Re: [efloraofindia:388677] Swamy/New series/ID/23 - ID of the plant Caesalpinia coriaria.

My pleasure. Thank you Mahadeswara Ji ! Saroj Kasaju On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 9:33 AM Mahadeswara wrote: > Thanks Saroj ji for your quick response & confirmation. > > On Saturday, June 12, 2021 at 11:11:07 PM UTC+5:30 Saroj Kumar Kasaju > wrote: > >> Yes ! >> Thank you. >> >> Saroj Kasaju >>

Re: [efloraofindia:388680] Re: Pyrus pyrifolia

Looks different from images at Pyrus pyrifolia I think it is a young fruit of Pyrus pashia only, as per images herein. On Sat, 5 Jun 2021 at 21:41, Seema Bin Zeenat wrote: > It's not

Re: [efloraofindia:388682] Plant for ID: Bangalore: 6th June 2021

Thank you very much, Mr. Mahadeswara Swamy. I will keep you all posted in this thread, as soon as it blooms. Thank you and warm regards Nancy Seby www.greencoverinitiative.com On Friday, 11 June 2021 at 17:36:58 UTC+5:30 Mahadeswara wrote: > I have seen this plant flowering during May in

Fwd: [efloraofindia:388684] Re: Pyrus pyrifolia

-- With regards, J. M. Garg -- Forwarded message - From: Seema Bin Zeenat Date: Sun, 13 Jun, 2021, 1:55 pm Subject: Re: [efloraofindia:387929] Re: Pyrus pyrifolia To: J.M. Garg Sir this is not Pyrus pashia Regards, Seema Bin Zeenat M.sc Botany Department of Botany, School of

Re: [efloraofindia:388682] Veronica sp.

Looks different from images at *Veronica arvensis* L. Appears close to images at *Veronica laxa* Benth. as per comparative images

Re: [efloraofindia:388680] Plant for ID: Kerala: 12th Jun 2021

Thank you very much, Mr. Paradesi. Will check these features. Warm regards Nancy Seby www.greencoverinitiative.com On Saturday, 12 June 2021 at 19:05:28 UTC+5:30 paradesia...@gmail.com wrote: > Finalise your self ma'am with this key > Fruiting calyx 18–30 mm long; calyx 10.5–20 mm long;

[efloraofindia:388683] Re: Rajouri j and k Date:18/05/2021 Habit: Herb

No, looks different from images at *Veronica anagallis-aquatica* L. On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 at 12:42, J.M. Garg wrote: > > > -- > With regards, > J. M. Garg > > -- Forwarded message - >

[efloraofindia:388678] Re: Potentilla sundaica (Blume) Kuntze

Dear Paradesi Ji, Could you please validate the ID ? Thank you. Saroj Kasaju On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 10:22 PM Saroj Kasaju wrote: > > Thank you. > > Saroj Kasaju > > > On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 10:21 PM Saroj Kasaju > wrote: > >> >> Thank you. >> >> Saroj Kasaju >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at

Re: [efloraofindia:388702] I'd requested 2

Thank you Paradesi Ji ! Saroj Kasaju On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 5:20 PM Paradesi Anjaneyulu < paradesianjiney...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes it's Saroj Ji, > With regards. > > On Sat, 12 Jun 2021 at 23:04, Saroj Kasaju wrote: > >> *Micromeria biflora* (Buch.–Ham. ex D. Don) Benth. ! >> Thank you. >>

Re: [efloraofindia:388700] I'd requested 3

Yes Saroj Ji, With regards. On Sat, 12 Jun 2021 at 23:00, Saroj Kasaju wrote: > Please check Leucas > > ! > Thank you. > > Saroj Kasaju > > > On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 10:16 PM Seema Bin Zeenat < >

Re: [efloraofindia:388708] Plant for ID: Bangalore: 6th June 2021

Thanks Nancy ji. On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 1:59 PM Nancy Seby wrote: > Thank you very much, Mr. Mahadeswara Swamy. > > I will keep you all posted in this thread, as soon as it blooms. > > Thank you and warm regards > Nancy Seby > www.greencoverinitiative.com > > On Friday, 11 June 2021 at

[efloraofindia:388717] Confusion between Cerastium fontanum subsp. vulgare and Cerastium glomeratum

Both these species appear quite confusing as per details at POWO: Cerastium fontanum subsp. vulgare (syn. of *Cerastium holostedides *) and Cerastium glomeratum

[efloraofindia:388721] Re: SK372 12FEB-2017:ID

Forwarding for ID Distributed as Crepis foetida ? Group discussion at SK372 12FEB-2017:ID (google.com) On Tuesday,

Re: [efloraofindia:388723] My Pending Identifications: Chakrata- Unid Asteraceae:: NS MARCH 17

Neither C. sancta nor C. multicaulis, none has auricled leaf bases in cauline leaves On Sunday, December 27, 2020 at 9:13:31 PM UTC+5:30 JM Garg wrote: > Appears close to *Crepis sancta* (L.) Bornm. >

Re: [efloraofindia:388693] Id request for this species of Arenaria .

Taxonomy of *Cerastium fontanum* looks quite complex. Also no habit and lower portion image, makes the task further difficult. Cerastium fontanum does not have distribution in our area as per POWO and CoL and also looks

Re: [efloraofindia:388700] I'd requested 2

Yes it's Saroj Ji, With regards. On Sat, 12 Jun 2021 at 23:04, Saroj Kasaju wrote: > *Micromeria biflora* (Buch.–Ham. ex D. Don) Benth. ! > Thank you. > > Saroj Kasaju > > > On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 9:59 PM Seema Bin Zeenat > wrote: > >> Location Rajouri jandk >> Habit: Herb >> Habitat:

[efloraofindia:388707] Fwd: stellaria again...

I think it will be *Cerastium glomeratum * as per images and details herein and as per discussions at Id request for this species of Arenaria -- Forwarded message

Fwd: [efloraofindia:388711] Fwd: stellaria again...

On further consideration, it appears close to Cerastium holosteoides as per POWO -- Forwarded message - From: J.M. Garg Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2021 at 17:44 Subject: Fwd: [efloraofindia:267558] Fwd:

Fwd: [efloraofindia:388710] stellaria again...

-- Forwarded message - From: Alok & Isabelle Date: Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 8:58:25 PM UTC+5:30 Subject: Re: [efloraofindia:63022] stellaria again... To: Gurcharan Singh Cc: indiantreepix@googlegroups.com Thanks Gurcharan ji, Here's a photo of the leaves.. sincerely

Re: [efloraofindia:388713] Id request for this species of Arenaria .

On further consideration, it appears close to* Cerastium holosteoides* as per POWO (syn: *Cerastium fontanum* subsp. *vulgare* (Hartman) Greuter & Burdet of Flora of China

Re: [efloraofindia:388687] Plant for ID: Kerala: 12th Jun 2021

You're welcome ma'am, With regards. On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 at 13:46, Nancy Seby wrote: > Thank you very much, Mr. Paradesi. > > Will check these features. > > Warm regards > Nancy Seby > www.greencoverinitiative.com > > On Saturday, 12 June 2021 at 19:05:28 UTC+5:30 paradesia...@gmail.com > wrote:

Re: [efloraofindia:388703] Wild Plant for ID : Nasik : 06JUN21 : AK-01

Yes it's common ma'am, With regards. On Sat, 12 Jun 2021 at 20:55, Aarti S. Khale wrote: > Thanks Paradesi Ji for validating the id. > This plant is well known to me and seen many times. > The smaller size of the dried plant got me confused. > Regards, > Aarti > > On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 12:30

Fwd: [efloraofindia:388709] Fwd: stellaria again...

-- Forwarded message - From: JM Garg Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2017 at 12:34 Subject: [efloraofindia:267558] Fwd: stellaria again... To: efloraofindia , Alok Mahendroo < alokisabe...@gmail.com>, Gurcharan Singh I think the first image is of *Stellaria media*

Re: [efloraofindia:388713] Re: identification of a fruiting tree

I agrre with Anjaneyulu ji. If you need correct identity please post proper images showing habit, foliage, leaves arrangement, flowers if any etc., On Sunday, June 13, 2021 at 5:00:31 PM UTC+5:30 paradesia...@gmail.com wrote: > Oh no Sorry Mathew Ji, > It's different from Crateva, > With

Re: [efloraofindia:388716] Plant for ID: Kerala: 12th Jun 2021

Looking at the shape of leaves and comparison with the images on the NET , the ID points towards Clerodendrum paniculatum, though it is better to check the key characters as suggested by Anjaneyulu ji. On Sunday, June 13, 2021 at 4:41:44 PM UTC+5:30 paradesia...@gmail.com wrote: > You're

Re: [efloraofindia:388718] Fwd: stellaria again...

On further consideration, I think it will be *Cerastium glomeratum* as per discussions at Confusion between Cerastium fontanum subsp. vulgare and Cerastium glomeratum On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 at 17:55, J.M. Garg wrote: > On further

Re: [efloraofindia:388726] Banglore-Ooty November 2013 :: Requesting ID of this plant :: 22112013 :: ARK-01

Forwarding for ID Distributed as Hypochaeris glabra ? Group discussion at Banglore-Ooty November 2013 :: Requesting ID of this plant :: 22112013 :: ARK-01

[efloraofindia:388734] Cerastium fontanum in FOI

Hi, Tabish ji, Images of Narendra ji as Cerastium fontanum in FOI , are of *Cerastium glomeratum* as per discussions at Confusion between Cerastium fontanum subsp. vulgare and Cerastium glomeratum

[efloraofindia:388691] Re: Potentilla sundaica (Blume) Kuntze

Thank you fo ID validation Paradesi Ji ! Saroj Kasaju On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 5:02 PM Paradesi Anjaneyulu < paradesianjiney...@gmail.com> wrote: > Everything matched with ID Saroj ji > Have not experience with this sp. that's why thinking only, > With regards. > > > > On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 at

Re: [efloraofindia:388699] Re: 93 ID wild plant

Allmania nodiflora only, With regards. On Sat, 12 Jun 2021 at 23:16, Sam Kuzhalanattu wrote: > Dear Saroj ji, > Thank you Saroj ji, it is Alternanthera sp. > But no matching as per flower images. Also, leaves pattern is alternate. > With kind regards, Sam. > > On Sat, 12 Jun 2021, 10:59 pm

Re: [efloraofindia:388716] Re: Swamy/New series/ID/24 - ID of the plant

Yes Mahadeswara Ji ! Thank you. Saroj Kasaju On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 5:55 PM M Swamy wrote: > Few more from a different locality in Mysore. > > On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 5:37 PM M Swamy wrote: > >> Dear members, >> Please ID the plant received for ID in a group. Photographed in Mysore >> last

Fwd: [efloraofindia:388724] Id request for this species of Arenaria .

-- With regards, J. M. Garg -- Forwarded message - From: Shakir Ahmad (Amateur Taxonomist) Date: Sun, 13 Jun, 2021, 8:16 pm Subject: Re: [efloraofindia:387976] Id request for this species of Arenaria . To: J.M. Garg Let me confirm it sir On Sun, 13 Jun, 2021, 5:59 pm J.M.

Re: [efloraofindia:388738] Re: Swamy/New series/ID/24 - ID of the plant

Thanks Saroj ji for confirming the ID . On Sunday, June 13, 2021 at 6:10:48 PM UTC+5:30 Saroj Kumar Kasaju wrote: > Yes Mahadeswara Ji ! > Thank you. > > Saroj Kasaju > > > On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 5:55 PM M Swamy wrote: > >> Few more from a different locality in Mysore. >> >> On Sun, Jun 13,

Re: [efloraofindia:388736] Re: 93 ID wild plant

Yes, it is Parades ji, Thanks & Regards, Sam. On Sat, 12 Jun 2021, 11:16 pm Sam Kuzhalanattu, wrote: > Dear Saroj ji, > Thank you Saroj ji, it is Alternanthera sp. > But no matching as per flower images. Also, leaves pattern is alternate. > With kind regards, Sam. > > On Sat, 12 Jun 2021, 10:59