Clematis buchananiana DC., Syst. Nat. 1: 140 1817. (Syn: Clematis bucamara Buch.-Ham. ex DC.; Clematis buchananiana var. rugosa Hook.f. & Thomson; Clematis buchananiana var. tortuosa Hook.f. & Thomson; Clematis buchananiana var. vitifolia Hook.f. & Thomson; Clematis buchananii D.Don; Clematis buchaniana Wall. [Spelling variant]; Clematis loasifolia D.Don);
China (SW-Sichuan, Yunnan), S-Tibet, Nepal, Myanmar [Burma] (Ayeyarwady, Chin, Kachin, Mon, Shan, Sagaing), Bhutan, Sikkim, Pakistani Kashmir (Azad Kashmir), Jammu & Kashmir (Poonch, Kashmir), India (Himachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Manipur, Mizoram, Assam, Meghalaya), Bangladesh, Vietnam, Nepal, Thailand as per Catalogue of Life;
Clematis buchananiana DC. (accepted name) ?? : 6 posts by 3 authors. Attachments (11)
Location : Chautara , Nepal
Altitude: 4700 ft.
Date: 12 December 2016
efi page on Clematis buchananiana ?
Thanks for posting a fine set of images which I shall comment about further as soon as I can.
I think your id is correct…!!
SK234DEC11-2016:ID : 10 posts by 3 authors. Attachments (5)
Location: Tokha, Kathmandu , Nepal
Altitude: 5300 ft.
Date: 14 December 2013
Clematis buchananiana ????
efi page on Clematis buchananiana ?
I have quickly looked at these images and will comment further hopefully in the coming days. Important that I examine the closely and that my
comments can be relied upon. This requires time to focus attention and concentrate fully – have been preoccupied with other matters in past days.
Thought it best, given the uncertainty that has surrounded the differences between various Clematis in the Himalaya incl. C. connata/ C. buchananiana, that I waited before commenting about these images.
Clematis buchananiana is known from 1800-3000m in Nepal, so 5,300′ just about fits.
Flora of Bhutan (1984) has C.tortuosa Wall. as a synonym, whereas Enumeration of the Flowering Plants of Nepal (1979) has this as a separate species. Both these are decades old.
I think the only other candidate is C.grewiiflora (found from 1000-1525m) which is similar but stems, leaves and sepals very densely brown tomentose with broader sepals.
Flora of Kathmandu Valley has a key to species which separates C.buchananiana from C.tortuosa.
This gives flowering Oct to Nov @ 1554-2600m for C.buchananiana flowers creamy sweet-scented; C.tortuosa @ 1667-2500m with white flowers.
The authors distinguish C.tortuosa from C.buchananiana on the basis of leaves & stems with long soft flexuous hairs cf. not these hairs but short or pubescent. Don’t think this is necessarily a valid distinction.
Both species are recognised as valid names in The Plant List.
The Enumeration gives C.tortuosa an altitudinal range of 2000-3900m from Kashmir to Bhutan and Assam.
Yet Stewart does not mention C.tortuosa from Kashmir.
All rather contradictory.
I have a copy of Clematis FLOWERING PLANTS OF INDIA by Kapoor (1962). This describes both C.buchananiana and C.tortuosa – which had been referred to in Indian floras as C.buchananiana var. tortuosa.
Whatever Kapoor thought (and I have been impressed by much of what he said about other Clematis in India) this was more than 50 years ago.
For the time being the Clematis photographed by … may well be C.buchananiana but I am uncertain about how this is distinguished from C.tortuosa. I am not a Clematis specialist nor taxonomist.
Needs further investigation.
So, for the present the best I can do is Clematis close to buchananiana.
Very nice photos.
Clematis Buchananiana ABJAN01/09 : 3 posts by 2 authors. 6 images.
This climber with fragrant cream colour flowers is quite common here. I found one still in flower today and brought it home to have a closer look. I have always assumed it to be C. connata but after studying my sample today think it to be C. buchananiana. The flowers are ribbed and so are the stalks. Flowers, filaments and stalks are hairy. Please advise.
Clematis buchananiana—Fragrant Chinese Clematis
Near Dal Lake, Dharamshala Cantt. HP
17 January 2016.
Thanks, …, for beautiful presentation.
I think it seems to match with images at
These fragrant clematis (C. buchananiana) are beginning to open and are a delight. I took some photos over the last week to share here. 8 images.
It is Clematis connata as per … as per discussions in another thread.
Yes, this plant comes within Clematis connata (there is a ‘connate’ base, though not as pronounced as in some variants). Definitely not
Please can someone send in some fresh images of this species or look amongst their past photos to see if they have the real thing.
I have also followed your detailed comments on this. For long I had thought species here to be C. connata but following ID keys by Col. Collett and Polunin & Stainton, I convinced myself that the flowers here are C. buchananiana. I am listing my reasons;
Stems faintly grooved, flowers not ribbed……C. connata
Stems grooved, flowers ribbed……C. buchananiana
Stainton & Polunin;
Leaf-stalks fused together at the node often into a large flat disc, petals not ribbed, achenes silky-haired……C. connata
Leaf-bases more or less united round stem, flowers sweet-scented, petals ribbed, achenes woolly-haired…..C. buchananiana
The flowers on our plants are definitely sweet-scented and ribbed. That should place our plants under C. buchananiana. However, the leaf-stalks are jointed mostly into a small flat disc (on the many plants I have photographed I did not find a ‘large’ disc forming). To my untrained eyes achenes don’t appear to have silky hair, more woolly-haired.
Flora of Chamba and Flora of Kullu list both species to be common in their respective areas.
These are my reasons to conclude the ID but I am willing to learn. Please advise.
I am afraid I must observe that I do not rate Collet’s ‘Flora Simlensis’ particularly highly.
Distinguished soldier he may well have been but not a professional botanist.
There are understandably glowing words about him “In Memoriam” at the start of the book but one needs to be cautious about using the book – it has a useful preliminary purpose but no more.
It is a very simplified ‘Flora’, so has strict limitations.
As for ‘Flowers of the Himalaya’ this is an excellent book with few mistakes but it is not a flora. It also has its limitations- it is a preliminary guide to a fraction of the total flora of the Himalaya.
So one cannot use the information contained in either as definitive.
I have not seen ‘Flora of Chamba’ or ‘Flora of Kulu’ but would not necessarily count them as authoritative – the same applies to ‘Flora of Lahaul-Spiti’.
One must always be mindful that the flora of the Himalaya has not been well-studied! We are still learning about the British flora (which is smaller) and we have had thousands of people looking at it intensively over hundreds of years….
I realise how difficult it is for those who have no other reference works. Presumably there is no way you can access your nearest herbarium to get staff to assist in any way?
Unless I can personally check voucher specimens, then I cannot rely upon the contents of these floras – and must say that I am sure I would have doubts about many entries in them….
I did have at one time a pressed specimen of what I am confident is C.buchananiana which was growing near Naini Tal. A pity I cannot send an image of this to you.
IF I am in a position to continue to contribute to this google group, I shall be questioning a lot more identifications over many families and numerous genera….
In the mean-time, I refer you to:
http://www.iiim.res.in/herbarium/ranunculaceae/clematis_buchananiana.htm – this specimen is in very poor condition with the resolution low so one cannot inspect closely but is probably correctly identified – it seems the remarks typed out are copied from a description in a flora (on the basis of the identification they claim) rather than from field notes or taken from the specimen itself.
http://www.iiim.res.in/herbarium/ranunculaceae/clematis_connata.htm– one cannot see much of a disc at the node here either – though may have been more pronounced lower down the plant.
http://www.flowersofindia.net/catalog/slides/Lemon%20Clematis.html– this has been misidentified, it is C.connata – the ‘connate’ part can be seen.
There are not many reliable images of C.buchananiana linked to ‘The Plant List’ but those from Bhutan show the features of the species well.
According to ‘Flora of Bhutan’ Vol 1 Part 2 (1984) C.buchananiana is usually brownish pubescent throughout – petioles sometimes broadened and thickened at base and narrowly connate…
They remark it is a variable species with two varieties having been reported from Bhutan one with more glabrous leaves.
They say that forms with pinnate leaves resemble C.connata but lack the broadly-winged petiole bases.
The specimen collected in Kumaon by Blinkworth in the Kew herbarium shows general features well. See: http://apps.kew.org/herbcat/getImage.do?imageBarcode=K001039669 – I am sure you would agree that your specimen does not match this.
There will often be specimens of a plant which seem somewhat intermediate between two species or at least approach another species. Such variation always presents challenges. It is worth me repeating my observation that “neatly pigeon-holing” plants into species A or Species B is not always straightforward.
Thank you again for taking the time to explain this. If we do not consider both the books as proper reference then I concur that my plant could be a variation within the larger ‘connata’ group. You are right that flora of the Himalaya is not well documented and I hope that the members of this group make significant progress to remedy that.
As an untrained botanist I cannot hope to correctly identify plants here without little or no proper reference material. I had taken ‘ribbed flowers’ as one of the identification keys which was also confirmed by Flora of Pakistan (C. connata: Closely related to Clematis buchananiana DC., but differing by the smaller size of nearly all its parts (leaflets, flowers & styles) and the sepals without ribs. The tapering filaments mentioned by Hooker f. & Thomson l.c. are not a reliable character. Commonly found from 1500-2700 m). To add to the confusion, several members of the group have posted photos of C. connata from Uttarakhand and Kashmir with unribbed flowers. Please see;
The flowers from Bhutan look different from my sample in shape and in the more woolly leaves. It’s a pity that they do not have a photo of C. connata for comparison. I could not convincingly state that the sample you pointed me to at KEW was not similar to the plants here. Please forgive my ignorance.
There are several of these plants in flower nearby and I could collect more evidence if you think it will help. I am happy to leave these to C. connata group till further study.
Thank you for insisting on rigour and discipline in identifications. It will help all of us!
Images of Clematis buchananiana in FOI is not correct : 1 post by 1 author.
Clematis buchananiana DC. : 3 posts by 2 authors. Attachments (8) – around 1 Mb each.
Location : Raniban, Balaju , Nepal
Altitude: 4700 ft.
Date: 20 November 2017
Clematis buchananiana DC. ?? : 5 posts by 2 authors. Attachments (7)
Location: Chautara, Nepal
Date: 16 December 2017
Altitude: 5600 ft.
I also think so as per images at Clematis buchananiana
SK179NOV05-2016:ID : 7 posts by 4 authors. Attachments (10)
Sharing some pictures for ID shot at Pharping, Kathmandu, Nepal on 25 October 2016 at 4600 ft.
No flowering / fruiting yet.
Looks like a Clematis species, difficult to reach to species level without flowers.
Clematis species in eFloraofindia (with details/ keys from published papers/ regional floras/ FRLHT/ FOI/ Biotik/ efloras/ books etc., where ever available on net)
I am in agreement with … that this is a Clematis. It can be hard enough to decide which species of Clematis when in flower.
Nevertheless, of the species recorded from the Kathmandu Valley, C.buchananiana is a possibility (there are one or two others). Would be great if you could return to photograph this in flower next year, as I am keen to have images of this species posted on eFI.
‘Flora of Kathmandu Valley’ says C.buchananiana flowers October to November…..
It is definitely not C.connata (in any of its assorted forms).
Clematis buchananiana DC. : 9 posts by 1 author. 9 images– 6 to 7 mb each.
Location: Nagarkot, Bhaktapur
Date: 24 October 2019
SK 2369 06 January 2020 : 7 posts by 2 authors. 5 images- 5 to 7 mb each.
Location: Kalimpong, WB, India
Date: 27 November 2019
Clematis buchananiana DC.??
Yes, appears close to images at Clematis buchananiana
Flora of Himachal Pradesh: Clematis connata from summer Hill Shimla : Attachments (4). 5 posts by 3 authors.
Clematis connata from summer Hill Shimla
efi page on Clematis connata
Since stem, petioles and and sepals outside are tomentose, it is C. buchananiana
Clematis buchananiana DC. !
SK235DEC11-2016:ID : 5 posts by 3 authors. Attachments (4)
Location: Kakani , Nepal
Altitude: 6000 ft.
Date: 2 March 2013
Clematis … ????
Full ID please !
Definitely a Clematis at the young fruiting stage. Will comment further as to likely species. Always much more difficult when not at flowering stage.
Clematis buchananiana DC.!
SK629 08 JUL-2017:ID : 3 posts by 2 authors. Attachments (5)
Location: Soureni, Mirik, India
Date: 20 May 2017
Altitude: 4200 ft.
Clematis buchananiana DC.
I think you are right