Pedicularis oederi

Pedicularis oederi Vahl, Fors. Dansk. Oek. Plantel. ed. 2: 580 1806. (syn: Pedicularis acaulis Salzer; Pedicularis asplenifolia Muhl.; Pedicularis atrorubens Salzer; Pedicularis filicifolia Adams ex Bunge; Pedicularis foliosa Gunn.; Pedicularis versicolor Wahlenb.; Pedicularis virescens Wahlenb.);   
Austria, Bulgaria, Slovakia, France, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, former
Yugoslavia, Norway, Poland, Romania, N- & C-European Russia, Ukraine,
Sweden, Siberia (W-Siberia, C-Siberia), Russian Far East, China (Gansu, Hebei,
Qinghai, Shaanxi, Shanxi, Sichuan, Xinjiang, Yunnan), Tibet, Bhutan, Jammu &
Kashmir (Dras, Ladakh, Rupshu, Zanskar, Poonch, Kashmir), Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Alaska, USA (Montana, Wyoming), Canada
(Alberta, British Columbia, Northern Territories, Yukon) as per Catalogue of Life; 

Common name: Oeder’s Lousewort
 

/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Pedicularis%20oederi.JPG
Pedicularis oederi – efloraofindia | Google Groups : 8 posts by 5 authors. Attachments (1)
Pedicularis oederi Vahl in Hornemann, Dansk Oekonom. Plantel. ed. 2. 580. 1806.
Family: Scrophulariaceae
Location: Rohtang Pass, Himachal Paradesh
This is Pedicularis oederi var oederi as it has 10-20 pairs of leaf segment, it its more than that (25-30pairs) then its var multipinna.

Thanks for the information…..I knew by the way, but there s general tendency by me to use without variety if the plant is original… It is
understood if you dont write the name of the variety.


You are quite knowledgeable about the Himalayan flora hence this is common that you know it !!
This for other who are not aware of it.

When the discussion is about the typical variety, there is no need to mention the variety name. But when you talk of also other variety/varieties, then the typical variety name has to be mentioned. 
We need not mention the variety name ‘indicus’ for Hemidesmus indicus, when we are not talking about H. indicus var. pubescens. 
Am i correct?

I accept … reliable comment on varieties and conclusion for this particular discussion.

Yes … thats what I wass trying to say but may be my words were not appropriate.

Both of you have explained it in a proper way Thanks again.