Usha Di, Abroma is very irritating, as can be seen/read in - http://www.plantoftheweek.org/week262.shtml.
Thanks for the "orthographic variant", it may explain *Boerhaavia<http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/CropFactSheets/punanrnava.html> * and *Boerhavia <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boerhavia_diffusa>*. Thanks for 'Broma', 'Abroma', 'Ambroma', 'Theobroma', found some info at - http://wordinfo.info/unit/2421/ip:21 Thanks for 'Linnaeus fils', searched and found - http://www2.nrm.se/fbo/hist/linnefil/linfil.html.en Thank you very much for the entire content at - https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/indiantreepix/MlzLNRNmbGU. Please, consider copying the same at - https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/indiantreepix/RwVtfMStccs too. Regards, surajit On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 1:13 PM, ushadi Micromini <[email protected]>wrote: > Surajit > > Yes looking for malvaceae and abroma... brings up many pages ... > recognizable among them in the first twenty listings often is my writeup > from september... ...so that's no help... > > but to day my irritation with this AMBROMA and ABROIMA was piqued > enough... > I did some searches... like history of Abroma august and many in this > vein... > > BUT then googled for ...."who named abroma /ambroma augusta originally? > 1784 or 1782 comes up but no more HELP > and many searches in this vein regarding who named it, who changed the > name etc... > NOTHING USEFUL.... > > 2nd set of googling for ...."who named abroma /ambroma augusta > originally? " > and hit pay dirt, got the following : I QUOTE : " *Abroma Notes* > > *Malvaceae Info (Home) <http://www.malvaceae.info/index.html> > Index to Genera <http://www.malvaceae.info/Genera/index.html>* * > Synonymy of > Abroma<http://www.malvaceae.info/Synonymy/Synonymy.php?file=Abroma> > * > > *Abroma angustum (L.) Murray* > > *Introduction* > > *Abroma (the persistent orthographic variant Ambroma is due to Linnaeus > fils) is a genus belong to tribe Byttnerieae and subfamily Byttnerioideae > of the angiosperm family Malvaceae sensu lato.The genus was introduced in > 1776 by Jacquin, based on Linnaeus's Theobroma augusta, but renaming the > species as Abroma fastuosa. The correct combination was subsequently made > by Linnaeus fils and Murray. Abroma, being based on the Greek βρομα > (broma), is neuter, and while the feminine gender has generally been used > for epithets in this genus, they should be corrected to neuter.* > > *Abroma is generally considered a monotypic genus, with the sole species > being Abroma augustum. However there are conflicting chromosome number > reports (2n = 16, 20, 22, 24) for this species, so the possibility that it > represents a species complex remains open.* > > *Abroma angustum (L.) L.f. > **[image: Description: Chinese] ang tian lian* > > *Synonyms of Abroma augustum include Abroma alata Blanco, Abroma > angulataLam., Abroma > angulosa Poir., Abroma communis Blanco, Abroma elongata Lam., Abroma > fastuosa Gaertn., Abroma fastuosa Jacq., Abroma fastuosa Vent., Abroma > molle DC., Abroma mollis DC., Abroma obliquum C.Presl, Abroma wheleriRetz. > and Theobroma > augusta L..* > > *Malvaceae Info (Home) <http://www.malvaceae.info/index.html> > Index to Genera <http://www.malvaceae.info/Genera/index.html>* * > Synonymy of > Abroma<http://www.malvaceae.info/Synonymy/Synonymy.php?file=Abroma> > * > > *(c) 2011 Stewart R. Hinsley"* > > *http://www.malvaceae.info/Genera/Abroma/Abroma.php* > > *when I searched for ambroma versus abroma...* > " end quote > > > > AND *WHAT IS ORTHOGRAPHIC VARIANT YOU ASK*? as per an article in Taxon > > > Homonyms, Paranyms and Orthographic Variants > Hj. Eichler > Taxon > Vol. 12, No. 1 (Jan., 1963), pp. 15-20 > > > *orthographic variant is a DIFFERENT SPELLING FORM OF A VALIDLY PUBLISHED > NAME....* > READ IT AT > > http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1216675?uid=3738256&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21101126705337 > > > * > SINCE IT WAS LINNAEUS"S SON the fils means son... (or a father whichever > ) I take it was paerhaps the son... but could also be the father since he > was alive during the first description of this plant.*.. > > > *SO THIS IS JUST A SPELLING MISTAKE BY THE FATHER_SON DUO.... > * > I AM DEFINITELY DONE WITH THIS >>>>> > THIS IS BEGINNING TO BORE ME>>>> > > I"LL DO ONE THING FOR SAKE OF COMPLETION (esp since my first submission > keeps coming up on googling) I'll copy paste what I wrote here to that > thread and also put a link to this SURJAIT's thread there ... > > SAYONARA TO ABROMA....AMBROMA .... > > *USHA DI * > > ps this Surajit thread 's link is > https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!search/abroma$20surajit/indiantreepix/JHioQNsI0ws/t34JcxnzPUAJ > > > *THE END * > On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:52 PM, surajit koley < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Usha Di, >> >> I think Malvaceae week was observed in September 2011, and i was not a >> member at that time. Moreover, it is not possible for me to go through all >> posts in the group, current or past. >> >> Regards, >> >> surajit >> >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:10 AM, ushadi Micromini < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Gurcharanji and Satish Phadke discussed it if I remmeber it >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:13 PM, surajit koley < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Thank you Usha Di for the suggestion. But a search of "malvaceae week" >>>> gives 643 results and browsing all is not feasible. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> surajit >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 9:44 AM, ushadi Micromini < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear Surajit and all: >>>>> >>>>> During the Malvaceae week the classification was discussed... >>>>> if you wish you can go back and see the discussion... >>>>> >>>>> usha di >>>>> === >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 7:58 AM, Ritesh Kumar Choudhary < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Good morning dear Surajit Ji, >>>>>> >>>>>> Please find attached herewith a PDF on APG III. You can go through >>>>>> page 96 where you'll find all the families treated under Malvaceae >>>>>> (including Sterculiaceae). >>>>>> >>>>>> Hope this satisfies your query. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> Ritesh. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:18 AM, surajit koley < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Good morning Ritesh Ji, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you very much for the info. But it gives birth to more >>>>>>> questions- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - What is APG III ? >>>>>>> - Why should Sterculiaceae go to Malvaceae? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dug up a little bit and found this- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> APG <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APG_system> > APG >>>>>>> III<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APG_III_system>> >>>>>>> Malvales <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malvales> > >>>>>>> Malvaceae<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malvaceae>> >>>>>>> Byttnerioideae <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byttnerioideae> (not >>>>>>> Sterculioideae <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sterculioideae> !!!) > >>>>>>> Abroma >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Oops! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> surajit >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 5:54 AM, Ritesh Kumar Choudhary < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear Surajit Ji, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for sharing a detailed illustration of A. augusta. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In the new system of classification (APG III) Sterculiaceae is >>>>>>>> treated under Malvaceae. So you can keep this plant in your Malvaceae >>>>>>>> folder. :-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Happy posting...and thanks again! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>> Ritesh. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Ritesh Kumar Choudhary, Ph.D. >>>>>> International Biological Material Research Center >>>>>> Korea Research Institute of Bioscience & Biotechnology >>>>>> 125, Gwahak-ro, Yuseong-gu >>>>>> Daejeon >>>>>> South Korea-305-806 >>>>>> >>>>>> +82-42-879-8342 (O) >>>>>> http://www.kribb.re.kr >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it >>>>>> would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a >>>>>> Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure." -- Albert Einstein >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Usha di >>>>> =========== >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Usha di >>> =========== >>> >>> >> > > > -- > Usha di > =========== > > --
