I am not a botanist... but I use herbaria at NYBG for personal inquiry or for helping out people back in India at lot... I have full access... I have even used herbaria at MOBOT and at Harvard.. Its only in India and Kolkata esp where even clerks behave as if they own the books (in libraries and do not let us even touch some books) or the sheets in herbaria,... NO ACCESS...
so lets not put NON - BOTANISTS down DInesh ji.... you write:" Plain people do not know what is herbarium. Herbaria are not easily accessible OR available; ironically even to the botanists. And if they are accessible to plain people, it will surprise us all with what they would say, though naively: " NON BOTANISTS are not stupid... you know... they just dont have the technical jargon down yet... Lets try a role reversal... I WONDER HOW ANY of YOU WILL FARE IF YOU WERE TO JOIN A CANCER IDENTIFICATION GROUP and we tried to put you down... IN EVERYTHING ELSE YOU WRITE HERE I AGREE WITH YOU... SO YOU SEE WE ALL MAKE WRITING FAUX PAS LETS NOT JUST PICK ON ONE.... HS MAY NEED HELP from some seniors that are near him and can communicate with him in his native language... Usha di ====== On Oct 23, 7:06 pm, Dinesh Valke <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear HS, > > We all are made to carry our own photographs in various documents to prove > our identity. > Without these we may stand to get detained from getting access to many of > our regular routines. > Most of us also carry photos that could be some months old (funnily even > years old). > We are all the same species, yet the authorities identify us with our > photograph, normally 2" x 2". > Imagine if they start getting difficult with us saying they need to check > our DNA, fingerprints, .... why ? because cannot trust photographs. > > All this said may not compare with the stringent identification procedure > involved in botany / zoology. > Point to drive is, here we "sincerely attempt" to identify flora. > This forum is not a ordinary place where IDs are resolved by mere guesswork. > Everyone's existence in this group proves that. > Otherwise, no serious botanist would have stayed here for another day. > > We are all here to find joy in finding out what we have explored in the > beautiful nature around us. > > Personally, I have some books on flora that were easily available to me. > It includes Shrikant ji's books and Kehimkar's book. They have helped me > immensely. > Not to forget the inspiring Flowers of India site of dear Tabish. > > Plain people do not know what is herbarium. > Herbaria are not easily accessible OR available; ironically even to the > botanists. > And if they are accessible to plain people, it will surprise us all with > what they would say, though naively: > > How can any one trust identification done with help of this mashed up parts > of plant ? > > My salutes to all the knowledgeable friends here, who patiently put their > efforts time and again to identify flora which is so common to them (that > includes you). > Identification done of a plant that we sighted gives us great joy. > I am sure it gives joy to the person who spends some minute(s) to guess OR > some time to analyse and identify. > > Wishing you get lots of joy too. > > Regards. > Dinesh > > > > > > > > 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/cf... > >>>> ] > > >>>> 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
