are not resolved...
First issue is "BLINDLY FOLLOWING THE PLANT LIST"
I looked in the history of THE PLANT LIST yesterday (for a different
matter)
what I found has earned my respect...
Its not a run by a flyby nite operation... nor is it a money grabbing
operation...
Its a KEW and Missouri Botanical Garden joint venture... both places
are run by and staffed by
very scientific .. very correct, very studious, and top of the line
educated folks... both places... They even rate the names as accepted
on basis of percentage acceptability, which I thought was very
honest....
MOST OF US including you mr. HS will do well to start following the
PLANT list as a basis....
then... BASIC RESEARCH HAS its place...
let the professors of BOTANY and Taxonomy figure out and publish...
SECOND ISSUE IS CAN I GET A PDF OF THIS PAPER: Kosteletzkya vitifolia
(L.) MRAlmeida & N.Patil J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc.93: 111 1996 ...
which is at the heart of this argument... cant find it on the net...
Thanks Usha di
==========
On Sep 9, 3:25 pm, HS [email protected]> wrote:
> no problem sirji... i do not have any problem you calling it Hibiscus
> vitifolia...
> but i willl follow what i feel is correct..
>
> ok.. here we shall stop discussion about this post..
>
> regards,,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Gurcharan Singh [email protected]>
wrote:
> > Dear HS
>
> > Please don't make comments like ......all the members are just blindly
> > following the Plant list or other sites for identification of plants.
>
> > There are many well informed members on the group, who can apply their
> > judgement in deciding what is correct. We have learnt to respect each
member
> > and expect you to follow the same for the sake of this group. Just
for your
> > information the following databases treat Hibiscus vitifolius as the
> > accepted name:
>
> >http://plants.usda.gov/java/profile?symbol=HIVI
>
> >http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?19104
>
> >http://www.theplantlist.org/tpl/record/kew-2850698
>
> >http://www.eol.org/pages/584775/overview
>
> >http://www.jstor.org/pss/4120636
>
>
>http://www.mozambiqueflora.com/speciesdata/species.php?species_id=139680
>
>
>http://www.ville-ge.ch/musinfo/bd/cjb/africa/details.php?langue=an&id...
>
> > These are just a few recent ones. Tanay gave you a valid reason, but
if you
> > still insist that others are wrong, perhaps we may not be able to do
any
> > thing.
> > I request again, let us discuss, agree or disagree, but don't treat
> > others as if they don't know any thing. Let us devote our energies
towards
> > helping members to know their plants.
>
> > --
> > Dr. Gurcharan Singh
> > Retired Associate Professor
> > SGTB Khalsa College, University of Delhi, Delhi-110007
> > Res: 932 Anand Kunj, Vikas Puri, New Delhi-110018.
> > Phone: 011-25518297 Mob: 9810359089
> >http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45/
>
> > On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:06 PM, HS [email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Dear all,
> >> Apologise if i have hurted anyones sentiments... ...
>
> >> and my knowledge is like a drop in a big jar of Dr. Singh and many
others
> >> on group.
>
> >> though i am proud that whatever i have learnt is in a right
direction...
> >> i dont want to pick wrong things from The Plant List... for eg..
suppose
> >> Kosteletzkya vitifolia name is unresolved because it doesnt have
basionym in
> >> original publication... that doesnt mean that Hibiscus vitifolia
becames the
> >> correct name... instead of making Kosteletzkya vitifolia valid by new
> >> publication or in newly fresh combination with valid publication,,,,
or it
> >> has to put on discussion.... all the members are just blindly
following the
> >> Plant list or other sites for identification of plants...
>
> >> We should not forget the purpose of the group...
>
> >> my intention is just contribute to group for bringing plants valid
correct
> >> name in front of the world..
>
> >> regards,
>
> >> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Tanay Bose
[email protected]>wrote:
>
> >>> This what ICBN Vienna Code 2006 Article 33.5 states
>
> >>> "33.5. For names published on or after 1 January 1953, errors in the
> >>> citation of the basionym or replaced synonym, including incorrect
author
> >>> citation (Art. 46
http://ibot.sav.sk/icbn/frameset/0050Ch4Sec3a046.htm>),
> >>> but not omissions (Art.
33.4http://ibot.sav.sk/icbn/frameset/0037Ch4Sec2a033.htm#33.4.>),
> >>> do not preclude valid publication of a new combination, new generic
name
> >>> with a basionym, or nomen novum."
>
> >>> Tanay
>
> >>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Tanay Bose
[email protected]>wrote:
>
> >>>> Dear HS Ji.
> >>>> I appreciate your knowledge in plant but I think your way of
> >>>> reciprocating
> >>>> to senior colleagues of the group is not quite OK for me. In
scientific
> >>>> community
> >>>> if you are vehemently protesting some ideas then you should have a
> >>>> strong evidence
> >>>> for it. It not us who makes these nomenclatural changes but the
credit
> >>>> goes to ICBN.
> >>>> Kosteletzkya vitifolia (L.) MRAlmeida & N.Patil J. Bombay Nat.
Hist.
> >>>> Soc. 93: 111 1996
> >>>> is an unresolved name the reason for it is the absence of basionym
in
> >>>> the publication.
> >>>> Hence, the new nomenclatural change doesn't make any effect and
the old
> >>>> name or the
> >>>> basionym ie Hibiscus vitifolius L. stays as the the legitimate
name.
> >>>> Kindly go through the link provided below.
>
> >>>>http://www.theplantlist.org/tpl/record/kew-2334897
>
> >>>> As a moderator of the group I will request you to be cordial with
fellow
> >>>> members of the
> >>>> group. Though identification of plant is the main aim of our group
but
> >>>> we always make sure
> >>>> that the interaction within the group stays soothing and peaceful.
No
> >>>> comments from
> >>>> any members of the group should hurt the sentiments of others. I
will
> >>>> request you to kindly
> >>>> stick to the group norm and try to help help members
> >>>> with identification in a bit cordial
> >>>> manner. Your knowledge in taxonomy is an asset to the group hence
we
> >>>> will always look
> >>>> to get our knowledge refreshed from your ideas.
> >>>> forward
>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>> Tanay
>
> >>>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 11:21 PM, HS [email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>>>> this plant doesnt comes under genus Hibiscus.... its different.
>
> >>>>> regards,
>
> >>>>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Gurcharan Singh
[email protected]>wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Both GRIN and The Plant List treat Hibiscus vitifolius L. as the
> >>>>>> accepted name.
>
> >>>>>> --
>
> >>>>>> Dr. Gurcharan Singh
> >>>>>> Retired Associate Professor
> >>>>>> SGTB Khalsa College, University of Delhi, Delhi-110007
> >>>>>> Res: 932 Anand Kunj, Vikas Puri, New Delhi-110018.
> >>>>>> Phone: 011-25518297 Mob: 9810359089
> >>>>>>http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45/
>
> >>>>>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 10:25 AM, HS [email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> i think Kosteletzkya vitifolia (L.) MRAlmeida & N.Patil
> >>>>>>> is correct name for this plant.
>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 6:03 PM, shrikant ingalhalikar
> >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> Involucral bracts are not forked and calyx is not
prickly/bristly.
> >>>>>>>> Note the nodding corolla also. This is hence not H. radiatus
but
> >>>>>>>> Fioria vitifolia. Regards, Shrikant
>
> >>>>>>>> On Sep 7, 12:11 pm, Gurcharan Singh [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> > More shots of leaves and epicalyx should be helpful. To me
it does
> >>>>>>>> not look
> >>>>>>>> > like H. radiatus.
>
> >>>>>>>> > --
> >>>>>>>> > Dr. Gurcharan Singh
> >>>>>>>> > Retired Associate Professor
> >>>>>>>> > SGTB Khalsa College, University of Delhi, Delhi-110007
> >>>>>>>> > Res: 932 Anand Kunj, Vikas Puri, New Delhi-110018.
> >>>>>>>> > Phone: 011-25518297 Mob: 9810359089
> >>>>>>>>http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45/
>
> >>>>>>>> > On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Narendra Joshi
> >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> > > Hibiscus radiatus
>
> >>>>>>>> > > --
> >>>>>>>> > > With Regards,
> >>>>>>>> > > Narendra Joshi- Hide quoted text -
>
> >>>>>>>> > - Show quoted text -
>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> - HS
>
> >>>>>>> A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, - a
mere
> >>>>>>> heart of stone
>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> - HS
>
> >>>>> A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, - a mere
heart
> >>>>> of stone
>
> >>>> --
> >>>> *Tanay Bose*
> >>>> Research Assistant & Teaching Assistant.
> >>>> Department of Botany.
> >>>> University of British Columbia .
> >>>> 3529-6270 University Blvd.
> >>>> Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 (Canada)
> >>>> Phone: 778-323-4036 (Mobile)
> >>>> 604-822-2019 (Lab)
> >>>> 604-822-6089 (Fax)
> >>>> [email protected]
> >>>> *Webpages:*
> >>>>http://www.botany.ubc.ca/people/mberbee.html
> >>>>http://www.botany.ubc.ca/people/gradstud.html
> >>>>https://sites.google.com/site/efloraofindia/
>
> >>> --
> >>> *Tanay Bose*
> >>> Research Assistant & Teaching Assistant.
> >>> Department of Botany.
> >>> University of British Columbia .
> >>> 3529-6270 University Blvd.
> >>> Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 (Canada)
> >>> Phone: 778-323-4036 (Mobile)
> >>> 604-822-2019 (Lab)
> >>> 604-822-6089 (Fax)
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> *Webpages:*
> >>>http://www.botany.ubc.ca/people/mberbee.html
> >>>http://www.botany.ubc.ca/people/gradstud.html
> >>>https://sites.google.com/site/efloraofindia/
>
> >> --
> >> - HS
>
> >> A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, - a mere
heart of
> >> stone
>
> --
> - HS
>
> A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, - a mere heart
of
> stone
