A reply: "DearSurajit Our first work in CAL next is checking mimosa in Herabriumnext Gdn office in top floor and in hall two where type section etc is kept.this is another example for independent KYDIANA FOR SUCH items on geogrphical elementS of taxonomy.,Unless I see the whole world in Herabrium I dont publish any speciEs as species is not based on just one specimen SO I DID NOT PUBLISH ANY SPECIES AT ALL -when a plant by railwaytrack can be from source of Sunflower or tobcco plantation in Mexico which we are growing here..Just inone day a seed can be taken to Sandieg o! at extreme west from Hoogly in East .Good observations using all senses Di d yougointo details of M,himalayn and M.diplotricha an note on paper with pen. KeepPollunin and stainton with youas Williams behind it is simple and ecellent botanist at BM I met.I hve to prepare a paperon Kydia Roxb inindia and also on Populus Linnwhich I worke inBM whenWilliams wa alive.William Stern Librarianand authority onSolanacae and Lililiacea . " from Datla CS Raju ji.
On 16 September 2012 13:51, jmgarg1 <[email protected]> wrote: > Forwarding again for Id confirmation or otherwise please. > > Some earlier relevant feedback: > > Surajit ji > It would have to much easier for us if you had given the characters on the > basis of which you rejected M. himalayana and chose M. diplotricha. > > On the basis of preliminary comparison your plant does not appear M. > diplotrich, in which there are generally more than 20 pairs of leaflets and > latter are densely silky. > One important thing to note is that your first plant is much different > from your other photographs, in both number of pinnae, number of leaflets > and flower colour. I fear they may be two different species. The first has > nearly 10 pairs of pinnae and 11-12 pairs of leaflets.with much longer > leaves. The other seems to have 5-7 pairs of pinnae and 10-12 pairs of > leaflets. > Both M. rubicaulis and M. himalayana (often treated under one species) are > recognised as distinct species by the Plant List and Monograph on Indian > Mimosa by Gamble. Former has usually 4-6 pairs of pinnae and 10-15 pairs of > leaflets. Latter has 8-12 pairs of pinnae and 16-20 pairs of leaflets. *Your > plant (except first) seem to be fitting M. rubicailis. > * > I am attaching the paper for your reference.- from Singh ji. > > Thank you very much for elaborating on Mimosa sp. > I am not sure if the attached pictures were of the same plant. > There were a small community at that place, spreading along railway tracks > and 100 meters away from the railway tracks, inside a private unused land, > inaccessible to me. > > I took more than 50 pictures from 3 plants lined in a series, having a > space of about 20 to 30 feet between each other, along the rail tracks. Of > these 3 plants, the first two were beyond my reach and i could take only > distant shots with my 5x (200mm) zoom. I could access a branch of the 3rd > plant and took closer photographs. > I regret that i didn't record any leaf, leaflet, petiole, peduncle > measurements and could not find any fruit. > It was a cloudy day with high wind and the sun played hide & seek. Colour > variation in attached photographs resulted from variable intensity of > sunlight and controlled aperture setting by myself. > The description of Mimosa diplotricha available in the sites i cited in my > post is confusing. An example : 11 to 30 pairs of leaflets on each of 3 to > 10 pairs of pinnae. However, one site states leaflets sessile, opposite, > lanceolate, acute - > http://www.hear.org/pier/species/mimosa_diplotricha.htm, whereas leaflets > in my post, i think, not acute. > I very much wanted to ID this plant as M. himalayana, but nowhere i could > found that M. himalayana is moderately sensitive, even in any thread in the > group posts i browsed :- > > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/indiantreepix/zG9JSldfGrM/discussion > > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/indiantreepix/oZG_RHlyZsE/discussion > > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/indiantreepix/bg07F2ITOXY/discussion > > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/indiantreepix/rdS2y0wu_jw/discussion > > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/indiantreepix/N8k8RXeySio/discussion > One thread in group informs M. himalayana is a small tree, my plant is not. > Attaching larger pictures of the same plant or plants. > *If Mimosa himalayana is a sensitive plant then my species is Mimosa > himalayana. > *Thank you once again, > Regards, > surajit > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: surajit koley <[email protected]> > Date: 9 September 2012 01:27 > Subject: [efloraofindia:129387] Mimosa diplotricha from Hooghly > To: efloraofindia <[email protected]> > > > Sir, > > I asked myself - > > 1. "Is it Mimosa pudica?" > 2. "Is it sensitive?" > 3. "Is this an illusion?" > > When i saw this plant i was sure that it was *Mimosa pudica*. But when i > touched it, it didn't response! I touched again, this time harder, but it > didn't response. I hit it with my plastic scale on its highly prickled stem > and it appeared to me that it did response! Or was it an illusion, i asked > myself. > > As i was going through my old records of *Mimosa pudica* i realized that > it was not the same plant. Net search gave me *Mimosa > himalayana<https://groups.google.com/d/topic/indiantreepix/0Uee97BPYxw/discussion> > *. I was about to id this plant with the same. But searched further and > found *Mimosa diplotricha* at FoC - > http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=2&taxon_id=242332757. > > I think this is *Mimosa diplotricha* var. *diplotricha* as in FoC - > http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=2&taxon_id=250019707. > > Species : *Mimosa diplotricha* var. *diplotricha* > Habit & Habitat : shrub, about 6.5 feet, beside railway track > Date : 01-Sept.-2012, 4.30 P.M. > Place : Baruipara (Hooghly) > ID help : > > - http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=2&taxon_id=120751 > - http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=2&taxon_id=242332757 > - http://www.daff.qld.gov.au/4790_7289.htm > - http://www.hear.org/pier/species/mimosa_diplotricha.htm > - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mimosa_diplotricha > - FoP doesn't feature this plant - > http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=5&taxon_id=120751 > > Regards, > > surajit > > > > > -- > > > > > > > -- > With regards, > J.M.Garg > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jmgarg1 > 'Creating awareness of Indian Flora & Fauna' > The whole world uses my Image Resource of more than a *thousand species*& > eight thousand images of Birds, Butterflies, Plants etc. (arranged > alphabetically & place-wise): > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:J.M.Garg. You can also use > them for free as per Creative Commons license attached with each image. > For identification, learning, discussion & documentation of Indian Flora, > please visit/ join our Efloraofindia Google e-group: > http://groups.google.co.in/group/indiantreepix (more than 1950 members & > 1,27,800 messages on 31/8/12) or Efloraofindia website: > https://sites.google.com/site/efloraofindia/ (with a species database > of more than 7000 species). > Also author of 'A Photoguide to the Birds of Kolkata & Common Birds of > India'. > > -- With regards, J.M.Garg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jmgarg1 'Creating awareness of Indian Flora & Fauna' The whole world uses my Image Resource of more than a *thousand species* & eight thousand images of Birds, Butterflies, Plants etc. (arranged alphabetically & place-wise): http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:J.M.Garg. You can also use them for free as per Creative Commons license attached with each image. For identification, learning, discussion & documentation of Indian Flora, please visit/ join our Efloraofindia Google e-group: http://groups.google.co.in/group/indiantreepix (more than 1950 members & 1,27,800 messages on 31/8/12) or Efloraofindia website: https://sites.google.com/site/efloraofindia/ (with a species database of more than 7000 species). Also author of 'A Photoguide to the Birds of Kolkata & Common Birds of India'. --
