Thank you once again Garg Sir. Regards,
surajit On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:50 PM, 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: 6 October 2012 21:56 > Subject: Re: [efloraofindia:129387] Mimosa diplotricha from Hooghly > To: jmgarg1 <[email protected]> > Cc: efloraofindia <[email protected]> > > > Sir, > > I have visited and recorded fresh pictures of this plant today, at > Baruipara (Hooghly). I am attaching those images in two mails, for their > bigger sizes, so as to study various features of this species. > > I repeat that this plant is sensitive as can be seen in the first two > pictures, taken within a gap of less than 1 minute. > > Thank you & Regards, > > surajit > > > > On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 7:57 PM, surajit koley < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Sir, >> >> I will try to visit the place once again to collect specimen there and >> record data on sizes of leaves, leaflets etc. >> >> Thank you & Regards, >> >> surajit >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 2:28 PM, jmgarg1 <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> 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'. >>> >>> >> > > > > -- > 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 1980 members & > 1,33,000 messages on 30/9/12) or Efloraofindia website: > https://sites.google.com/site/efloraofindia/ (with a species database > of more than 7500 species). > Also author of 'A Photoguide to the Birds of Kolkata & Common Birds of > India'. > > --
