Hi Samir, I read your post and looked at your pics with great interest. You are right about the confusion regarding this and related species. I have found WA Talbot's Forest Flora of Bombay Presidency and Sind to be very helpful here. Vol 1, (under Gymnosporia) I think you are most probably correct in your identification because Talbot lists G. puberula as flowering in rainy season. My own photos of G. konkanensis closely resemble your's except that konkanensis has a spiny habit. I have checked Talbot's specimens in Blatter herbarium, also. Both species flower at this time. Dr Almeida has united Maytenus puberula with G. konkanensis but I do not agree at all unless there is variation in the habits of the 2 plants ie armed and unarmed. The leaves and flowers appear the same, at least in photographs.
Did you collect samples? I have not seen this plant anywhere except on Tungareshwar, which is where Talbot collected G. konkanensis. best regards, Radha On Sunday, July 8, 2012 8:20:25 PM UTC+5:30, Samir Mehta wrote: > > Dear Fellow Group-Members, > > Got a chance to go to Prabalgad with a trekking group, had wanted to go > there for a long time, after seeing Prasant ji's posts from that area. As > was to be expected, it was more of a trek than a flower watching trip - and > a difficult one too. > > Spotted this large unarmed shrub just short of Prabal machi, about ? 1000 > ft asl, the lower surface of the leaf had hairs on the veins (cannot > remember whether they were hispid or puberulous); flower size was > approx.1cm. > > There seems to be some confusion in the taxonomic nomenclature (unresolved > in the plant list and not listed at ARS-GRIN and FoC or Fl Pakistan). > The id is based on Fl. Maharashtra 1:241 & 243, but here flowering season > is given as Dec-Jan, needs to be checked and FBI 1:619. > The shrub is not listed in Shrikant ji's Flowers of Sahyadri or Further > Flowers > of Sahyadri and no image of it was available for comparison in the group > database or on the net. > > Will appreciate if this post can be validated. > > > > >
