Hello,
As per my opinion all the Commelina's are complicated, but
few characters such as spathe, capsule, seed are plays important role in
their identification.
Your normal circumstances may be correct. Becoz, in my observations, I
never found underground (Cleistogamous) flowers in *Commelina erecta, *while
this is constant character in *C. forsskalaei *Vahl. (*Commelina-Delhi-d.jpg
*).
Another things here is the hell lot of nomenclature problem with
*Commelina
erecta *(46 synonyms according to Miss. Bot. Garden) some
examples............
*
*
***Commelina erecta *of Linn .published in Species Plantarum 1: 41. 1753. (1
May 1753); Lectotype designated by Clarke, Monogr. Phan. 3: 181(1881).
Robert Brown describes same species different epithet *Commelina undulata *R.
Br.Prodromus Florae Novae Hollandiae 270. 1810.
*Commelina kurzii* C.B. Clarke <http://www.tropicos.org/Name/50045660> synonym
for *Commelina undulata *R. Br.
Now from my observation *Commelina erecta *and *Commelina kurzii *both are
different (C. B. Clarke also treat different in Monog. Phan. 1981). *Commelina
erecta *is invasive and originate from New world while *Commelina kurzii *is
from old world (Asia). While *C.erecta* with isolate, pedunculate spathe
while *C. kurzii *with 2-3 subsessile aggregate spathe.
So finally, on the basis of spathe and cleistogamous flower it may conclude
the above posted species might be *Commelina forsskalaei *Vahl.
(hereby, some attachment for the confirmation).
Thank you
* *
Mr. Mayur D. Nandikar,
Research Student,
Department of Botany,
Shivaji University,
Kolhapur.
