Giby ji & Neil This is yet another case where The Plant List seemed to have bungled, recently I sent them a list of more than 80 species described in FBI, reported in IPNI and missing from the Plant List.
The name mentioned by Neil was published as *Actinodaphne* *gullavara* ( Buch.-Ham.<http://www.ipni.org/ipni/idAuthorSearch.do;jsessionid=2274751C59F531352FC966B4D5B27923?id=1242-1&back_page=%2Fipni%2FeditAdvPlantNameSearch.do%3Bjsessionid%3D2274751C59F531352FC966B4D5B27923%3Ffind_infragenus%3D%26find_isAPNIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_geoUnit%3D%26find_includePublicationAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_addedSince%3D%26find_family%3D%26find_genus%3DActinodaphne%26find_sortByFamily%3Dtrue%26find_isGCIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_infrafamily%3D%26find_rankToReturn%3Dall%26find_publicationTitle%3D%26find_authorAbbrev%3D%26find_infraspecies%3D%26find_includeBasionymAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_modifiedSince%3D%26find_isIKRecord%3Dtrue%26find_species%3D%26output_format%3Dnormal> ex Nees<http://www.ipni.org/ipni/idAuthorSearch.do;jsessionid=2274751C59F531352FC966B4D5B27923?id=6888-1&back_page=%2Fipni%2FeditAdvPlantNameSearch.do%3Bjsessionid%3D2274751C59F531352FC966B4D5B27923%3Ffind_infragenus%3D%26find_isAPNIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_geoUnit%3D%26find_includePublicationAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_addedSince%3D%26find_family%3D%26find_genus%3DActinodaphne%26find_sortByFamily%3Dtrue%26find_isGCIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_infrafamily%3D%26find_rankToReturn%3Dall%26find_publicationTitle%3D%26find_authorAbbrev%3D%26find_infraspecies%3D%26find_includeBasionymAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_modifiedSince%3D%26find_isIKRecord%3Dtrue%26find_species%3D%26output_format%3Dnormal> ) M.R.Almeida<http://www.ipni.org/ipni/idAuthorSearch.do;jsessionid=2274751C59F531352FC966B4D5B27923?id=30797-1&back_page=%2Fipni%2FeditAdvPlantNameSearch.do%3Bjsessionid%3D2274751C59F531352FC966B4D5B27923%3Ffind_infragenus%3D%26find_isAPNIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_geoUnit%3D%26find_includePublicationAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_addedSince%3D%26find_family%3D%26find_genus%3DActinodaphne%26find_sortByFamily%3Dtrue%26find_isGCIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_infrafamily%3D%26find_rankToReturn%3Dall%26find_publicationTitle%3D%26find_authorAbbrev%3D%26find_infraspecies%3D%26find_includeBasionymAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_modifiedSince%3D%26find_isIKRecord%3Dtrue%26find_species%3D%26output_format%3Dnormal> Fl. Maharashtra<http://www.ipni.org/ipni/idPublicationSearch.do;jsessionid=2274751C59F531352FC966B4D5B27923?back_page=%2Fipni%2FeditAdvPlantNameSearch.do%3Bjsessionid%3D2274751C59F531352FC966B4D5B27923%3Ffind_infragenus%3D%26find_isAPNIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_geoUnit%3D%26find_includePublicationAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_addedSince%3D%26find_family%3D%26find_genus%3DActinodaphne%26find_sortByFamily%3Dtrue%26find_isGCIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_infrafamily%3D%26find_rankToReturn%3Dall%26find_publicationTitle%3D%26find_authorAbbrev%3D%26find_infraspecies%3D%26find_includeBasionymAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_modifiedSince%3D%26find_isIKRecord%3Dtrue%26find_species%3D%26output_format%3Dnormal&id=20000035-1> 4A: 251. 2003 and duly recorded in IPNI Now the important question, is whether above is the correct name or Actinodaphne angustifolia *Actinodaphne* *angustifolia* (Blume) Nees<http://www.ipni.org/ipni/idPlantNameSearch.do;jsessionid=2274751C59F531352FC966B4D5B27923?id=462206-1&back_page=%2Fipni%2FeditAdvPlantNameSearch.do%3Bjsessionid%3D2274751C59F531352FC966B4D5B27923%3Ffind_infragenus%3D%26find_isAPNIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_geoUnit%3D%26find_includePublicationAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_addedSince%3D%26find_family%3D%26find_genus%3DActinodaphne%26find_sortByFamily%3Dtrue%26find_isGCIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_infrafamily%3D%26find_rankToReturn%3Dall%26find_publicationTitle%3D%26find_authorAbbrev%3D%26find_infraspecies%3D%26find_includeBasionymAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_modifiedSince%3D%26find_isIKRecord%3Dtrue%26find_species%3D%26output_format%3Dnormal> -- Pl. Asiat. Rar. (Wallich). 3: 31. 1832 [15 Jan 1832] based on *Litsea* *angustifolia* Blume Bijdr. Fl. Ned. Ind. 11: 566. 1826 [24 Jan 1826]<http://www.ipni.org/ipni/idPlantNameSearch.do;jsessionid=A27983E94E71E82D633A675F18A01A30?id=465508-1&back_page=%2Fipni%2FeditAdvPlantNameSearch.do%3Bjsessionid%3D2274751C59F531352FC966B4D5B27923%3Ffind_infragenus%3D%26find_isAPNIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_geoUnit%3D%26find_includePublicationAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_addedSince%3D%26find_family%3D%26find_genus%3DActinodaphne%26find_sortByFamily%3Dtrue%26find_isGCIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_infrafamily%3D%26find_rankToReturn%3Dall%26find_publicationTitle%3D%26find_authorAbbrev%3D%26find_infraspecies%3D%26find_includeBasionymAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_modifiedSince%3D%26find_isIKRecord%3Dtrue%26find_species%3D%26output_format%3Dnormal> . Flora of British India clearly excludes Blume's synonym from the name and Indian plant is as given in IPNI *Actinodaphne* *angustifolia* Hook.f. & Thomson ex Meisn.<http://www.ipni.org/ipni/idPlantNameSearch.do;jsessionid=2274751C59F531352FC966B4D5B27923?id=462205-1&back_page=%2Fipni%2FeditAdvPlantNameSearch.do%3Bjsessionid%3D2274751C59F531352FC966B4D5B27923%3Ffind_infragenus%3D%26find_isAPNIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_geoUnit%3D%26find_includePublicationAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_addedSince%3D%26find_family%3D%26find_genus%3DActinodaphne%26find_sortByFamily%3Dtrue%26find_isGCIRecord%3Dtrue%26find_infrafamily%3D%26find_rankToReturn%3Dall%26find_publicationTitle%3D%26find_authorAbbrev%3D%26find_infraspecies%3D%26find_includeBasionymAuthors%3Dtrue%26find_modifiedSince%3D%26find_isIKRecord%3Dtrue%26find_species%3D%26output_format%3Dnormal> -- Prodr. (DC.) 15(1): 218. 1864 [May 1864]. with Laurus gullavara Buch.-Ham. as synonym. Since A. angustifolia Hook.f. & T. is a later homonym of A. angustifolia (Blume) Nees, it can't be maintained and Actinodaphne gullavara (Buch.-Ham) M R Almeida should be the accepted name. I have not gone through Flora Maharastra, and I request Neil ji to check for the justification given in Fl. Maharashtra when this combination was published. This is my analysis of what I could explore. -- 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, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Neil Soares <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Dr.Giby, > Thanks for your feedback. Have quoted from Dr.Almeida's 'Flora of > Maharashtra' Vol 4-A. Actinodaphne gullavara [syn. A. augustifolia, syn. > A.hookeri] is the only species of Actinodaphne found in Maharashtra. > With regards, > Neil Soares. > > --- On *Thu, 1/12/12, Giby Kuriakose <[email protected]>* wrote: > > > From: Giby Kuriakose <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [efloraofindia:103861] Re: identification of Actinodaphne > angustifolia > To: "Neil Soares" <[email protected]> > Cc: "shrikant ingalhalikar" <[email protected]>, "efloraofindia" < > [email protected]>, "Prashant awale" <[email protected]>, > "Satish Nikam" <[email protected]>, "navendu page" < > [email protected]> > Date: Thursday, January 12, 2012, 11:33 PM > > > Dear Neil ji, > > Interesting! > I couldn't find *Actinodaphne gullavara* in both "the plant list" or > "GRIN" > There are 3 different *Actinodaphne angustifolia *listed in the plant > list @ http://www.theplantlist.org/tpl/search?q=actinodaphne > First one is *Actinodaphne angustifolia* Nees is an accepted name with *Laurus > gullavara* Buch.-Ham. ex Nees as a synonym ( but not *A. gullavara).* > Second one is *Actinodaphne angustifolia* Benth. listed here as > illegitimate and unresolved > The third one is *Actinodaphne angustifolia* Hook.f. & Thomson ex Meisn. > as a synonym of *Actinodaphne hookeri* Meisn. > Further, in GRIN *A. hookeri* is listed as a synonym of *A. angustifolia.* > > Now it is getting confused. > I feel that the leaves of the plant in this thread and the pictures in the > link provided by Neilji looks little different. > Unless we handle the specimen it would be hard to conclude, I think. > > > > Regards, > Giby > > > > > On 12 January 2012 18:40, Neil Soares > <[email protected]<http://us.mc339.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > > wrote: > > Hi, > Affirmative. This is Actinodaphne gullavara. Have had a previous > discussion on this and it is available at this link : > > > https://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix/browse_thread/thread/df392de7a2165bed/52a541fbd2f49b71?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=Actinodaphne+gullavara+Neil+Soares#52a541fbd2f49b71 > > With regards, > Neil Soares. > > --- On *Thu, 1/12/12, Giby Kuriakose > <[email protected]<http://us.mc339.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > >* wrote: > > > From: Giby Kuriakose > <[email protected]<http://us.mc339.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > > > Subject: Re: [efloraofindia:103861] Re: identification of Actinodaphne > angustifolia > To: "shrikant ingalhalikar" > <[email protected]<http://us.mc339.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > > > Cc: "efloraofindia" > <[email protected]<http://us.mc339.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]>>, > "Prashant awale" > <[email protected]<http://us.mc339.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]>>, > "Satish Nikam" > <[email protected]<http://us.mc339.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > > > Date: Thursday, January 12, 2012, 6:30 PM > > > Yes, *Actinodaphne angustifolia *is a synonym of *A. hookeri.* > * > * > Pubescent leaf petiole is an important field character of *A. hookeri* > Please refer @ > > https://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix/browse_thread/thread/432f5657686dcb84/5e74fdc5b8468ce1?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=actinodaphne+giby#5e74fdc5b8468ce1 > * * > * > * > > Regards > Giby > > > > On 12 January 2012 18:23, shrikant ingalhalikar > <[email protected]<http://us.mc339.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > > wrote: > > I suppose A. angustifolia and A. hookeri are syn. What is the > difference observed? Regards, Shrikant > > On Jan 12, 12:28 pm, Prashant Awale > <[email protected]<http://us.mc339.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]>> > wrote: > > Could this be Actinodaphne hookeri .Satish ji, will u pl tell me the > > location. > > I had spotted similar plant at the base of Korigad fort (Lonavala region) > > as well as in Matheran Hills. > > Regards > > Prashant > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Satish Nikam > > <[email protected]<http://us.mc339.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Friends, > > > I am posting the photo of the same tree as last year > > > which was ID'd as Actinodaphne angustifolia.Here is the old link. > > >http://www.flickr.com/photos/wwwssncomphotos/5284817799/ > > > Also some young saplings around.My observation is that their are both > > > light green leaves as well dark green on the same plant>Experts now > your > > > call. > > > > > thanks > > > regards > > > satish nikam- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > -- > GIBY KURIAKOSE PhD > Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), > Royal Enclave, > Jakkur Post, Srirampura > Bangalore- 560064 > India > Phone - +91 9448714856 (Mobile) > visit my pictures @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/giby > > > > > -- > GIBY KURIAKOSE PhD > Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), > Royal Enclave, > Jakkur Post, Srirampura > Bangalore- 560064 > India > Phone - +91 9448714856 (Mobile) > visit my pictures @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/giby > >
