Thats what i love about the group, so many non botanist members interested in the plant.. what more can be expected from them, they are doing more than expectation.. but i really expect from the so called botanist or taxonomist..
regards, On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 7:01 PM, Gurcharan Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear H S > Let us understand and appreciate that there are only 50 or less botanists > on this group, and we can't expect nearly 1750 non botanists to go to a > herbarium, in these days when plucking of flowers is discouraged all over > the world. The main aim of this group is photography, interest in flowers > and let us find ways to make best use of that and not discourage people who > are getting interest in environment. It may interest you to know that all > modern text books have shifted to the use of coloured photographs instead of > line diagrams. > > I believe in moving with the technology and would request every one else to > do the same > -- > 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 Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 6:51 PM, H S <[email protected]> wrote: > >> sorry sirji, but i never learned that identifying the photos are called >> TAXONOMY.. no daubt that you have great great experience in this field and >> great knowledge about the subject, i also have one of your textbooks with >> me, but somewhere you also will believe that in some of the genus like >> Alysicarpus, Eriocaulon, Cyperus, Eragrostis nad many more its very tuff to >> identify the species with photograph, its need to be studied by comparing >> with herbarium or studying under microscope.. >> >> no one taught me Taxonomy....that go in the field take snaps come back and >> compare with photos in Trees of Delhi, Flowers of Sahyadri, Trees of Mumbai, >> etc etc.. >> >> regards, >> >> >> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Gurcharan Singh <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Dear H S >>> The very purpose of this group is to share photographs taken by >>> different members, and exchange these photographs. The members get their >>> photographs identified through experts who know these plants. I have been >>> practicing taxonomy for last 40 years and have studied herbarium specimens >>> of almost all major Indian Herbaria, but I have learnt more taxonomy in last >>> three years that I joined this group, and perhaps no one can appreciate the >>> value of digital photographs than me. Perhaps half of our problems would be >>> solved if we learn to move with the time and take benefit of developing >>> technology. >>> >>> If we agree to your view point that photographs are no use for >>> identification, then perhaps we would have to disband this group of 1800 >>> members. At least I don't subscribe to that. After excellent close ups by >>> Pankaj ji, Dinesh ji, Satish ji, I have come to believe that perhaps a macro >>> of fresh flower can give more details than a under microscope study of dried >>> and deformed flower. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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 Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 6:16 PM, H S <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> dear sirji, if i asked for some more details about the plants than what >>>> wrong i did, because i know that there are two more similar looking species >>>> in the same genus.. >>>> >>>> i never trust anyones identification done from the photograph.. >>>> >>>> if group is not happy about my post than i am not interested in >>>> discussing the things.. >>>> >>>> thanks.. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Gurcharan Singh <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> I think it would help the group if more and more experts come forward >>>>> to share different jobs. For last so many years my self and Garg ji have >>>>> been doing our best to resurface the pending identifications and how >>>>> tiring >>>>> this job is. Every body knows we have been giving all previous feedbacks >>>>> and >>>>> our comments also. Seeing how difficult job it is Dinesh ji, who has been >>>>> doing all important job for the website, (which not every one can >>>>> appreciate). has given a lending of resurfacing. Rather than appreciating >>>>> such efforts I find one member has chosen to find faults with it. It would >>>>> have been more appropriate if he had found and supplemented the >>>>> resurfacing >>>>> efforts. I have been requesting him repeatedly to take up some jobs on the >>>>> group. He does not want to do any job for the group, but is ready to find >>>>> faults with every body else. His consistent lines in the middle of the >>>>> thread have been "I think..............................." and there is >>>>> not s >>>>> single evidence to support his conclusion. The other day he wrote on the >>>>> group "there may be other experts on the group who can identify your >>>>> photographs but............................". Such type of behavior only >>>>> spoils the atmosphere of the group. few days back when Dinesh ji shared >>>>> some valuable identified plants on the group, he consistently asked him to >>>>> supply details about the plants which were already identified and with >>>>> useful information of all regional names. I had to tell him that person >>>>> sharing his already identified plants is only doing service to the group, >>>>> and every thing supplied by him is a bonus for us. If we have any doubts >>>>> we >>>>> should do our home work and if there are any doubts he should share with >>>>> evidence. >>>>> I am sorry to share this in the forum, but I have tried in vain >>>>> that he does not spoil the harmony of the group, but it seems his >>>>> intrusions >>>>> are increasing and are not for the good of the group. I request him again >>>>> that is a talented person and should use this for welfare of the group and >>>>> not spoil its harmony through his frequent non too desirable utterances. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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 Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Samir Mehta >>>>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I did just that yesterday & I am happy that the same is being >>>>>> suggested to the group for wider implementation. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please see: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix/browse_thread/thread/cff8bf25002f8c8d/a5847174c6cfc51a?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=boerhavia+diffusa# >>>>>> ] >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks & Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Samir Mehta >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 23, 1:31 pm, H S <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> > One request to the group: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > no doubt its very clear that the plant photo is not 100 percent sure >>>>>> about >>>>>> > the identity if posted again as resurfing for identification. just >>>>>> one >>>>>> > request to those who are posting again for resurfing, if he or she >>>>>> can give >>>>>> > or add little comments on the earlier post by the member for the >>>>>> identity.. >>>>>> > than it would become easy to seperate them from another species.. >>>>>> or it can >>>>>> > be discuss by the moderator member of the group and than put for >>>>>> resurfing >>>>>> > with some extra details.. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > one question.. is it necessary to identify every not clear photos (i >>>>>> mean >>>>>> > some times photos are not so clear to identify the species level and >>>>>> if >>>>>> > someone is doing so, i think it can only be a guess and not a 100 >>>>>> percent >>>>>> > proper identification), than why to stretch on such things and waste >>>>>> time... >>>>>> > by putting again and again it for resurfing... >>>>>> > >>>>>> > regards >>>>>> > >>>>>> > -- >>>>>> > - H.S. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, - a mere >>>>>> heart of >>>>>> > stone >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> - H.S. >>>> >>>> A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, - a mere heart >>>> of stone >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> - H.S. >> >> A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, - a mere heart of >> stone >> >> > > > > -- - H.S. A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, - a mere heart of stone
