Gorgeous Shots Sir On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Gurcharan Singh <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think I should finally go for G. hugelii only > > > -- > 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://www.gurcharanfamily.com/ > http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45/ > > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Gurcharan Singh <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Dear members >> This mail was originally meant for Botany colleague from Kashmir. I am >> sending it again with proper subject line. >> >> This Gentiana which was flowering very commonly in Gulmarg and >> Khillenmarg in May perhaps needs some critical study and could belong to >> any of the three species characterised by fimbriate corolla and placed in a >> distinct genus Qaisera in Flora of Pakistan. >> This plant has often been reported as Gentiana carinata, and as >> common in Gulmarg and Khillenmarg, even by Blatter, and perhaps confusion >> has been comounded by Flowers of Himalayas where it is identified as G. >> carinata. >> Let us first look at the key in Flora of Pakistan >> >> >> 1Accessary lobes or plicae equal in size to the lobes, thus giving an >> impression of corolla being 10-partite 3 Qaisera >> coronata<http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=5&taxon_id=250093030> >> +Accessary lobes or plicae not equal in size to the corolla lobes, >> corolla appears to be 5-partite >> (2)<http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=5&taxon_id=314809#KEY-1-2> >> 2 >> (1)<http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=5&taxon_id=314809#KEY-1-1> >> Inflorescence >> laxly arranged few flowered cyme. Leaves lanceolate 1 Qaisera >> carinata<http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=5&taxon_id=250093027> >> +Inflorescence densely cl ustered cyme. Leaves ovate 2 Qaisera >> hugelii<http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=5&taxon_id=250093028> >> >> >> To me corolla lobes and plicae appear almost of the same size (or latter >> slightly shorter) and I would have gone for G. coronata but leaves come in >> the way as they should be lanceolate with acute tip whereas they are >> clearly obovate-spatulate in our specimens. >> >> Assuming that plicae are shorter than lobes, then placing in G. carinata >> would face same problem of leaf shape, more so if we look at the following >> net images where plicae are distinctly smaller and flower much different.: >> >> http://www.gentians.be/index.php?page=plant_portraits&pic=78 >> >> http://www.alpines.be/central-nepal/#!modal-window[gallery]/21/ >> >> Although following image has larger plicae >> >> http://www1.odn.ne.jp/~cet85270/02f177.html >> >> If we accept that our plant has smaller plicae, then I hope G. hugelii is >> the perfect match with upper leaves obovate, closely placed, rounded at >> apex, recurved and slightly mucronate at apex, and distinctly carinate on >> lower side along midvein, and more so flowers are clustered. >> >> May be you can have a better interpretation. >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> -- >> 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://www.gurcharanfamily.com/ >> http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45/ >> >> > > -- Regards Dr Balkar Singh Head, Deptt. of Botany and Biotechnology Arya P G College, Panipat Haryana-132103 09416262964
