/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_1008a.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_1009a.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_1010-9.jpg

/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_0974.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_1012_Habitat.jpg

/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_3055a.jpg
 

/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_3055b.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSCN6388-on%20tree%20bark.JPG


 
 

/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_8043b.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_8043a.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_8044f.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_8044c.jpg
Ragi hosahalli, Devimane ghats, Western ghats Uttara Kannada
Oct 2010
Habitat: Growing on the bark of a large tree, in the mid of the Benne river.
No flowers or fruits observed


Yes Bulbophyllum, but which one??????????
Cant help without flowers…


Could it be B. crassipes??


No, bulbs are angular, i have never seen such bulb in crassipes. We have live here too and in field too. They are always smooth and elongated.


Yes Sir,I m wrong
I have just check this photographs


Yes this is B. crassipes.
Thanks for sharing…
This is the only species of Bulbophyllum found in Jharkhand


Twists and turns while tracing the correct names?: 

While working on the Revision of Bulbophyllums of Asia, I am encountering many Orchid names which are tricky. So I just wished to share some information, why we should be careful while attaching proper names to the plants. Its very technical and may not be interest of all, but please bear with me.
Here are few strange examples:
A.
Bulbophyllum careyanum (Hook.) Spreng., Syst. Veg. 3: 732 (1826).
Bulbophyllum carrianum J.J.Verm., Gard. Bull. Singapore 52: 279 (2000).
Both of the above examples are of accepted names of two different plants, but they are pronounced similarly though they have variation in spelling and etymology.
B.
Bulbophyllum klossii Ridl., Trans. Linn. Soc. London, Bot. 9: 179 (1916).
Bulbophyllum klossii Ridl., Bull. Misc. Inform. Kew 1926: 85 (1926), nom. illeg.
Both of the names are unaccepted. Second name is invalid as the first name already existed. These name dont refer to the same plant because first plant is actually synonyms of Bulbophyllum trachyanthum Kraenzl., Oesterr. Bot. Z. 44: 336 (1894), where as second one refers to Bulbophyllum purpurascens Teijsm. & Binn., Natuurk. Tijdschr. Ned.-Indië 24: 308 (1862).
C.
Bulbophyllum ciliatum (Blume) Lindl., Gen. Sp. Orchid. Pl.: 48 (1830).
Bulbophyllum ciliolatum Schltr., Repert. Spec. Nov. Regni Veg. Beih. 1: 809 (1913).
Both the above names are accepted and they are distinct taxa and missing one ‘o’ means a wrong identity!!
D.
Bulbophyllum cochleatum Lindl., J. Proc. Linn. Soc., Bot. 6: 125 (1862).
Bulbophyllum cochleatum Schltr., Repert. Spec. Nov. Regni Veg. 8: 455 (1910), nom. illeg.
First is an accepted name and second is invalid as first exists but second refers to another plant, Bulbophyllum macphersonii var. spathulatum Dockrill & St.Cloud, N. Queensland Naturalist 26(117): 4 (1957).
E.
Bulbophyllum dearei (Rchb.f.) Rchb.f., Flora 71: 156 (1888).
Bulbophyllum dearei A.H.Kent in H.J.Veitch, Man. Orchid. Pl. 3: 95 (1888), nom. illeg.
Both names were published in 1888 but one was a bit early so first is accept and second is illegitimate. But the interesting thing is, second is synonym of first. Second interesting thing is the basionym of first was also published in 1888, Sarcopodium dearei Rchb.f., Flora 71: 156 (1888).!!!
Enjoy the twists and turns….


In the last case, most interesting thing is, three differentpersons at three different places, used the same
species name for theirplants in the same year, which eventually referred to same taxa. There has to be somethign DEAR about DEARE on which the name is based!!! May be the plant to which all referred to was collected by some Mr. Dear!!


Indeed interesting …
To me, the most interesting point is someone digging into this chaos.
Not much is discussed in this regard; and rarely such matter is put in black and white.
Though not knowing the plants you mentioned, it is getting clearer that botanical name alone may not suggest a species, unless accompanied by the author citation.
Thank you very much for the eye-opening post.


Sorry, two different persons named the last one with a single species name and a third person made a new combination.
One name is based on other.
As usual, I am poor in mathematics…


Had known examples of homonyms involving different authors, but this one is interesting
Bulbophyllum klossii Ridl., Trans. Linn. Soc. London, Bot. 9: 179 (1916).
Bulbophyllum klossii Ridl., Bull. Misc. Inform. Kew 1926: 85 (1926), nom. illeg.
How could Ridley give same name to two different plants


Yes sir, that was the twist. Its by same author in different publication…. 🙂



Bulbophyllum_RKC01_22072012: Saw this Bulbophyllum in a flower show at Da Lat City of Vietnam.

Is it a hybrid?
Sorry for the hazy photographs.
(July, 2012)


This is not hybrid, but I need to see from top how it looks. Could be Bulbophyllum auratum but need to see properly to confirm.

Please check my pic of auratum on the following link if you have seen the whole flower yourself.


Thanks for your instant response. The plant was hanging on the top of a wall therefore I could not see or photograph it properly. 


 

 
 
 
 
 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.